Agenda Index City of Vancouver

POLICY REPORT
OTHER

TO:

Standing Committee on City Services and Budgets

FROM:

General Manager of Engineering Services in consultation with the General Manager of Community Services, the General Manager of Corporate Services, the General Manager of the Park Board and the Chief Constable

SUBJECT:

Anti-Graffiti Strategy for Vancouver

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

A. THAT Council approve the following elements of a one-year Targeted Abatement Anti-Graffiti Strategy commencing May, 2002, totalling $1,203,100 as set out in this report, including temporary staffing increases in the Engineering Services Department and the Community Services Department, with increases to the 2002 and 2003 Operating Budgets, as follows:

1. Leadership

B. THAT Council direct that all revenue from fines levied in accordance with the Graffiti By-law be used to offset the cost of the Free Paint Program as described in Recommendation A.

C. THAT Council advise the Director of Planning that the Anti-Graffiti Mural Program is an important initiative in managing graffiti and that favourable consideration should be given to the approval of development applications for mural installation; and,
FURTHER THAT the Director of Development Services give priority to the processing of development applications for murals proposed under the Anti-Graffiti Mural Program.

D. THAT Council request the Director of Legal Services to bring forward amendments to the Graffiti By-law:

E. THAT Council request the General Manager of Engineering Services to consult with Special Advisory Committee on Cultural Communities to develop guidelines which will ensure that a clear and consistent process is followed by the City's contractors when dealing with hate and offensive graffiti.

F. THAT Council request the Director of Legal Services to investigate processes by which the City could assist property owners in organizing area-wide graffiti-removal contracts for commercial districts.

G. THAT Council direct staff to report back at the end of this trial on the effectiveness of the Anti-Graffiti initiatives referred to in Recommendations A through F and provide recommendations on an on-going anti-graffiti program .

COMMENTS

POLICY

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the results of a recently completed public consultation process on the removal of graffiti from private property. Further, to recommend a multi-faceted Anti-Graffiti Strategy for Vancouver involving leadership, prevention, eradication, enforcement and community empowerment, the goal of which is the substantial eradication of graffiti in the City of Vancouver.

SUMMARY

A recently-completed public consultation process found that graffiti is considered acceptable by the public only under limited, predetermined conditions such as murals and freewalls. Where those conditions are not met, the public believes that graffiti must be removed as quickly as possible, that anyone convicted of a graffiti offence should be subject to stronger penalties than currently exist, and that the private sector must partner with the public sector to achieve rapid clean-up solutions.

The City has demonstrated leadership in addressing the graffiti problem by increasing its efforts to remove graffiti from City property. Two contracts which were awarded in 2001 have been very successful in reducing the amount of graffiti on City property. However, graffiti on private property is a problem for which existing City By-laws and policies restrict staff ability to effectively enforce. This problem will continue to worsen until a vicious cycle of graffiti attracting more graffiti is broken.

Staff propose that Council adopt a goal of substantial eradication of graffiti in Vancouver. The elements of the strategy to achieve this goal are:

i. Leadership
· increased commitment to quick removal of graffiti from City property.
· support for an active and effective Anti-Graffiti Task Force which combines and coordinates the resources of City departments and outside organizations.
· ongoing measurement of the extent of the graffiti problem.

ii. Prevention
· implementation of targeted educational and publicity programs.
· implementation of an expanded mural program.

iii Eradication
· implementation of a process which assists property owners by educating them about graffiti removal options, augmented by a Free Paint Program.

iv. Enforcement
· enforcement of the City's Graffiti By-law when property owners fail to take advantage of available graffiti removal options, targeted at commercial and industrial properties.

v. Community Empowerment
· making graffiti-removal work on certain City buildings available to partnerships of local community non-profit organizations and professional graffiti-removal companies.
· increased support for community paint-outs.
· development of a process which will help local commercial areas organize graffiti-removal contracts for their neighbourhoods.

The total cost of the programs recommended in this report will be $939,500 in 2002, of which $611,700 represents new Operating Budget funding (excluding policing costs and garbage container program that is to be reported separately). The annual cost of the anti-graffiti program is estimated at $1,203,100 of which $875,300 would be new funding requirements.

BACKGROUND

1. Introduction

On May 17, 2001, the General Manager of Engineering Services and the General Manager of Community Services submitted a report to Council proposing anti-graffiti initiatives relating to both public property and private property.

