## Meeting Overview On October 29, 2025, at 1:00 PM, City of Bellingham Hearing Examiner Sharon Rice convened via Zoom to hear an appeal of a vehicle impound. The case, filed as HE25VI-039, involved Nicholas Fields challenging the impound of his 2022 Subaru Outback during the Bellingham Bay Marathon on September 21, 2025. The hearing brought together city parking enforcement officers, police personnel, the towing company owner, and the appellant to examine whether proper signage justified the emergency vehicle removal from Railroad Avenue. What made this case particularly notable was its connection to a larger controversy — this was one of eleven appeals filed from a single day when 32 vehicles were impounded from the marathon route after severe weather knocked down most temporary no-parking signs. The hearing would examine the intersection of public safety, legal notice requirements, and the practical challenges of managing large public events during adverse weather conditions. ## The Emergency Impound Operation Greg Coulter, a Parking Code Compliance Officer with Bellingham Public Works, painted a picture of careful preparation that was derailed by nature. "Because this is a large-scale event, often, well, a few times a year, Bellingham Police Department contacts City Bellingham Parking to assist with clearing an event route ahead of time," Coulter explained. The city had extensive experience with events like the Memorial Day Parade and Pride Parade, but the Bellingham Bay Marathon presented unique challenges due to its expansive downtown route. The preparation had been methodical. Per city policy for permitted right-of-way usage, temporary no-parking signs were posted 72 hours in advance on the evening of September 18th — a total of 28 signs placed on parking meter posts along the 1200 block of Railroad Avenue. Parking enforcement verified the signs were in place on both September 19th and 20th. Additionally, because this block was the first section of both the 10K and half-marathon routes, the city installed a large 2-foot by 3-foot retroreflective road closure sign with traffic cones at the block entrance. "This, the entirety of this 2 foot by 3 foot sign, so all of the white shown on page 8 is a retro-reflective material. It's the same material as is put on highway signs, specifically designed to reflect light from headlamps directly back at vehicles, and to make it as visible as possible within low-light conditions," Coulter testified. But then came September 21st's weather disaster. "Unfortunately, the morning of the event, a big wind and rainstorm flew in. We had about a quarter of an inch rain that fell over the course of 4 hours, and wind gusts were up as high as 30 miles an hour in the hours leading up to 6 AM when we arrived on site," Coulter said. Weather data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association showed wind gusts beginning around 1:45 AM and intensifying through the early morning hours. The scene that greeted enforcement officers at 6 AM was devastating to their careful preparations. "When we arrived on site, I personally counted 6 temporary signs that were still up on the meters after the storm, but we had obviously noticed that a lot of the signs were down," Coulter testified. Of the original 28 signs, only six remained standing after the storm. ## The Safety Decision Special Operations Lieutenant Dante Alexander described the difficult decision-making process that morning. As the officer responsible for reviewing permitted events, Alexander had specifically requested parking enforcement assistance due to "prior issues with parking on the route" and safety concerns. "The reason why we want to make sure that vehicles are removed from the route is it's a major safety issue. If cars are allowed to park on the race route, and as the race is occurring, and people are trying to leave, frustrated they can't leave, or leaving, you know, that puts jeopardy of the racers," Alexander explained. Faced with the storm damage, Alexander consulted with Sergeant Johnson, Officer Mays, and Coulter about whether to proceed with impounds. "When I was informed that the signages that were up in the blocks where the cars were being towed that it met that criteria. And especially in the 1200 block when there was that retroflective sign, hard sign that had been there and was still there the morning of... for the safety of the racers on the event, as that's the... that block is the second block of the start of the race. We just wanted to make sure that the safety of the runners were... was paramount." Before ordering the impounds, officers attempted to contact vehicle owners through their report writing system, hoping to find