HomeMy WebLinkAboutNB 1 GRAFFITI REWARD 02-01-93r1.,1 BUSINESS N0. 1
-93
Inter -Com
DATE: FEBRUARY 11 1993
TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
FROM: DOUG FRANKS, CHIEF OF POLICE
CHRISTINE A. SHINGLETON, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:
ELIMINATION OF GRAFFITI/GRAFFITI REWARD PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION
Provide direction to staff establishing $250.00 graffiti
reward amount.
BACKGROUND
At the Town Hall meeting of January 12, 1993, several citizen
comments were made regarding the City's success at timely
removal of graffiti from private and public property.
However, it was pointed out that the occurrence of graffiti in
_._ the City has dramatically increased and that graffiti removal,
while essential, does not effectively discourage graffiti
vandals from continuing their practice of defacing public and
private property. As a result of these comments, City Council
requested staff to prepare a report which would investigate
programs designed to more fully discourage the occurrence of
graffiti within the City.
Generally, staff believes that there are the following four
methods available to reduce the occurrence of graffiti within
the City:
1. Remove graffiti immediately after application: Rapid
removal of graffiti discourages taggers and gang members
from revisiting the area since a primary goal of graffiti
is to announce an identity or "claim" an area. If
graffiti is repeatedly removed, little recognition from
a graffiti vandal's peers is generated and the vandal may
become disenchanted with the area and move somewhere else
where their mark may remain for a longer period of time.
On November 18, 1991, the Tustin City Council adopted
Ordinance 1079, formally establishing a code prohibiting
graffiti and providing penalties for graffiti vandals.
The Ordinance specifically prohibited property owners
from tolerating graffiti on their property and required
its removal within seven (7) days of notification by the
City. Failure of an owner to remove graffiti from
City Council Report
Re: Elimination of Graffiti/Graffiti Reward Program
February 1, 1993
Page 2
private property, when notified, can result in citation
with a fine of $75.00.
City Council has also had the foresight to allocate
$45,000 ($20,000 FY91-921 $25,000 FY92-93) of Community
Development Block Grant funding to provide free graffiti
removal to property owners requesting the service. In
addition, $11,000 has been designated during FY92-93 to
the Public Works Department for contract removal of
graffiti from public rights-of-way including flood
control channels, and certain CalTrans property not
actually on the freeway. Staff has instituted a Graffiti
Hotline available 24 hours a day. City Police, Community
Development and Public Works staff proactively report
graffiti witnessed in the field. Both City contractors
follow a strict policy of removing reported graffiti
within 72 hours (except private property where a
liability release has not been previously obtained from
the owner).
Public Work's public property graffiti contract removal
expenses, since July 1992, total approximately $2,300.00.
A review of graffiti removal activities performed by the
City's private property contractor indicates that
graffiti removal costs have soared since July 1992, as
follows:
July 1992:
$ 40.00
August 1992:
170.00
September 1992:
11090.00
October 1992:
2,945.00
November 1992:
21639.00
December 1992:
31850.00
2. Eliminate sales of spray paint to minors: Eliminating
the ability. of vandals to access the tools needed to
apply graffiti is essential. Ordinance 1079 echoes
current State law in prohibiting the sale of spray paint
to minors. Merchants choosing to ignore this code
requirement may face citation with a fine of $500.00.
Such provisions are generally useless against adult
vandals, and minors who steal spray paint or illegally
purchase paint from uncooperative business owners.
3. Education: Significant funding and personnel
resources are currently being focused on graffiti removal
that could be used for much more productive purposes.
Educating the community's minors and businessmen of this
City Council Report
Re: Elimination of Graffiti/Graffiti Reward Program
February 1, 1993
Page 3
extraordinary waste may cause the most significant long-
term reduction in the occurrence in graffiti. Peer
recognition currently drives vandals to apply graffiti.
Peer pressure, if redirected, may be effective in
reducing graffiti in the community.
