A. In addition to the requirements of RCW 46.55.120, a person redeeming a vehicle impounded pursuant to LMC 11.02.051 must establish that the driver who is to drive the vehicle away from the business location of the registered tow truck operator or other storage location has a valid driver’s license and valid liability insurance in compliance with RCW 46.30.020. A vehicle impounded because the operator is arrested for a violation of RCW 46.20.342 may be released only pursuant to a written order from the police department or the court.

B. The chief of police, or designee, is authorized to release a vehicle impounded because the operator is arrested for a violation of RCW 46.20.342 prior to the expiration of any period of impoundment upon petition of the spouse of the driver based on economic or personal hardship to such spouse resulting from the unavailability of the vehicle and after consideration of the threat to public safety that may result from release of the vehicle including, but not limited to, the driver’s criminal history, driving records, license status, and access to the vehicle. If such release is authorized, the requirements of RCW 46.55.120(1)(a) and (1)(b), and subsection (A) of this section, must still be satisfied before the vehicle may be released.

C. At a post-impoundment hearing, whether conducted by an administrative hearings officer or the municipal court, an abstract of the driver’s driving record is admissible without further evidentiary foundation and is prima facie evidence of the status of the driver’s license, permit, or privilege to drive and that the driver was convicted of each offense shown on the abstract. In addition, reasonably reliable evidence, which may include verbal and computerized checks of the records of the Washington State Department of Licensing and equivalent out-of-state licensing agencies, is admissible to establish the identity of the registered and legal owners of the vehicle and the licensing status of the vehicle’s driver. Further, at a hearing conducted by an administrative hearings officer, the hearings officer may consider written reports by the officer(s) who authorized or were involved in the impoundment and related incident.

D. No determination of facts made at a post-impoundment hearing, whether conducted by an administrative hearings officer or the municipal court, shall have any collateral estoppel effect on a subsequent criminal prosecution and such determination shall not preclude litigation of those same facts in a subsequent criminal prosecution. (Ord. 2245 § 4, 1999)