phone numbers from previous police contacts. "Some of the difficulties is some of the cars are rental cars, so, you know, you really can't get that information to who that person is, or if they live outside of the city and we don't have their contact information," Alexander noted. The Department of Licensing doesn't maintain phone numbers, making these efforts hit-or-miss. Alexander also contacted the race organizer to inform them about the parked vehicles, hoping word could reach runners who had already been shuttled to the marathon start point on Lummi Island. ## The Towing Operation Chris Heston, owner of Heston Hauling and Heston Towing, described the scale of the operation. "We brought in extra tow trucks for this. We had 7 drivers available," he testified. The company was experienced with large-scale emergency removals, and this day proved no exception. Due to the rushed nature of clearing the route before the race, Heston's company charged only the minimum one-hour rate despite many vehicles requiring more complex procedures. "Our times are very skewed. The drivers were grabbing cars, dropping them as quick as they could to get back for the next ones," Heston explained. Fields' Subaru Outback, being all-wheel drive, required special dolly equipment to prevent transmission damage, but the company didn't charge extra time despite the additional complexity. "The customer was charged $400 at 1 hour. The vehicle was redeemed within the first 12 hours, so only a half day of storage was charged at $50.50. It was a Sunday that the vehicle was redeemed, which the office is closed at that time. So, bringing staff in, there's an after-hours fee added to it of $201 for a total of $710.14," Heston detailed. The scale of the day's operations was remarkable: 32 vehicles impounded from the marathon route, with an additional 37 vehicles towed just two days later from a street cleaning operation using the same route. "This is pretty typical, the amounts when you have this large of an event," Heston noted. ## The Appellant's Case Nicholas Fields, the marathon runner whose vehicle was impounded, presented his perspective with the frustration of someone caught between competing authorities. "We were all given explicit communication by the marathon organizers that, and this is found in the documentation, that we can park anywhere downtown for free," Fields testified. Fields arrived just before 6 AM on September 21st, parked his car, and immediately boarded the shuttle to Lummi Island for the marathon start. "It was also made clear that there'd be no way for us to get back," he said, noting that his phone was in the car since he doesn't run with it over such distances. His testimony emphasized the absence of visible warnings at the time he parked. "I made my way down there, and I parked in an area that I did not see, any clear indications that the road would be closed. I did not see the road closed sign out there for that morning. I'm not saying it wasn't there at 6.45 when the photo was taken. But I did not see it just before 6 AM when I parked." Fields acknowledged the storm conditions, noting that the parking enforcement officer's own testimony confirmed the temporary no-parking sign near his vehicle "was face down between the vehicles at the time" and that "wind was continuing to gust around 6 AM." There was a 40-minute gap between when Fields parked and when enforcement photos were taken. After finishing the marathon, Fields returned to find his vehicle gone. "I quickly deduced that my car was no longer there. I turned around, went back to Depot Market Square" where an officer helped him contact the towing company. A promised taxi never arrived, and he ultimately relied on a race organizer for transportation to retrieve his vehicle "about 2 plus hours later." Fields pointed to what he saw as inconsistencies in the city's signage practices. When he returned to look for his car, he observed that signs dated September 23rd for a different parking restriction remained in place and showed less weather damage than the marathon signs from September 21st. "They themselves showed signs of definitely being ripped around by the wind... but 4 were still up," he noted, contrasting this with the near-total loss of marathon signage. ## The Legal and Policy Framework The hearing delved into complex questions about proper notice under federal and local standards. Coulter explained that the city follows the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), federal guidelines that establish minimum signage requirements. "The specific section that no parking signs fall within is Section 2B.53," Coulter testified, reading from the manual: "The R8 series signs, which