With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". P.3d 663. The Supreme Court caution[ed] against using a declaratory judgment action to challenge or review administrative actions if such an approach would foreclose any necessary fact-finding by the administrative entity, discourage reliance on any special expertise that may exist at the administrative level, disregard an exclusive statutory scheme for the review of administrative decisions, or circumvent procedural or substantive limitations that would otherwise limit review through means other than a declaratory judgment action. Smith, 2007-NMSC-055, ¶ 15, 142 N.M. 786, 171 P.3d 300; see also State of N.M. ex rel. Hanosh v. N.M. Envtl. Improvement Bd., 2008-NMCA-156, ¶ 6, 145 an agency made the wrong decision are improper. Cf. Smith, 2007-NMSC-055, ¶ 17, 142 N.M. 786, 171 P.3d 300 (<HOLDING>). {15} In sum, Lion’s Gate with Smith require a

A: holding a city liable for personal injuries caused by a driver colliding with a girder in the center of a city street where the city did not give a warning
B: recognizing that the plaintiffs did not argue that the city made the ivrong decision they argued that the city had no right to even make a decision and noting that such a challenge is precisely the type of question appropriately considered by a declaratory judgment action
C: holding that the city had standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute allowing certain communities within the same county as the city to incorporate as towns without the citys consent
D: holding that plaintiffs did not have standing to bring a declaratory judgment action in either a thirdparty beneficiary individual or associational capacity because there was nothing in the contract between a conservation district and a city concerning rates charged to the city that conferred donee  or creditorbeneficiary standing upon the plaintiffs to challenge the contracts terms
B.