On June 6, 2001, Council passed six resolutions in regard to the May 17th report. Three of these resolutions related directly to graffiti on private property. Staff were directed to:

· report back with recommendations on an expanded multi-faceted anti-graffiti program.
· conduct evening meetings to consult with various interest groups in regard to the proposed program.
· communicate in writing to owners or tenants of properties which had graffiti, on the importance of addressing the removal of graffiti aggressively; and further to alert them that the City will be moving forward with anti-graffiti programs including Education, Enforcement and Eradication and to request their input on solutions.

On August 2, 2001, staff submitted a report to Council on the completion of work which Council had directed on June 6th. At that time, Council approved $15,000 to fund a public consultation process to seek input on private property owners' responsibility for removal of graffiti, including ways in which the City could provide support. In addition, Councilapproved $20,000 for an interim program to provide free paint to private property owners whose properties have been tagged with graffiti.

2. Public Consultation Process

From September, 2001 through February, 2002, a consultant (Context Research Inc.) worked with staff to plan and implement a public consultation process. Details of this process, together with key themes learned during the process, are attached as Appendix A. The process determined that graffiti is considered acceptable by the public only under limited, predetermined conditions such as murals and freewalls. Where those conditions are not met, the graffiti must be removed as quickly as possible and anyone convicted of a graffiti offence should be subject to stronger penalties than currently exist. Further, the private sector must partner with the public sector to achieve rapid clean-up solutions.

DISCUSSION

1. Introduction

The following sections provide Council with information, options, and a recommended strategy to deal proactively with the graffiti problem. The discussion is organized as follows:

2. Impact of Graffiti

Graffiti is a behaviour which has victims. Owners of properties which have been sprayed with graffiti have to pay to remove the graffiti. Over time, the repeated application and removal of graffiti will damage walls. Property values are reduced and the ability of owners to attract tenants is also reduced by graffiti.

Graffiti also affects neighbourhoods; it creates visual blight and negatively impacts the value of community space and community property. Further, graffiti has a direct negative effect on large parts of the economy, such as tourism, retailing and small business.

The most recent estimate available is that approximately $6 billion is spent every year across North America on efforts to abate graffiti.

3. Current City Anti-Graffiti Initiatives

a) Eradication from City Property

Practices for eradication of graffiti from City property were the subject of previous Council reports as recent as August, 2001. A summary of current practices has been compiled and is attached as Appendix B.

b) Eradication from Private Property

The great majority of removal of graffiti from private property takes place as a result of the initiative of individual property owners. This initiative can be as simple as keeping a can of paint at hand to paint over graffiti tags. Alternatively, if property owners choose, they can now hire one of several graffiti removal companies operating in Vancouver which provide high quality graffiti removal services. In some areas, Business Improvement Associations have entered into contracts with graffiti removal companies to remove graffiti in their areas. These contracts usually involve a "zero tolerance" approach, based upon weekly inspection and graffiti removal by the contractor. This has proven to be a cost-effective solution in
some areas (typical cost: $100/year per property) and has been successful in virtually eliminating the visual blight of graffiti in some areas.

As an additional option, community paint-out programs assist in some neighbourhoods. There are approximately 20 different volunteer-based community paint-out programs, targeted at removing graffiti from private property. These programs are commonly led by alocal Community Police Centre but are also at times organized by people associated with schools and community centres. The City currently supplies free paint and graffiti removal supplies along with training and logistical support to these community paint-outs. The City contribution to this program is augmented by corporate sponsorships.

The City also provides assistance to organizers of mural projects by offering up to $500 per mural for paint and painting supplies. In 2001, four murals were completed with the City's participation.

In August, 2001, Council approved $20,000 for a pilot program involving the supply of paint to individual property owners whose properties had been tagged with graffiti. This program was implemented in partnership with BIA's, local business associations and Community Police Centres, who were relied upon to both publicize the program and identify eligible properties. Paint was delivered using the City's Graffiti Busters vehicle, creating the opportunity to both educate the property owner about the need to continue removing graffiti and to verify the actual need for the requested paint. In general, the program was well received, and as of February, 2002, the funding has been fully spent. Approximately 200 properties benefited from free paint supplied by this pilot program.

