View in portable document format.

Parking and Traffic Appeals Panel

This report was prepared by the committee chairman, David R. Maidment, and approved by the committee in April 2010. This revised version is submitted to document additional work that the committee did in reviewing appeals over the summer session 2010.

The purpose of the Parking and Traffic Appeals Panel is to review appeals for fines arising from enforcement by the Parking and Traffic Services administration of the University’s parking and traffic regulations. A person receiving a fine can appeal first to the Parking and Traffic Services staff, and if not satisfied with the result, can appeal further to the committee to consider their case for reduction or dismissal of the fine.

The Parking and Traffic Appeals Panel for 2009-10 consists of thirty-nine members:
Faculty: Christopher Adejumo, Chandra Bhat, Neal Burns, Linda Carpenter, Edward Coyle, George Forgie, Alexandra Garcia, Michelle Habeck, Howard Liljestrand, David Maidment, Hunter March, Thomas Milner, Christene Moore, Robert Parrino, Pengyu Ren, Jeffrey Richards, Patricia Stout, George Sylvie
Faculty Council Appointees: Namkee Choi, Gerald Hoffmann
Staff: Ashley Adams, Beverly Blythe, Andrew Carls, David Littlefield, Jennifer Morgan, Susan Peake, Debbie Roberts, Jason Shoumaker, Diane Skubal, Warren Whitaker
Students: Minator Azemi, Dan Caponio, Christopher Klabunde, Ryan Mehendale, Christopher Plummer, Zachary Pozun, Cristina Ramage, Andrew Solomon, Justin Stein

The committee is divided into six review panels, each with six or seven members, and each review panel considers a group of appeals, generally five at a time, over a two-week period. The individual panel members electronically review the evidence presented by the Parking and Traffic Services administration, the counter arguments presented by the appellant, and vote either to uphold, reduce, or dismiss the fine. The chairman of the committee reviews the votes of the panel members on each case and makes the final decision on the appeal. There is no further avenue for appeal beyond this committee. Generally, about three quarters of the committee’s membership responds when asked to review appeals, and this produces four to six responses per appeal, enough to gain a collective sense of how each appeal is viewed by the committee members. The chairman makes the final decision on each appeal upon review of the committee responses.

From September 2009 through August 2010, the committee considered 307 cases, of which eighty-six cases were held over from the 2008-09 academic year and 221 cases arose from appeals lodged during this academic year. The eighty-six cases held over from last year were answered between November 23, 2009, and December 7, 2009. The 221 cases from this academic year have been answered between January 29, 2010, and August 31, 2010.

Overall, the committee members contributed 1540 reviews to resolve the 307 appeals, or an average of just over five reviews per appeal. Considering that there are either six or seven people on each review panel, this is a very good response by the committee members. A standard of at least four reviews per appeal was the goal in each review cycle.

The committee has elected George Sylvie as its chair elect, and he will become the chairman of the committee at the beginning of the 2010-11 academic year.

The committee chairman wishes to record his appreciation for the timely and thorough manner in which the committee members have performed their duties during this year, and for the considerable help that he has received from Parking and Traffic Services staff: Jeri Baker, Margaret Rogers and Shola Esho, in the operation of the committee.

David Maidment, chair

Report updated on September 13, 2010.