The Tustin Police Department provides "Anti -Graffiti"
information in general terms to local elementary schools
but does not have a formalized curriculum for this topic
at this time. In addition, Police and Community
Development Department staff continue to work with
property owners and the Tustin Effective Apartment
Managers (TEAM) to identify graffiti prevention
alternatives such as vine plantings, providing additional
outdoor lighting, etc.
4. Arrest Vandals: Arrest with prosecution and fines may
also aide the community's efforts toward eliminating
graffiti. Ordinance 1079 requires that persons arrested
for graffiti vandalism be charged with a misdemeanor with
a fine of $500.00 (first offense) or $1000.00 (second
offense). Parents or guardians must pay fines and
cleanup costs associated with graffiti vandalism caused
by minors to whom they are responsible.
In the past year, Tustin Police have arrested 15
juveniles and 2 adults for graffiti vandalism. Past
Tustin Police Department surveillance efforts have not
been successful at preventing graffiti at private
properties within the community which have been
repeatedly been the target for graffiti vandals. This is
due to the fact that graffiti vandals are sporadic and do
not follow established patterns. Three properties in
particular have received over $3, 000.00 in free graffiti
removal from the City.
Based upon the graffiti cleanup cost figures detailed
above, arrest has not yet been an effective tool in
reducing the occurrence of graffiti within the City.
REWARD PROGRAM
Public support for a proactive solution to Graffiti within the
community may be generated through reward incentives. In
adopting Ordinance 1079, an opportunity was established for
Council to authorize and offer a reward to anyone providing
information leading to the arrest of any person maliciously
applying graffiti to public or private property within the
City Council Report
Re: Elimination of Graffiti/Graffiti Reward Program
February 1, 1993
Page 4
City. The reward is required to be paid by the convicted
vandal or their responsible parent or guardian. Also, the
Ordinance provides that the exact amount of the reward be
determined by the City Council after receipt of a report from
the City Manager confirming that valuable information had been
received by the City which lead to the arrest of a person who
had maliciously applied graffiti in violation of the city
Ordinance. No officer, official or employee of the City is
eligible for such reward.
Seven separate police actions resulted in the arrest of the 17
graffiti vandals mentioned above. Five of those actions were
the result of a phone tip received from a Tustin business
owner, resident or property owner. While prosecution of the
vandals is still pending, none of the informants have yet
applied for the City's graffiti reward. However, the
informants may not have known about the graffiti reward
program.
Staff has surveyed a number of other cities which utilize a
graffiti information rewards to determine alternative nethods
for successfully administering such a program. Sadly, the
responses were not promising:
Fountain Valley: The Graffiti Reward Program is
administered by the Chief of Police. Citizens identify
themselves for reward purposes when providing information
on suspects. The Police Department follows the progress
of the case through the court system. Upon receiving a
conviction, a check request is filed through the City's
Finance Department whereupon "asset forfeiture" money is
used to pay the reward. The reward is mailed to the
informant by the Finance Department.
Anaheim: The Code Enforcement Division of the City
administers Anaheim's graffiti reward program. Council
has authorized twenty $500.00 rewards over the past three
years with an additional 67 active reward claims awaiting
final court disposition. Rewards are issued to persons
providing information leading to the arrest and
conviction of a graffiti vandal. Funding is derived from
the City's graffiti consultant budget. The program is
actively advertised through brochures, posters, police
presentations and other publicity.
La Habra: The program is similar to that of the City of
Anaheim. It is not widely publicized and no one has ever
collected a reward.
City Council Report
Re: Elimination of Graffiti/Graffiti Reward Program
February 1, 1993
Page 5
South Gate: The reward program was discontinued due to
a perception by Council that it didn't work. In
addition, numerous informants were vocally disenchanted
when court convictions and rewards did not occur as
expected.
Long Beach: The reward program has been very effective
at garnering public participation and involvement in
arresting graffiti vandals. The reward is currently set
at $1,000.00 for information leading to conviction.