Flowing from the Safer City Task Force recommendations in 1993, the Planning Department has maintained a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) program where all major conditional development applications and rezonings are reviewed to ensure that opportunities for crime and nuisance behaviour such as graffiti are reduced through design measures that also enhance the built environment. Based on this experience, staff plan to produce a general guideline or bulletin in written form and for inclusion on the City website. This would allow the public, in particular architects, planners and landscape architects, to reference the information on their own and to be used by staff in reviewing development applications.

c) Enforcement

The City's Licences and Inspections Department is responsible for dealing with property owners in regards to graffiti on private property as part of its Property Use Inspection function. As reported in May, 2001, enforcement of the Graffiti By-law has been carried out only in response to complaints. Enforcement has been held in abeyance pending the outcome of the public consultation process and direction from Council in terms of By-law amendments and policy on enforcement.

d) Education

The City operates a Graffiti Hotline through which the public can obtain information about how to deal with graffiti. The Anti-Graffiti office has developed a multi-lingual educational pamphlet which is distributed in coordination with community paint-outs, and also maintains a website.

e) Response to Hate and Offensive Graffiti

By Council policy, hate and offensive graffiti is removed from City property within 24 hours of a report. This performance standard is required in the City's graffiti removal contracts. Removal of hate and offensive graffiti from private property is usually undertaken by property owners. However, if the City is made aware of such graffiti on private property, staff will offer to assist with this and remove the graffiti immediately.

4. Effectiveness of Programs

a) Graffiti on City Property

Overall, the initiative to eradicate graffiti from City property approved through two contracts on an interim basis last year has been highly successful. There has been a drastic reduction in the amount of graffiti on City property, particularly in the areas which were designated to be patrolled weekly. The City's contractors, Point Grey Painters and Goodbye Graffiti, have both been providing good service. Some quality assurance inspections have been done, and these have consistently confirmed a removal rate of greater than 99%. In only a handful of cases have we found graffiti which has been left for more than a week. However, there have been some valuable lessons learned during the first contracts which need to be resolved for future tenders:

Park Board staff advise that approximately 500 incidents of graffiti vandalism are dealt with annually on the Board's 192 parks and 300 buildings. These incidents range from minor incidents that take about an hour to remove to major incidents that can take several work-weeks to remove and refinish. The most common graffiti instruments are spray paint and felt pens although etching, burning or carving is not uncommon. Exterior walls of buildings, interiors of fieldhouse washrooms and change rooms, park furniture, playground equipment, retaining walls, the seawall, signs, pedestrian underpasses and bridges are typical targets.

The most heavily hit parks and facilities are in the downtown area and beaches. A second heavily targeted area is the Queen Elizabeth Park, Hillcrest Park and Riley Park area. In 2000 and 2001, Kitsilano Pool Fieldhouse had the dubious distinction of being the facility most frequently vandalized by graffiti.

With the exception of offensive graffiti which is given top priority, graffiti on Park Board facilities is typically responded to within one to two weeks of receiving a complaint. Response times are influenced by poor weather, by technically difficult removals and by limited staff during heavy periods of tagging and re-tagging. As a result, there are a number of cases in which graffiti removals have taken considerably longer than desired by staff or expected by the public. Unfortunately, delays in removal tend to encourage graffiti vandals to expand the graffiti. This in turn increases the cost of removal. A regular inspection and reporting system is viewed as a key element in improving the response to graffiti vandalism in City parks.

There have been mixed results in getting owners of encroachments on City streets to adhere to the graffiti removal standards approved by Council. The most obvious failure has been in relation to graffiti on commercial garbage containers (dumpsters), however, this has recently been resolved by making graffiti removal a condition of the Container License Agreement. City staff will be presenting a report to Council on this issue with different alternatives on how to deal with graffiti on private garbage containers on City land. The recommended solution involves applying the same graffiti removal standard to wastemanagement companies as is applied to private property owners (10 days for compliance), combined with a program of inspection and enforcement.

Some utility companies have indicated a concern about adopting a graffiti removal standard in Vancouver to which they may be held Province-wide. However, they have also indicated a willingness to participate in Vancouver's graffiti removal contract as long as costs can be allocated equitably. Detailed discussions around this concept have been deferred pending Council's direction on anti-graffiti policy matters.

Graffiti on items such as newsboxes and advertising benches continues to be a problem in some areas. The owners of these facilities are generally compliant with Council's requirement that they remove graffiti within three working days of a complaint. However, very few complaints are being generated outside the downtown area, with the result that in many areas there are severe graffiti accumulations on these facilities.

To address these problems, this report is recommending that a part-time inspection function be established to seek out graffiti on encroachments and ensure that the graffiti is removed in accordance with Council's standard. The cost of this inspection can be recovered in the future through increased permit fees charged back to the encroachment owners.

b) Graffiti on Private Property

The problem of graffiti on private property is best measured by counting the number of buildings which have graffiti on them. By this metric, the City's existing Anti-Graffiti Program is clearly not successful in addressing the problem of graffiti on private property. As reported previously, a survey conducted in July, 2001 found approximately 3,000 properties in Vancouver which have been tagged with graffiti. The cost to clean these buildings on just a one-time basis was estimated at $1.5 million.