are all the no parking signs, may be used where sufficient notice of parking prohibition is satisfied by the use of single signs." This created a paradox in the city's approach. While the MUTCD suggests that over-signing can create confusion and that a single sign can prohibit parking for an entire block, Bellingham's practice was to place signs on every meter post to avoid challenges from vehicle owners claiming insufficient notice. "If there is a driveway cutout along a block, we post a minimum of two signs, one per side of the driveway cutout. If there's not a driveway cutout on the block, then one sign is sufficient to show no parking," Coulter explained. Under this interpretation, even with most signs blown down, the remaining signage technically met legal requirements. However, this raised practical questions about clarity. As Hearing Examiner Rice noted, "The no parking sign doesn't say no parking this block. It just says no parking, and it's attached to a meter, which seems understandably to be... could be perceived as applying to the parking meter to which it's attached and not to the block." Coulter acknowledged this challenge: "Unfortunately, that can communicate that if one of those signs is down, it's okay to park in that one space." ## Competing Communications and Confusion A significant issue emerged around contradictory communications to marathon participants. Fields repeatedly emphasized that "race organizers clearly instructed us that we could verbatim park anywhere downtown for free. They included alternative options. The only place that they explicitly told us that we could not park was at Depot Market Square." Lieutenant Alexander acknowledged this communication gap, promising future coordination: "I was in contact with the organizer, and I got... my request is for them next year to post those no parking zones. It's a PDF file that he could... they could, include in the website very easily." The situation was further complicated by multiple overlapping events requiring parking restrictions. Coulter noted that "there were 6 different events that were signed for no parking in the 11 and 1200 block of railroad within 5 days of each other that month." This created visual confusion with signs for different dates and events posted simultaneously. ## The Broader Pattern Perhaps most telling was the pattern of appeals from this single day's operations. Heston noted that while 32 vehicles were impounded from the marathon route, the city faced 11 formal appeals — an unusually high rate of challenges. By contrast, when 37 vehicles were towed from the same area just two days later for street cleaning, "zero appeals" were filed despite more vehicles being affected. This suggested that the marathon impounds involved circumstances that many affected parties viewed as fundamentally unfair, even if technically legal under city interpretations of signage requirements. Coulter acknowledged the unusual nature of the situation: "What seems to be different about this one are the number of contested towings that we've had." This wasn't simply a case of people ignoring clear restrictions — it appeared to involve a genuine breakdown in the notice system due to extraordinary weather conditions. ## Closing Arguments and What's Ahead Fields concluded with an appeal to fairness and clarity: "No signage was obvious and clear that I could not park where I parked... we've already noted that the signage that was placed was heavily impacted by the presence of the weather. Signage that was in place for other dates somehow survived." He emphasized that "me and likely the other racers... had no intention of doing any wrongdoing, or skirting around anything." The case highlighted fundamental tensions in municipal governance: balancing public safety needs, legal notice requirements, practical enforcement challenges, and fairness to citizens. The city had followed its established procedures and arguably met technical legal requirements, but extraordinary weather had created a situation where reasonable people could park in good faith without seeing adequate warning. Hearing Examiner Rice took the matter under advisement, promising a written decision by November 13th, 2025. The decision would need to weigh whether the remaining signage provided adequate legal notice under the circumstances, and whether the emergency nature of the situation justified the impounds despite the communication breakdown. The case represents more than a simple parking dispute — it illuminates the complex challenges cities face in managing large public events while protecting both public safety and individual rights, especially when natural forces disrupt even the most careful planning.