Funding is provided through Community Development
Department budget.
Santa Ana: The Chief of Police is currently working on
developing a graffiti reward program that is planned to
reward persons providing information leading to the
arrest and conviction of graffiti vandals with monies
received as violator payment of graffiti related court
required fines.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff believes that the City's current reward program could be
improved or modified to increase public participation in the
effort to eliminate the occurrence of graffiti within the
City.
1. Press Publicity: Press publication of graffiti
related arrests, convictions and monies available through
reward programs should be promoted to discourage graffiti
vandals from their activities.
2. Promotional Publicity: Flyers, posters, school
handouts, and other media should be used to encourage the
confidential reporting of graffiti vandals and the
existence of a graffiti hotline and City sponsored
graffiti removal services.
3. Education: City efforts at communicating with the
City's youth should continue so that positive peer
pressure and community pride is encouraged. Essays,
youth art, graffiti removal efforts, slogans, etc. could
be generated and publicized.
4. Community Activism/Awareness:
* City staff should continue to work with community
organizations, business owners, property owners and
City Council Report
Re: Eliminaticn of Graffiti/Graffiti Reward Program
February 1, 1993
Page 6
tenants to provide graffiti removal alternatives
(Vine plantings on exposed walls, provision of
additional lighting, use of close circuit T.V.
monitors, etc.).
* Staff could work with the City Attorney to develop
a liability waiver form to allow and assist civic
minded groups, interested in performing free
graffiti paint -out work parties, the ability to
assist in the elimination of graffiti within the
City.
* The City could promote and conduct a program
designed to acquire charitable contributions from
City businesses and others interested in
financially assisting the City's graffiti removal
program. Caltrans' introduction of the "Adopt a
Wall" program is a type of program which the
citizens, charitable organizations and businesses
may want to become a part.
5. Inter -City Cooperation: City staff should continue
to work with neighboring jurisdictions when prosecuting
graffiti vandals and to share innovative ideas which help
the effort against graffiti.
6. Pre -Establish Reward Amount: To assist in the
promotion of the City's Reward Program, staff. recommends
that the City Council formally establish a $250.00 amount
to be issued as a reward for information leading to the
conviction of a graffiti vandal. Once the reward amount
is set, staff can more effectively advertise the program
to the public.
The City currently has a graffiti reward program established
within the Tustin City Code. While there seems no clear
method to guarantee the elimination of graffiti within the
City, staff believes that implementation of the above
reference at es coul assist our efforts.
Doug Franks Christine A. Shinton
Chief of Police Assistant City Ma ger
DO:kd\9rafrwrd.mem
Attachment: Ordinance 1079
1
a
3'
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. 1079
AN ORDIN. NCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUST=N, CALIFORNIA, ADDING ARTICLE 5,
CHAPTER 1 TO THE TUSTIN CITY CODE ENTITLED
GRAFFITI SPRAY PAINT PROGRAM
The City Counzil of the City of Tustin does ordain as
follows:
Section 1: Article 5, Chapter 7 entitled
"Graffiti/ Spray Paint Program" is hereby added to the
Tustin City Cede to read as follows:
CHAPTER 7
GRAFFITI/SPRAY PAINT PROGRAM
5700 PURPOSE AND FINDINGS
The purpcse of this chapter is to provide a program
for the elimination of graffiti from on both public and
private property, to reduce blight and deterioration
within the Ci -:y and to protect the public safety. The
City finds ans determines as follows:
(1) Graffiti on structures located upon public and
private property is a blighting factor which not
only depreciates the value of the property, but
also devalues the adjacent and surrounding
properties in the community; and
(2) It is the City Council's intent to provide for the
prohibit -:,.on of the placement of graffiti on
structures located either on public or private
property; and
(3) Governme.rt Code Section 53069.3 authorizes a City
to enact ordinances to provide for the use of City
funds to remove graffiti from public and privately
owned structures located within the City; and
(4) The Citi- Council finds that graffiti or related
inscribes materials is obnoxious and pursuant to
Gove.rnmen-- Code Section 53069.3 authorizes that a
program instituted allowing for the use of City
funds to remove graffiti from'structures on public
and private.property; and
(5) Governmer.: Code Section 53069.5 authorizes a City
to offer and pay a reward for information leading
to the determination of the identity of, and the
apprehens-on of any person who willfully damages
property.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7I
8'
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1079
Page 2
5701 DEFINITIONS
"Bona fide evidence of majority" means a document
issued by a federal, state, county or municipal
government or subdivision or agency thereof, including
but not limited to, a motor vehicle operator's license,
a registration certificate issued under the Federal
Selective Service Act, a passport, or an identification
card issued to a member of the armed forces which
identifies an individual and provides proof of the age of
such individual.