During the public consultation process, participants provided consistent feedback that the graffiti problem is both a real problem and is gradually getting worse. Unless the City adopts a new approach to dealing with graffiti on private property, this trend is virtually certain to continue. The longer graffiti is left undealt with, the more new graffiti is encouraged. Graffiti will proliferate in this vicious cycle until action is taken to break the cycle.

c) Hate and Offensive Graffiti

The Special Advisory Committee on Cultural Communities has raised two concerns about current practices for dealing with hate and offensive graffiti (see accompanying report). First, that the City's contractors need to be given training related to identifying such graffiti, and need to be provided with better guidelines which will ensure that a clear and consistent process is followed in dealing with hate and offensive graffiti. Second, that a legal framework needs to be developed to enable prompt removal of graffiti from private property, even in the absence of the owner's permission. The Committee has offered to provide input on both of these issues, and recommendations are made in this report which would direct staff to work with the Committee to find solutions.

5. Strategic Objective

The City has recently adopted a leadership role by increasing funding to eliminate graffiti from its own property and by requiring those who use City property to adhere to the same high standards. The City's current approach to graffiti on private property, in contrast, reflects a philosophy of treating graffiti as a nuisance which is tolerable. Staff believe that in order to break the cycle of ever-increasing incidents of graffiti, the City needs to adopt a new objective for its anti-graffiti strategy and apply this equally to public and private property: to substantially eradicate graffiti in Vancouver.

6. Strategic Policy Options

Five alternative policy options (status quo, City pays for eradication everywhere, zero-tolerance enforcement of Graffiti By-law, 100% tolerance, and targeted abatement) have been developed. These reflect the full diversity of attitudes to graffiti which were expressed by participants in the public consultation process. The following section describes each options and lists the pros and cons of each.

i) Minor Changes to Status Quo

ii) City Pays For Eradication Everywhere

iii) Zero-Tolerance Enforcement of the Graffiti By-law

iv) 100% Tolerance

v) Targeted Abatement

The next section elaborates on elements of the Targeted Abatement strategy, which forms the basis of the recommendations of this report. If Council wishes to adopt one of the other four options outlined above, a report back would be necessary.

7. Recommended Strategy - Targeted Abatement

The strategy consists of five elements: Leadership, Prevention, Eradication, Enforcement and Community Empowerment.

a) Leadership

The most important way by which the City can demonstrate leadership on the graffiti issue is to lead by example and carry out prompt and thorough removal of graffiti from its own property. The contracts which Council awarded in 2001 have been very effective in reducing the overall level of graffiti on City property. However, to be consistent with the level of graffiti removal proposed for private property owners, further changes will be necessary:

In 2001, funding for the increased service levels provided by these contracts was provided out of Contingency Reserve; if Council wishes to continue or expand the scope of these contracts, it will be necessary to provide additional funding in the 2002 Operating Budget. The total cost of these contracts can be offset by applying the funding which was previously approved for the City's graffiti-removal crew.

Park Board staff propose a complementary graffiti eradication initiative which demonstrates Park Board leadership in addressing the graffiti problem. The Park Board proposes to contract with a firm that specializes in graffiti removal for the most heavily targeted areas under the responsibility of the Park Board in the City, i.e. downtown parks, including Stanley Park, the South False Creek and the English Bay beaches as far as Spanish Banks West and Queen Elizabeth Park, Riley and Hillcrest. The pilot will be for a one year period with a report evaluating the contract prior to renewal, expansion or discontinuation. The budget estimate of $100,000 to implement this expanded service includes the cost of a service which would provide weekly inspection and removal of any graffiti on the exterior of buildings, structures or property in the designated area. The designated area has over 30 buildings and over 30 parks, which in area represent almost half of the city's park land inventory. Within these parks there are hundreds of benches, picnic tables, retaining walls, rocks and a variety of other park features, which attract graffiti.

The balance of the parks and buildings within them would continue to be serviced by Park Board staff. Improvements in reporting graffiti incidents will be sought from staff who regularly visit or work at the remaining park sites and facilities, and removals will be monitored to meet Council's expectations.

