HomeMy WebLinkAbout- - Graffiti Ordinance Report Revision - 10/5/2010CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2010
ITEM NUMBER:
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO THE GRAFFITI ORDINANCE
DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 2010
FROM: POLICE DEPARTMENT
PRESENTATION BY: JASON CHAMNESS, POLICE OFFICER
ELENA GERLI, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Chamness (714)754-5055
Elena Gerli (714) 446-1400
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance regarding Graffiti
Vandalism.
BACKGROUND:
The City's Graffiti Ordinance was last amended by City Council on May 15, 2007. The
amendment included updated and additional definitions of graffiti implements; stricter
requirements for retailers to maintain those implements in a secure manner; and additional
penalties for those individuals convicted of anti -graffiti law violations.
The City is continuing to find ways to proactively address graffiti, institute safeguards to further
prevent opportunities for graffiti vandals and taggers, and discourage them through penalties
and restitution. As mentioned in the staff report in 2007, the graffiti vandals continue to find
different ways to mark and deface both public and private property.
Last year, AB 576 (Torres) was signed into law and became effective January 1, 2010. AB 576
adds government entities to the definitions of victim when the court imposes an order upon the
defendant or the juvenile offender to make restitution to the victim or victims.
In 2009, the City learned that several cities in Southern California had revised their graffiti
ordinances to further strengthen the language concerning definitions, sale and possession,
public access and penalties. Several cities, including West Covina and Santa Ana, added
sections to their ordinances on parental civil liability for minors who violate their graffiti
ordinance, restitution to the victim, and community service requirements. These sections
address accountability and discourage recidivism. As graffiti vandals/taggers have found more
ways to deface property, local agencies are now turning to the stronger use of parental civil
liability and restitution to combat problems, to pay for damages to victims and to educate the
vandals and their parents or guardians.
A Graffiti Ordinance Committee consisting of staff from the Police, Public Services,
Development Services, City Attorney's and City Manager's Offices met several times to review
1
the best provisions in the West Covina, Santa Ana, and other surrounding agencies' ordinances.
Additionally, city staff met with members of the Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce, business
owners/managers and members of the public to address any questions or concerns. As a
result, the attached proposed ordinance has been prepared for Costa Mesa (Attachment 1).
On September 14, 2010, at City Council Study Session, city staff provided a presentation on
graffiti instrumentation and policy discussion items to Councilmembers. These items have been
incorporated into this ordinance.
ANALYSIS:
Graffiti negatively impacts the quality of life in a community. As noted in the Background
section, the proposed ordinance amendment further addresses current trends by graffiti vandals
and incorporates the new strategies some cities are now taking. These include:
• a comprehensive list of definitions and of graffiti implements;
• revised restrictions on accessibility of graffiti implements and signage requirements;
• revised sections pertaining to:
o parental civil liability;
o restitution to the victim(s), including the authority for the City to place a lien on
property if necessary;
o expanded authority for the chief of police to reward a person who provides
credible information regarding graffiti violations;
o a 48-hour removal time frame for utility companies to remove graffiti on utility
fixtures and equipment upon being reported to the utility;
o cost recovery procedures; and
o community service requirements and penalties.
While graffiti can be attributed to both criminal gang activity and tagger activity, the Costa Mesa
Police Department has indicated that the graffiti most often seen in the City is the work of
taggers. The majority of these are minors. By involving the parent, guardian or legal guardian,
the educational and financial responsibility components have been found to be a deterrent to
minors becoming repeat offenders. The proposed changes will also assist the Police
Department in its efforts to educate parents and the community, while increasing its ability to
arrest graffiti vandals.
The City of Santa Ana has reported that they have been enforcing the civil liability provisions of
their new graffiti ordinance since mid-October. Both public works (graffiti removal) and police
have stated that they have noticed a decrease in tagger related graffiti vandalism. They are
working with their school police officers as well as primarily enforcing California Penal Code
Section 594 and 594.2 (vandalism; graffiti; persons possessing graffiti implements;
punishment; community service as a condition of probation; and descriptions of graffiti
implements). Since October, the Santa Ana Police Department has made countless arrests;
several which are related to the new code that will involve the parents. These cases are in
process now.
The City of West Covina's graffiti ordinance was amended in 1994 and again in February
2009. It is somewhat less restrictive than Santa Ana's ordinance. West Covina PD advised
that they have experienced a 70% reduction in graffiti after their ordinance was implemented
E
and with the use of "graffiti tracker" software. Costa Mesa uses a similar software program
(TAGRS) to track graffiti related incidents.
The Costa Mesa Police Department has been using TAGRS since approximately November of
2009. Since November, more than 14 significant arrests of graffiti vandals have been made with
approximately $15,000.00 in restitution being collected. Realizing Costa Mesa's graffiti
vandalism problem is understandably different than West Covina and Santa Ana, a
comprehensive ordinance was drafted using the current ordinance as a solid foundation. Ample
time was taken when drafting this ordinance to ensure a balance between the spirit of the law,
quality of life, and community expectations. Adoption of the revised Graffiti Ordinance will
further strengthen the Cities ability to investigate graffiti vandalism crimes, ultimately holding
those responsible accountable for their actions.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
Do not adopt the proposed revision.
FISCAL REVIEW:
None required.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney's Office has been involved in the preparation of the proposed amendments to
the Graffiti Ordinance and has reviewed and approved the attached ordinance "as to form."
CONCLUSION:
The proposed amendment to the Costa Mesa Municipal Code is intended to further deter graffiti
in Costa Mesa. City Council is requested to approve the ordinance as written.
THOMAS R. HATCH
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
CHRIS SHAWKEY
POLICE CHIEF
KIMBERLY HALL BARLOW JASON CHAMNESS,
CITY ATTORNEY (legal review only) POLICE OFFICER
DISTRIBUTION: Acting Development Services Director Kim Sergeant Keith Davis
Brandt City Engineer Ernesto Munoz
Director of Public Services Peter Naghavi Chief of Code Enforcement Willa
Maintenance Svcs Manager Bruce Hartley Bouwens-Killeen
ATTACHMENTS: 1 Proposed Ordinance No. 10-
2 Redlined Ordinance
Graffiti Ord Rpt 9-28-10
9 am
3