"Capable of defacing property" means any substance,
spray paint, paint, or dye, or any other liquid which
when applied to any surface leaves an opaque and
insoluble residue which cannot be removed by ordinary
application of soap and water.
"Graffiti" means the unauthorized inscribing,
spraying of paint, or making symbols using paint, spray
paint, ink, chalk, dye or similar materials on public or
private structures, buildings or places.
"Obnoxious Graffiti" means graffiti which has any of
the following characteristics:
(1) Insults or incites hatred or contempt of any
racial, religious or ethnic group;
(2 ) Refers to the name of a gang or includes words or
symbols associated with a gang or individual;
(3 ) Insults or threatens any identifiable individual or
group;
(4) Includes obscene or indecent language or
depictions;
(5) Constitutes an aesthetic blight or eyesore to a
neighborhood;
(6) Tends to attract more graffiti;
(7) Promotes criminal activity or promotes retaliatory
action by an individual(s).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
91
I,
10
11
12
131
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1079
Page 3
5702 SALE OF SPRAY PAINT
A. Sale to Minors Prohibited
No person shall sell or cause to be sold to any
person under the age of eighteen years any aerosol
container of spray paint capable of defacing property.
. B. Evidence of Sale Subject to Prosecution
Evidence that a person, his or her employee, or
agent, demanded and was shown bona fide evidence of
majority and acted upon such evidence in a transaction of
sale to a minor, shall be a defense to any criminal
prosecution thereof.
C. Posting of Prohibition Required
Any person who owns, manages or operates a place of
business wherein, aerosol containers of spray paint
capable of defacing property are sold shall conspicuously
post a copy of subsection A of this Section in such place
of business in letters at least 3/8 of an inch high.
5703 POSSESSION OF SPRAY PAINT - PROHIBITION IN PUBLIC
PLACES, PARRS AND BUILDINGS
No person shall have in his or her possession any
aerosol container of spray paint capable of defacing
property while in any public park, playground, swimming
pool, or recreation facility, public building or other
public place, other than a highway, street or alley,
except authorized employees or agents of the City or
persons having the authorization of the City Manager or
g his designees. Nothing in this Section shall be deemed
to prohibit the possession of an aerosol container of
spray paint capable of defacing property on .the property
of any school as defined by the Education Code, by a
teacher or authorized agent of such a school or any other
person under the direct supervision and control of a
teacher of such a school.
5704 POSSESSION OF SPRAY PAINT - PROHIBITION BY MINORS IN
STREETS OR OTHER PUBLIC PLACES
No person under the age of eighteen (18) shall have
in his or her possession any aerosol container of spray
paint capable of defacing property while on any public
highway, street, alley or way unless such person is
accompanied by a parent or legal guardian.
2
3
4
5'
61
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1079
Page 4
5705 GRAFFITI PROHIBITED
No person shall willfully or maliciously use any
liquid substance, spray paint, chalk, dye, or other
similar substance to paint, mar or deface any public or
privately owned structures located on public or privately
owned real property within the City, whether such
property is occupied, vacated or abandoned.