A second way in which leadership can be shown is through the promotion and support of an active and effective Anti-Graffiti Task Force. This Task Force consists of representatives from several City departments together with outside organizations such as Translink and the Vancouver School Board. Its role is to exchange information, implement cooperative and coordinated anti-graffiti responses, and to provide feedback and advice to the City's Anti-Graffiti Coordinator. The Task Force has recently been reconvened after several years without meeting. New member organizations have been identified and will be invited to future meetings. The future effectiveness of the Task Force can be enhanced by tasking the Anti-Graffiti Coordinator with an increased emphasis on leadership and interorganizational coordination. Currently, the Coordinator is involved in carrying out all elements of the City's anti-graffiti program. If Council approves the recommendations of this report, many of the time-consuming programs such as murals, community paint-outs etc. can be delegated to junior staff, enabling the Coordinator to focus more on carrying out the activities related to promoting consistent and coordinated action among the many City departments and organizations which have their own anti-graffiti responses.

A third way in which the City can provide leadership is to develop and publicize objective measurements of the extent of the graffiti problem and to report these measurements on a regular basis.

b) Prevention

There are two graffiti prevention initiatives recommended in this report: first, an educational/publicity program and second, a program to aggressively promote the creation of murals.

i) Educational/Publicity Program

The public consultation process revealed public support for a variety of educational activities, such as:

A public education campaign will be developed in partnership with Corporate Communications. The campaign will take a multifaceted approach to support the goals of the Anti-Graffiti Program. For example, some communications will be directed at private building owners in an effort to inform them of their responsibilities for removing graffiti, as well as providing them with information that will assist their efforts. Guidelines would be produced to assist owners of heritage buildings with information on graffiti protection and removal techniques that will minimize damage to historic building materials. All of the educational activities which are anticipated will require the active involvement of several departments and organizations, such as the School Board, Police Department and Community Services.

Communications would also be directed at young artists to give them information on ways they can creatively express themselves through public art (i.e., mural) opportunities. Media events would help showcase public murals and reinforce the message that graffiti is not acceptable and there are alternatives.

While the detailed plan still needs to be developed, the first year of the campaign will require more funding than subsequent years since many of the communications tools will need to be developed from scratch - visual identity, web site, brochures, etc.

ii) Mural Program

A second proposed element of the graffiti prevention initiative is an expanded program to promote and organize murals on both public and private property. For graffiti writers, this program could be offered as a legitimate alternative form of artistic expression. Such a program would also be of interest to property owners whose properties are frequent targets of graffiti; murals are highly effective at deterring further tagging. The process of planning, organizing and producing a mural can also be an excellent community-building exercise.

For these reasons, staff believe that the City should create a program which actively organizes, promotes and contributes financially to the creation of murals. This program would:

This work would be supported by Civic Youth Strategies staff, together with the Park Board, in identifying an appropriate youth to undertake research and outreach work on graffiti issues, particularly urban art projects which would support the community mural program. This youth involvement would provide a much-needed dimension to abatement and educational efforts.

Murals are regulated by the Zoning and Development By-law and, with few exceptions, require a development permit. Section 10.25 of the By-law allows the Director of Planning to permit a mural in any zoning district, provided he/she first considers any policies of Council and the submission of any advisory group, owner or tenant. During the Context Research Inc. public consultation process, some participants expressed concern over the perceived length and cost of the development permit process.

The Planning and Development Services Departments recognize the importance of the Mural Program as a management tool for graffiti. However, administration of the Zoning and Development By-law requires development application review of a proposal for compatibility and fit, in consultation with the community via notification of development applications, for comment. If Council wishes to encourage murals as a constructive alternative to graffiti, it would be helpful if Council adopted a policy encouraging the Director of Planning to give favourable consideration to development applications for mural installations under the Mural Program. This could be communicated in any community notification and may assist in generating supportive public comment, noting that any development application approval would still be subject to possible Board of Variance appeal.

Council could also instruct that priority be given to processing of development applications for these murals, to further assist in making the Mural Program effective. Development Permit application fees could be covered through the Mural Program.

The Director of Development Services notes that giving priority to these applications would require re-allocating staff from the processing of other development applications, the time lines for which are already of noted Council concern. This priority processing would further add to the list of priority projects Council has previously identified (heritage projects, non-market and rental housing projects, and special needs residential facilities), all of which continue to seek greater staff attention and much shorter time lines.

c) Eradication from Private Property

The proposed strategy for eradicating graffiti from private property is based upon a principle that the City's approach should emphasize assisting private property owners with removing graffiti, rather than penalize them for being victims of graffiti. The approach would be first to educate property owners about their options:

This educational process would be carried out by Property Use Inspectors in the Licensing and Inspections Department, using leaflets developed by the Anti-Graffiti program office. If property owners choose to remove the graffiti themselves, the City could offer to provide a one-time supply of free paint through an ongoing Free Paint Program.

