In Petras v. Arizona State Liquor Board, 129 Ariz. 449, 450, 631 P.2d 1107, 1108 (App. 1981), the licensee argued that a liquor license revocation was excessive and thus arbitrary and capricious. To determine whether an agency has acted arbitrarily, we look for "'unreasoning action, . . . in disregard for facts and circumstances; where there is room for two opinions, the action is not arbitrary or capricious if exercised honestly and upon due consideration.'" Id. at 452, 631 P.2d at 1110 . The Court noted that the Arizona Court of Appeals had in other cases affirmed the penalty even when the opposite outcome was equally supportable. Id. The Court also held that when the penalty is statutorily authorized and the licensee fails to show it is disproportionate to the offense, we will affirm. Id.