It may just be a $25-ticket, but Michel Bernier will take some time to decide whether to appeal a court decision that he pay it.

Bernier said today he will have to digest the court case before deciding whether to appeal a guilty verdict in his dispute over the parking ticket.

After a short trial in bylaw court this morning, Justice of the Peace Dean Cameron delivered the guilty verdict. He ordered Bernier to pay the $25-ticket within two weeks for parking for more than two hours in a two-hour zone.

'It's a question of principle,' Bernier commented outside the courtroom after the hearing.

Under questioning by city lawyer Lori Lavoie, bylaw constable Jay Lester told the court that last Nov. 2, he had checked which vehicles were in the two-hour parking zone in the 300 block of the south side of Lambert Street at around 9:11 a.m.

Using chalk to mark the left rear tire, he returned at 11:44 a.m. to find the chalk line on Bernier's wife's vehicle, which Bernier was using that day, still intact. The chalk line is used as an indicator to determine whether the vehicle has moved.

Lester pointed out the place where the car was parked within the two-hour zone using photos of the area provided by Lavoie.

Lester then wrote up the $25-ticket and placed it on the car windshield. Bernier's wife registered the not-guilty plea by coming into the bylaw office and signing the ticket.

After questioning by Lavoie, Bernier presented the court with a map from the city's website showing the downtown parking zones. As Bernier pointed out, the map shows the location as being in a free-parking zone next to the two-hour zone.

The map didn't come directly from city hall but from its website, he told the court when asked about it by Cameron.

Lavoie took issue with the map, noting she wasn't sure whether this was a permanent map, when it was produced or other details about it.

Bernier explained it was taken from the city's website the same day the ticket was issued and was checked again today.

In summarizing her arguments, Lavoie pointed out Bernier had no dispute that he parked in the area in question for more than two hours.

She asked that Cameron disregard the map presented by Bernier or at least place less weight on it. What is paramount is the signs there displaying how long parking in that area is for.

Reading from the bylaw, she pointed out the displayed signs on the road take precedence over such maps.

As Bernier pointed out though, the map and signs seem to be conflicting directions about parking from the city.

In handing down his decision, Cameron said while he doesn't dispute there seems to be conflicting evidence from the city in the parking regulations, the bylaw deals with what is on the street.

If the city had intended another parking zone in the area, the signs would be changed or there would be garbage bags placed over the signs, as is often the case during construction, Cameron said.

The map is only a rough indication of the parking zones and isn't to scale, he added.

The precise location of the extended parking zone would be overruled by a parking sign.

'The sign clearly indicates a two-hour zone,' said Cameron.

Bernier was given 14 days to pay the $25-ticket and told he could appeal within 30 days.

As he was speaking outside the courtroom, Bernier said he believes the map is part of the city's regulations.

'This is the law as far as I'm concerned,' he said.

He also pointed out that the parking regulations for the area should be changed because the building he was parked in front of, where his office is, is no longer a video store with customers coming and going.

'There's no need for a two-hour limit,' he said.