Only if the property owner failed to deal with the graffiti on their property by taking advantage of one of their options would a by-law enforcement process be initiated.

To support this strategy, some revisions are required in the Graffiti By-law. At the present time, the By-law authorizes the City to enter private property and remove graffiti at the cost of the owner in limited circumstances and only after giving 60 days' notice. It is recommended that the By-law be amended to require all property owners to remove graffiti from their property. The By-law should provide that, if an owner fails to remove the graffiti, the City may enter and remove it at the cost of the owner. It is recommended that owners be given ten days' notice to remove graffiti before the City removes it. The By-law should also provide that, if the cost to the City to remove graffiti from private property is not paid within 30 days after a demand is made, then the cost be added to the property tax roll. These timeframes (i.e. 10 days' notice to remedy the problem and 30 days to pay the City if the City remedies the problem) are consistent with the time frames currently in the Untidy Premises By-law.

d) Enforcement

To achieve the goal of substantially eradicating graffiti from private property, it will be necessary to implement the foregoing eradication plan on an aggressive and persistent basis. This means that the City's Property Use Inspectors will be required to change their enforcement practices so as to deal with graffiti as a top priority. Consistent, determined follow-up with non-compliant situations will need to become a part of standard operating procedures.

It is possible, however, that graffiti can be substantially eradicated without the need to apply this enforcement practice to every property in the City. Currently, most graffiti occurs on commercial and industrial properties. As experience is gained through implementation, it will be possible to gain a better understanding of the wisdom of targeted enforcement. In the meantime, however, staff believe that the best results will likely be achieved through an enforcement campaign targeted at commercial and industrial properties. Enforcement against residential properties can still be carried out in response to complaints or obvious problems.

A further element of the City's enforcement plan involves the creation of an Anti-Graffiti team in the Police Department. The objective of this team would be to implement a wide range of Police Department anti-graffiti initiatives such as:

The details of the Police plan, together with a separate funding request, are contained in an accompanying report from the Chief Constable. To support this plan, and to respond tofeedback obtained during the public consultation process, staff are recommending that the Graffiti By-law be amended to provide for a minimum $500 fine for anyone caught committing graffiti vandalism. Further, that all revenue generated from these fines be used to offset the cost of implementing the proposed Free Paint Program.

e) Community Empowerment

The public consultation process revealed that it is the public's expectation that the City's policies work at the community level to solve the graffiti problem. This fact is already recognized in the City's support for several community paint-outs. However, there are more ways in which the City could be of assistance in helping neighbourhoods deal with graffiti at the community level:


ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no substantial environmental implications associated with this matter.

SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Implementation of the proposed strategy should produce a positive social impact:

· There will be a measurable reduction in the visual blight created by graffiti.
· Graffiti is often perceived as an intimidating territorial mark of ownership, and the substantial elimination of graffiti in Vancouver will return public space to the citizens.
· Graffiti vandals who are charged and convicted with writing graffiti will be diverted into a programs which allow constructive forms of expression.
· Restitution made by graffiti vandals can compensate the victims of their crimes.

There are no particular social impacts on families and children different from those on the general population.

PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS

Currently, Engineering Department staff assigned to the Anti-Graffiti office consists of one Anti-Graffiti Coordinator. If Council approves the recommendations of this report, three new temporary Engineering Assistant positions will be created within the Anti-Graffiti Office. This level of staffing is expected to be necessary for the first year due to the extra work involved in starting up the various new programs, however within one year it is anticipated that the extra work will be able to be handled with less staff. In the first year, the organization of the Anti-Graffiti office would be as follows:

Anti-Graffiti Coordinator

· Program leadership.
· Ensuring a coordinated and consistent response to graffiti.
· Building effective working relationships with other organizations, both inside and outside the City.
· Overall coordination of anti-graffiti programs.
· Reporting to Council on program effectiveness.
· Supervision of staff.
· Budgetary control.
· Identifying new opportunities and strategies.

Street Use Inspector

· Implementation of the Free Paint Program.
· Communications - responding to emails, answering the Graffiti Hot Line, replying to letters.
· Arranging neighbourhood "zero tolerance" graffiti removal projects.

Street Use Inspector

· Implementation of the Mural Program.
· Implementation of the Education/Publicity Program.
· Implementation of the Community Paint-Out Program.

Engineering Assistant/Technician

· Inspection and contract administration - graffiti removal contracts.
· Collection of data and statistical analysis about program effectiveness.
· Compliance inspection - encroachments on City property.

