Special magistrate upholds four school‑zone camera citations in St. Cloud

A City of Saint Cloud special magistrate on Sept. 17 denied four appeals of school‑zone speed‑camera notices and ordered each registered owner to pay a $100 fine plus $89.49 in administrative costs, for a total of $189.49 per case.

Hearing officer Drew Smith, the independent hearing officer presiding over the administrative matters, said repeatedly that state statute governing the camera program leaves him no discretion to reduce or waive fines for conduct he found to be violations. "The statute gives me no such leeway," Smith said during the hearing. "Because there was a violation, I find I have to impose the penalty that was assessed."

The magistrate upheld the notices against Marcy Sue Berger, Mohammed Ibrahim Gull, James Morenci and Victor George Hernandez. City staff presented camera stills, video clips, and camera/radar test logs in each case, and recommended denial of each petition on the basis that the recorded speeds exceeded the posted limits.

- In Marcy Sue Berger’s case, staff presented a still image and video showing a 2015 black Mazda registered to Berger recorded at 42 mph in a posted 30 mph school zone near St. Cloud Elementary School. Berger said she was rushing to assist a frail resident who had fallen; she told the magistrate, "I was just trying to get there as quickly as I could." Smith replied that, under the statutory program, he could not excuse the violation for those circumstances and entered an order upholding the citation.

- In the case of Mohammed Ibrahim Gull, staff said the 2020 silver Lexus was recorded at 27 mph in a posted 15 mph reduced school‑zone period; video showed Gull braking when reaching the sign. Gull told the magistrate, "I was breaking when I got to the sign," and described his work as an overnight hospital frontline worker. Smith again said the statute provided no basis to reduce the penalty and upheld the citation.

- James Morenci was recorded at 43 mph in a 30 mph school zone; he argued that due process for driver identification had not occurred and questioned the placement of signage and whether the reduced 15 mph beacon was active. The magistrate rejected the argument that those factors nullified the recorded violation and upheld the order.

- Victor George Hernandez said he was the registered owner but not the driver; he told the magistrate the driver was a mobile mechanic he could not locate. The magistrate noted that the statutory process allows owners to submit an affidavit identifying the actual driver; Hernandez said he had not submitted that affidavit and the magistrate therefore upheld the citation.

Each motorist was told they would receive a written order and additional mailed instructions from the camera vendor showing online payment options and that the magistrate’s written order starts the appeal period to circuit court.

The City of Saint Cloud staff cited City Ordinance 20‑24‑48 in support of the violations. The magistrate referenced the state statutory program that authorizes locally administered school‑zone speed‑camera enforcement and said the statute, not local discretion, determined the outcome.

The hearing proceeded through multiple camera‑case dockets before moving to separate code‑enforcement matters later in the session.