# The Marathon Morning Impound: A Hearing Examiner's Tale of Signs, Storms, and Safety On the morning of October 1st, 2025, Hearing Examiner Sharon Rice convened a virtual hearing that would reveal the complex intersection of weather, municipal events, and the often-brutal economics of vehicle impoundment. What began as a routine appeal of a $710 towing fee would unfold into a story involving 32 impounded vehicles, a marathon runner's nightmare, and the challenging realities of managing major public events in downtown Bellingham. The case — file number HE25VI-032 — brought together an unusual cast: Casey Gish, a marathon runner whose car was towed while he was competing in the Bellingham Bay Marathon; his wife Brooke Usrey, the vehicle's registered owner; city parking enforcement officers; and representatives from Heston Hauling, the towing company. But this wasn't just about one car or one family's $700 surprise. It was about 32 vehicles, hundreds of confused runners, and what happens when carefully laid municipal plans collide with Mother Nature's fury. ## The Perfect Storm: Weather Meets Marathon Planning The September 21st Bellingham Bay Marathon was an annual event requiring extensive coordination between the city, police, and race organizers. Greg Coulter, a Level 1 Parking Code Compliance Officer, testified about the meticulous planning that preceded the race. The 1200 block of Railroad Avenue — a critical section of the race route where approximately 1,000 runners would pass through — required complete parking clearance from 3 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. "There was some planning ahead of time, through communication with Lieutenant Dante Alexander, who is the City of Bellingham Police Department's traffic liaison and head of these kind of large-scale events," Coulter explained. The preparations included posting 28 temporary no-parking signs along the block, supplemented by what enforcement officers called a "hard sign" — a permanent metal sign posted at the northeast end of the block indicating road closure from 8 a.m. to 11 a.m. But nature had other plans. According to weather data from Bellingham Municipal Airport, conditions at 1:45 a.m. on September 21st shifted dramatically from calm breezes of 5-7 mph to rain and wind gusts reaching 30 mph, continuing through 7 a.m. During that crucial three-hour window — precisely when the no-parking restriction was set to begin — a quarter-inch of rain fell, accompanied by sustained high winds. "When we arrived just after 6 o'clock, I believe I was on site at 6:10 a.m., there were still 5 to 6 signs left up on this 1200 block of railroad attached to the posts," Coulter testified. The implications were immediate and serious: signs were continuing to fall even as enforcement officers arrived. "Some more of those signs continued to fall off of the posts, and so the numbers were dwindling literally as we were on site, trying to enforce them." ## A Runner's Morning Turns Into a Legal Battle For Casey Gish, September 21st began like any runner's race day — an early alarm, pre-race nutrition, and the familiar anxiety of competition. As a second-year participant in the Bellingham Bay Marathon, Gish had parked in virtually the same location the previous year without incident, following guidance from the race website that encouraged free downtown parking. "I got up about 5 AM, and between 5:15 and 5:30, I drove from my home in Sunnyland in Bellingham to downtown to Railroad," Gish recounted. "I hadn't spent any time downtown in the weeks going up to the race, I was unaware of any sort of posted signage before that. Basically just pulled up, saw other racers parking in the area, pulled up, parked in the spot, did not see any visible, no parking signage right where the car was parked." The early morning darkness would prove crucial to Gish's defense. Parking around 5:15 a.m., well before sunrise, visibility was severely limited. Adding to the confusion, the race website explicitly stated that participants could "park for free anywhere downtown, with exception of immediately in front of the Depot Market." There was no mention of restrictions on Railroad Avenue. After parking, Gish caught the race shuttle to the starting line, ran his marathon, and returned to find his car gone. "At that point, there was a lot of hubbub and communication with other runners who also had their car towed," he testified. His investigation of the area revealed fallen signs zip-tied to parking meters, but lying flat on the ground and dated September 23rd — two days after the race. The human cost became clear as Gish described his post-race ordeal: "And carting my wife and two little kids up to Ferndale to go get the car. It was, yeah, awesome end of my day." The $710 towing and storage fee represented a crushing financial blow to cap off what should have been a celebratory athletic achievement. ## The Economics of Emergency Towing Chris Heston, owner of Heston Hauling and Heston Towing, provided insight into the financial mechanics of vehicle impoundment. Though not present at the scene, Heston explained the rate structure that led to the $710 charge. "We charged the customer 1 hour towing. Half a day storage, they came in the same day and picked it up. It was on a Sunday, so there was an after-hours release fee added." The breakdown revealed the harsh mathematics of impoundment: $400 for one hour of towing (the state-mandated minimum regardless of actual time), $50.50 for half-day storage, and $201 in after-hours release fees. "It doesn't matter if a call is 2 minutes or 1 hour under the state rates, it's charged at 1 hour, and then it goes into 15-minute increments from there," Heston explained. Perhaps most revealing was Heston's observation from his drivers about the morning's events. "One of my drivers had told me that they had actual road closed signs put up on the road that people were going around," he testified, highlighting the extraordinary lengths some drivers went to find parking despite obvious barriers. ## The Weight of 32 Vehicles The scope of the morning's enforcement action became clear when Coulter revealed the total number of impounded vehicles: 32. This wasn't an isolated incident of a few negligent drivers, but a mass enforcement action affecting dozens of marathon participants. "Given that 1,000 race participants would have been moving through that particular stretch of railroad at 9am," Coulter explained, the city faced a genuine safety dilemma. In coordination with police, officers attempted to contact registered owners through the Department of Licensing database, but phone numbers aren't mandatory for vehicle registration. "Even given that, we were able to clear about 50% of the cars from the race routes, through their efforts." The safety concerns were visceral for Coulter, who drew on personal experience: "I ran a lot in high school, and having been a part of a 700-person start of a race, constricting that down to 15 feet is a significant safety concern. I personally have been trampled multiple times at the start of races just because it is the definition of a stampede." ## Competing Responsibilities and Broken Communication A critical revelation emerged about responsibility for sign posting. Unlike city-sponsored events such as the Memorial Day Parade, where city staff handle signage, private events like the marathon require organizers to post their own no-parking signs. "It is incumbent on the events to place that signage to ensure their veracity," Coulter testified. This created a communication breakdown with serious consequences. While race organizers were responsible for posting adequate signage, their website continued to advertise free downtown parking without mentioning Railroad Avenue restrictions. When Gish attempted to contact race organizers after his vehicle was impounded, he received what he described as "a form, canned response that basically they weren't responsible for this." The city's dilemma became apparent through Coulter's testimony about signage standards. Following federal guidelines from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), the minimum legal requirement was one sign per block, or two signs if there was a driveway cutout. Yet the city routinely over-signs events, placing signs on virtually every parking meter to maximize visibility. "As a city, in terms of suggesting guidelines for signage, we're at a bit of an impasse," Coulter explained. "If we only put as many signs as are legally necessary, we're told that not adequate signage was necessarily present to be in place. So we went with the effort of trying to put signs on every single meter post." ## The Human Element of Municipal Enforcement Perhaps the most poignant moment came when Raul Murillo Delgado, the city's parking operations supervisor, addressed the appellants directly. "First, I'm sorry that you guys had to go through all this, and our staff was trying to address the safety concern, and based on what was required by code, they made a decision with police." His testimony revealed the municipal perspective on emergency decision-making: "I believe our staff did everything what they could do, and with police, and they made the decision to remove these vehicles for the safety of the competitors and the participants of the race." The financial mechanics of potential appeals also became clear. If Hearing Examiner Rice granted the appeal, Delgado explained, "the city will pay for the fees, and then we'll send an invoice to the event." This created a paper trail of accountability, potentially placing financial responsibility back on the marathon organizers whose inadequate signage contributed to the confusion. ## Technology Failures and Extended Proceedings The hearing itself became a microcosm of modern municipal challenges when technical difficulties repeatedly dropped Gish from the virtual meeting. Recognizing the fundamental unfairness of proceeding without the appellant present, Hearing Examiner Rice made an unusual accommodation, holding the record open to allow Gish to review the hearing recording and submit written responses. "I'm still, like, waiting to respond. Yes. Okay, so we're gonna stand by for a few minutes, because he absolutely has to have an opportunity to speak again during this hearing," Rice declared, demonstrating a commitment to due process that extended the proceedings but preserved Gish's rights. ## The Broader Questions of Municipal Event Management Beyond the immediate question of whether Gish's $710 fee should be refunded, the hearing exposed larger questions about how cities manage major public events. The testimony revealed competing pressures: ensuring public safety during large gatherings, maintaining clear communication with event participants, and fairly enforcing parking regulations when circumstances change unpredictably. Coulter's observation about persistent parking violations despite obvious enforcement presence highlighted the challenge: "Even with multiple police cars, parking enforcement vehicles, and tow trucks on the block, we still had to stop more than 10 vehicles from trying to park as we were removing vehicles from those parking stalls." The case also illuminated the sometimes harsh economics of municipal enforcement. While $710 might represent a reasonable cost for emergency towing services under state regulations, it also represented a potentially devastating expense for families attending what should be a celebratory community event. ## Awaiting Resolution As the hearing concluded, Hearing Examiner Rice established a post-hearing schedule allowing Gish to submit additional evidence, including emails from race organizers and website screenshots showing parking guidance. The city would have an opportunity to respond, followed by Gish's final reply. The decision deadline was set for October 21st, though Rice expected to rule sooner. The case of file HE25VI-032 ultimately embodied the complex realities of modern municipal governance: the challenge of balancing public safety with individual rights, the difficulty of managing communication across multiple stakeholders, and the sometimes arbitrary impact of weather and circumstance on carefully laid plans. For Casey and Brooke Gish, the hearing represented more than a chance to recover $710. It was an opportunity to hold accountable a system that, despite good intentions and careful planning, had failed to prevent a foreseeable outcome. For the city, it was a reminder that emergency decisions made under pressure would ultimately face scrutiny under the deliberate light of administrative review. As Hearing Examiner Rice adjourned the proceedings, 31 other vehicle owners faced similar financial consequences from that stormy September morning, their own stories of confusion and frustration likely echoing the Gishes' experience. The broader question remained: in an era of increasingly complex urban events and unpredictable weather, how can cities better balance safety, communication, and fairness in their enforcement actions?