To carry out the proposed enforcement activities of the Graffiti By-Law on private property, three temporary positions would be needed in the Licenses and Inspections Department. One temporary Property Use Inspector who would be assigned full time to inspect and carry out the enforcement of the Graffiti By-Law. Two clerical staff would be required initially, to cope with the significant increase in the amount of document processing. With the proposed changes to the Graffiti By-Law on private property this level of staffing is necessary due to the additional level of work involved. It is anticipated that staffing levels may be reduced
after the first year of implementation.

Property Use Inspector

· Enforcement of the Graffiti By-law in areas of the City that are heavily targeted
· Assist in enforcement of the Graffiti By-law throughout the City
· Distribute educational materials to private property owners, tenants and businesses regarding the Graffiti By-Law
· Coordination of graffiti removal by contractors from private property
· Working relationship with the Anti-Graffiti Coordinator and Task Force

Administrative Support (2-Clerk II Positions)

· Process increased volume of correspondence/orders to remove graffiti from private property
· Assist the Property Use Inspector in the coordination and administration of the graffiti removal contracts
· Compile and assist in preparing educational materials
· Liaise with the Anti-Graffiti Coordinator

All new positions subject to a classification review by the Human Resources Department.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The following table outlines the cost in 2002 of implementing the proposed Targeted Abatement strategy. The proposed anti-graffiti program is for one year, the first eight months of which are in 2002 and the last four of which carry into 2003. Therefore, separate costing is provided for the 2002 and 2003 budget years.

 

Current Funding

Proposed Increase 2002

Proposed Increase
2003

Total

A. LEADERSHIP

        

GRAFFITI REMOVAL FROM CITY FACILITIES

        

    A1 - Engineering Dept. facilities (bridges, walls, poles, etc.)

$107,300

$178,600

$68,000

$353,900

    A2 - Civic Buildings facilities

$0

$34,500

$11,500

$46,000

    A3 - Park Board facilities (buildings, park amenities, seawall, bridges, etc.)

$125,000

$75,000

$25,000

$225,000

SUBTOTAL GRAFFITI REMOVAL

$232,300

$288,100

$104,500

$624,900

STAFF

        

    A4 - Leadership & Financial Control (1 FTE)

      Overall program administration, leadership
      Coordination with other departments /agencies
      Budgeting and financial control

$64,500

$0

$0

$64,500

    A5 - Compliance Inspection & Analysis (1 FTE)

      Contract Inspection/Management
      Compliance inspections - encroachments
      Specification writing
      Data Collection & Analysis

$0

$38,100

$19,100

$57,200

SUBTOTAL STAFF

$64,500

$38,100

$19,100

$121,700

STARTUP COSTS

        

    A6 - Office Setup (Computers, phones, furniture, etc.)

$0

$18,000

$0

$18,000

SUBTOTAL STARTUP COSTS

$0

$18,000

$0

$18,000

SUBTOTAL LEADERSHIP

$296,800

$344,200

$123,600

$764,600

B. PREVENTION

        

    B1 - Educational/Publicity Program

      Administrative Staff (0.33 FTE)
      Educational Materials
      Publicity
      SUBTOTAL

$0
$0
$0

$11,600
$9,300
$26,700
$47,600

$5,800
$4,700
$13,300
$23,800

$17,400
$14,000
$40,000
$71,400

    B2 - Mural Program

      Administrative Staff (0.33 FTE)
      Materials and Logistical Support
      SUBTOTAL

$0
$0

$11,600
$13,300
$24,900

$5,800
$6,700
$12,500

$17,400
$20,000
$37,400

SUBTOTAL PREVENTION

$0

$72,500

$36,300

$108,800

C. ERADICATION

        

    C1 - Free Paint Program

      Administrative Staff (1.0 FTE)
      Free Paint Supply

$0
$0

$34,800
$66,700

$17,400
$33,300

$52,200
$100,000

SUBTOTAL ERADICATION

$0

$101,500

$50,700

$152,200

D. ENFORCEMENT

        

    D1 - Licensing & Inspections Enforcement

      Staff (1 Property Use Inspector, 2 Clerk IIs)

$0

$81,900

$47,200

$129,100

SUBTOTAL ENFORCEMENT

$0

$81,900

$47,200

$129,100

E. COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

        

    E1 - Community Paint-out Program

      Administrative Staff (0.33 FTE)
      Materials & Logistical Support - City
      Materials & Logistical Support -Sponsors
      SUBTOTAL

$0
$31,000
$17,100
$48,100

$11,600
$0
$0
$11,600

$5,800
$0
$0
$5,800

$17,400
$31,000
$17,100
$65,500

    E2 - Sponsorships/Partnerships - Revenues

      Less: Abatement of Partners' Buildings
      SUBTOTAL

($37,100)
$20,000
($17,100)

$0
$0
$0

$0
$0
$0

($37,100)
$20,000
($17,100)

SUBTOTAL COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT

$31,000

$11,600

$5,800

$48,400

         

GRAND TOTAL

$327,800

$611,700

$263,600

$1,203,100

If Council approves the recommendations of this report, Council's total budget for dealing with graffiti in 2002 will be $939,500, corresponding to a budget increase of $611,700.