### Meeting Overview The Bellingham Hearing Examiner held a vehicle impound appeal hearing on October 29, 2025, considering Nicholas Fields' challenge to the impound of his 2022 Subaru Outback during the Bellingham Bay Marathon on September 21, 2025. ### Key Terms and Concepts **Hearing Examiner:** An independent attorney who decides appeals from city decisions, including vehicle impounds. Sharon Rice serves as Bellingham's contract Hearing Examiner. **MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices):** Federal guidelines that govern traffic signage requirements, including no parking signs. **Retroreflective signage:** Signs made with special material that reflects vehicle headlights directly back to drivers, designed for maximum visibility in low-light conditions. **Class A tow truck:** Heavy-duty towing equipment required for all-wheel drive vehicles to prevent transmission damage during towing. **Burden of proof:** The legal requirement that the appellant (vehicle owner) must demonstrate error in the impound decision. **R8 series signs:** Federal designation for no parking signs under MUTCD guidelines. **Right-of-way usage permit:** City authorization required for events that use public streets and may require parking restrictions. **Registered tow truck operator official fees:** State-mandated fee schedule that all municipal towing contractors must follow. ### Key People at This Meeting | Name | Role / Affiliation | |---|---| | Sharon Rice | Bellingham Hearing Examiner | | Nicholas Fields | Appellant/Marathon participant | | Greg Coulter | City Parking Code Compliance Officer | | Lieutenant Dante Alexander | Bellingham Police Special Operations | | Chris Heston | Owner, Heston Towing | ### Background Context The Bellingham Bay Marathon is a major annual event requiring extensive street closures and parking restrictions downtown. The city coordinates with police and parking enforcement to clear race routes for safety reasons. The 1200 block of Railroad Avenue was part of both the 10K and half marathon routes, making it critical to keep clear of parked vehicles. Weather played a significant role in this case. A major windstorm with gusts up to 30 mph and heavy rain struck the night before the marathon, blowing down most of the temporary no parking signs that had been posted 72 hours in advance. Of 28 signs originally posted, only 6 remained when enforcement arrived at 6 AM. ### What Happened — The Short Version Nicholas Fields parked his car on Railroad Avenue just before 6 AM on marathon day, following race organizers' instructions that participants could "park anywhere downtown for free." Due to overnight storms, most temporary no parking signs had blown down. City staff and police decided to proceed with impounds based on remaining signage and safety concerns for runners. Fields discovered his car was towed after finishing the race and appealed the $710.14 impound fee, arguing inadequate signage. The city defended the action citing federal signage standards and runner safety priorities. ### What to Watch Next - Hearing Examiner decision due by November 13, 2025 - Potential policy changes for future marathon parking communications - Lieutenant Alexander working with race organizers to include parking restriction maps on event website ---

**Q:** What was the total impound fee charged to Nicholas Fields? **A:** $710.14, including $400 towing (1-hour minimum), $50.50 storage (half day), and $201 after-hours redemption fee. **Q:** How many temporary no parking signs were originally posted on the 1200 block of Railroad? **A:** 28 signs, one on each parking meter post, placed 72 hours before the event. **Q:** How many signs remained standing after the windstorm? **A:** Only 6 of the original 28 signs were still up when parking enforcement arrived at 6 AM. **Q:** What federal guidelines govern no parking signage requirements? **A:** The MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices), specifically Section 2B.53 for R8 series no parking signs. **Q:** What time did Nicholas Fields park his car on marathon morning? **A:** Just before 6 AM, before taking the shuttle to Lummi Island for the race start. **Q:** Who serves as Bellingham's Hearing Examiner? **A:** Sharon Rice, an attorney who works on contract with Bellingham and about 9 other cities and counties. **Q:** What weather conditions affected the signage the night before the marathon? **A:** Wind gusts up to 30 mph and about a quarter inch of rain over 4 hours. **Q:** How many total vehicles were impounded during the marathon event? **A:** 32 vehicles were impounded across the entire race route. **Q:** What special equipment was needed to tow Fields' all-wheel drive Subaru? **A:** An extra dolly system to keep all wheels off the ground and prevent transmission damage. **Q:** What instructions did marathon organizers give participants about parking? **A:** They could "park anywhere downtown for free," with the only restriction being no parking at Depot Market Square. **Q:** Who has the burden of proof in a vehicle impound appeal? **A:** The appellant (vehicle owner) must demonstrate error in the impound decision or towing fees. **Q:** How many of the 32 impounded vehicles resulted in appeal hearings? **A:** 11 vehicle owners filed appeals, while the others paid the fees without contesting. **Q:** What is Lieutenant Alexander requesting for future marathons? **A:** That race organizers post parking restriction maps on their website as a PDF file. **Q:** When was the retroreflective "Road Closed" sign installed? **A:** September 15th, three days before the regular temporary no parking signs. **Q:** What time frame were the road closures scheduled for? **A:** 8 AM to 11 AM on marathon day (September 21, 2025). ---