5706 GRAFFITI TOLERATION
It shall be unlawful for the owner of any private
property to permit graffiti or other inscribed materials
to remain on structures so as to be capable of being
viewed by a person utilizing any public right-of-way in
the City, such as a highway, street, road, parkway or
alley, providing the City Code Enforcement Officer has
given written notice to the owner and occupant requiring
removal of the graffiti within a period of not less than
seven (7) calendar days and such time period has elapsed
without remedial action.
5707 GRAFFITI REMOVAL
Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Tustin
City Code, when the Director of Public Works or Director
of Community Development determines that graffiti or
other inscribed material constitutes obnoxious graffiti
and by virtue of its location on public or private
property is in view of a person utilizing any public
right-of-way, whether a highway, street, road, parkway or
alley, the City shall be authorized to undertake the
removal of such graffiti. Prior to the removal of such
graffiti the City shall obtain the written consent of the
owner for such action and the owner shall execute an
appropriate release form and right of entry form to
permit such graffiti removal. If the City provides for
the removal of graffiti, it shall not authorize or
undertake to provide for the painting or repair of any
more extensive area than that area where the graffiti is
located.
5708 GRAFFITI REWARD
A reward in an amount established by Resolution of
the City Council may be authorized, offered and may be
paid by the City to any person who provides information
leading to the determination of the identity of, and the
apprehension of, any person who willfully or maliciously
1
1
1
1
1
16
17
18
19
20
21'
22
23
24
25
26
27
R3
Ordinance No. 1079
Page 5
paints, mars or defaces any public or private structure
located on private or public property within the City.
The exact amount of any reward to be paid by the
City shall be determined by the City Council after
receipt of a report from the City Manager indicating that
information was received leading to the determination of
the identity of, and the apprehension of, a person who
willfully or maliciously painted, marred or defaced a
structure located on public or private property located
within the City, and indicating the f inal disposition of
such matter. No law enforcement officer, municipal
officer, official or employee of the City shall be
eligible for such reward.
Any person violating the provisions of Sections 5705
through 5707 of this Chapter shall pay the City the
amount of any reward paid pursuant to this Section, and
if such person is an unemancipated minor, such minor's
parents or guardian are so liable and shall pay the
amount of any reward to the City. Failure to pay any
amount demanded by the City pursuant to this Section
within thirty ( 3 0 ) days of written demand therefore shall
itself be a violation of the provisions of this section.
5710 SEVERABILITY
It is declared to be the intention of the City
Council that the sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses
and phrases of this Chapter form an interrelated program
for dealing with the problem of graffiti and vandalism
within the City, but that such sections, paragraphs,
sentences, clauses and phrases are distinct and severable
and, in the event that any sections, paragraphs, clauses
and phrases are declared unconstitutional, invalid or
unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction,
such unconstitutionality, invalidity or unenforceability
shall* not affect any of the remaining sections,
paragraphs, clauses or phrases of this Chapter.
Section 2: Within fifteen days after the adoption
of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall certify to the
adoption hereof and cause it to be posted in at least
three public places within the City.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ordinance No. 1079
Page 6
PASSED and ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Tustin on this 18th day of
November, 1991.
&I � ; � 4L� -&-
CHARLES E. PUCKETT
MAYOR
MARY W N
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF TUSTIN )
CERTIFICATION FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1079
MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and ex -of f icio Clerk of the City
Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby
certify that the whole number of the members of the City
Council of the City of Tustin is f ive; that the above and
foregoing Ordinance was duly and regularly introduced and
read at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the
4th day of November, 1991, and was given its second
reading, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the
City Council held on the 18th day of November, 1991, by
the following vote:
COUNCILPERSONS AYES: Puckett, Pontious, Edgar, Potts, Prescott
COUNCILPERSONS NOES: None
COUNCILPERSONS ABSTAINED: None
COUNCILPERSONS ABSENT: None
Do:kd\1079.ord MARY E. YNN, ity Clerk