If this program were to become a permanent increase to the budget in the future, it would represent a total annual cost of $1,203,100 (an increase of $875,300 in the annual operating budget). Increased fine revenues are expected to offset these costs to some extent, but that at this time it is difficult to predict these revenues. Further, it is expected that over time, fine revenue would decrease due to the success of the program.

There are two additional proposed anti-graffiti initiatives which will involve City funding, but which are not included in the above figures. The accompanying report of the Chief Constable recommends a policing strategy which has a total cost of $193,000 in the first year, $140,000 of which is covered through existing funding and $17,600 of which is ongoing funding. In addition, a separate report from the General Manager of Engineering Services, scheduled for the April 25, 2002 meeting of the City Services and Budgets Committee, recommends that the City allocate $25,000 per year for the enforcement of graffiti removal from containers in lanes, funded by increased container permit fees. Therefore, the full annual cost of the anti-graffiti program is $1,421,100 which corresponds to a $892,900 increase in the annual operating budget.

Given the significant increase in costs, staff will be reporting back to Council on the effectiveness of the program and at that time make recommendations for a permanent anti-graffiti program.

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Implementation will begin immediately after Council approval. Hiring of new staff will take place in April. Implementation of all of the program elements will be in full effect by May, 2002.

It is anticipated that the staff resources requested in 2002 will not be needed to the same degree in 2003 because success is anticipated in substantially eradicating graffiti in Vancouver by end of this year. In addition, many procedural details related to implementation of various programs will have been worked out during 2002 and this will further reduce the workload in future years.

For these reasons, this report recommending funding for 2002 only. A further report back will be needed in early 2003 to assess the success the proposed Anti-Graffiti Strategy and to recommend appropriate adjustments at that time.

CONCLUSION

As participants in the public process told us, graffiti will always be a problem to some degree in Vancouver. The City can satisfy the majority of public expectations about graffiti if it implements the multi-faceted strategy proposed in this report. This strategy has as its objective the substantial eradication of graffiti in Vancouver. New Operating Budget funding has been recommended in this report to achieve this goal by the end of the year. The City cannot stop graffiti vandalism completely, but it can minimize the problems which graffiti causes through a combination of leadership, prevention, eradication, enforcement and community empowerment.

* * * * *

cs020425.htm

- A1-

APPENDIX A
PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS

1. Description

The public consultation process involved:

Significant effort went into publicizing the public consultation process through:

2. Results Of The Public Consultation Process

Context Research Inc. has produced a report which summarizes both the public consultation process and the input which was received (limited distribution, on file in the Office of the General Manager of Engineering Services). The following key themes were heard:

- A2 -

- A3-

APPENDIX B
CURRENT CITY GRAFFITI ERADICATION PRACTICES

In 2001, City Council awarded contracts to two professional graffiti removal companies to remove graffiti from its property. These contracts both represent significantly increased funding devoted to removing graffiti from City property, compared to previous years. One contract involves removal of graffiti from City facilities on City-owned rights of way at a monthly cost of $15,000 plus taxes. A second contract involves removal of graffiti from approximately 110 City-owned buildings, at a monthly cost of $2,795 plus taxes. Both of these contracts were initially awarded for a six month term, and will now both expire in May, 2002.

Also in 2001, Council passed a policy which requires the owners of all encroachments on City property to remove graffiti within three working days of the receipt of a complaint, or alternatively to establish a weekly graffiti removal patrol for their facilities.

Graffiti removal within the Park Board is undertaken, with few exceptions, by Trades Painters from the Paint and Sign Shop. It is estimated that $125,000 is expended annually on graffiti removal and repair. This includes approximately 1.5 FTEs of staff time, a vehicle and materials.

The Park Board has established a one working day target for responding to graffiti that is racist, hate based or obscene.

The Vancouver School Board has a zero tolerance anti-graffiti policy and an annual budget of $250,000 for graffiti removal. This budgets covers all 128 buildings operated by the Vancouver School Board.

Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver