ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

Date: July 23, 2001
Author/Local: R. Birch (7292)

RTS No. 2202

CC File No. 3501

CS&B: August 2, 2001

TO:	Standing Committee on Community Services and Budgets
FROM:	General Manager of Engineering Services In Consultation With The Director of Licenses and Inspection
SUBJECT:	Graffiti Removal on Private Property

RECOMMENDATIONS:

The General Manager of Engineering Services submits the following RECOMMENDATIONS for Council's approval:

A THAT Council authorize the expenditure of $15,000 from Contingency Reserve for a public consultation process, as outlined in this report, to seek input on private property owners' responsibility for removal of graffiti, including ways in which the City could support private property owners in removing graffiti from their property. Further that a subsequent report back on this matter be submitted to Council with policy recommendations.

B. THAT Council authorize the expenditure of $20,000 from Contingency Reserve to supply paint and graffiti removal supplies to BIA's, business associations and other organizations to facilitate graffiti removal from private property. This program will run parallel with the public consultation process described in Recommendation A.

C. THAT Council direct staff to explore the viability of free walls as a means to reduce graffiti by offering legitimate alternatives to graffiti writers.

CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The City Manager RECOMMENDS approval of the foregoing.

COUNCIL POLICY

On January 5, 1993, Council authorized the creation of a regular full-time Anti-Graffiti Coordinator position.

On October 4, 1994, Council approved the Graffiti Bylaw, which holds property owners responsible for removing graffiti from their own properties.

On July 23, 1998, Council approved a policy which requires publishers to remove graffiti from newsboxes within 72 hours.

On June 14, 2001, Council approved a policy which requires that, as a condition of continued placement on the City Street Allowance, owners of furniture or amenities (e.g. newsboxes, bus shelters, utility kiosks, garbage containers, hoarding, etc.) be required to remove graffiti within three working days from the date of notification by the City unless a weekly inspection and cleaning program, acceptable to the City, is implemented. Further that any offensive or racist graffiti be removed within 24 hours of notification.

The City supports graffiti removal from private property through supply of paint and graffiti removal supplies at community paint-out events, and through provision of paint to organizers of community mural projects.

PURPOSE

On June 14, 2001, Council passed six resolutions related to graffiti. The purpose of this report is to advise Council on accomplishments since that date and to present policy options as requested.

BACKGROUND

At the June 14, 2001 meeting of the Standing Committee on Planning and Environment, Council considered a report from the General Manager of Engineering Services dated May 7, 2001. This report advised that graffiti is an increasing problem everywhere in Vancouver, but particularly on private properties where the City's practice of relying on voluntary compliance is no longer very effective. A series of recommendations were presented which proposed increased attention to graffiti on City property, strengthening and increasingenforcement of the Graffiti Bylaw, and provision of support to property owners through supply of paint and materials.

Council passed six resolutions, as follows:

"A. THAT staff be directed to send out a Request for Proposals to appropriate contractors, along with specifications for a six-month contract for graffiti removal from public property, in order to determine costs; and further that this process be completed within one month;

B. THAT as a condition of continued placement on the City Street Allowance, owners of furniture or amenities (e.g. newsboxes, bus shelters, utility kiosks, garbage containers, hoarding, etc.) be required to remove graffiti within three working days from the date of notification by the City unless a weekly inspection and cleaning program, acceptable to the City, is implemented. Further that any offensive or racist graffiti be removed within 24 hours of notification;

C. THAT Engineering Services and Community Services Staff continue graffiti removal outreach by involving community organizations, schools, BIA's, business associations and others in jointly undertaking graffiti removal;

D. THAT the City communicate in writing with all the properties (owners or tenants) which have 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; and,

E. THAT staff be requested to report back on the elements of an expanded anti-graffiti program with emphasis on the following elements:

i. enforcement and prosecution options for graffiti perpetrators;

ii. eradication programs on private property including options for City assistance and support;
iii. education programs which increase public awareness and support for this program;
iv. alternative regulatory approaches to the sale of graffiti materials and supplies;
v. corporate sponsorships and partnerships for delivery of the anti-graffiti program;
vi. additional resource needs to address graffiti on publicly owned buildings, including park facilities;
vii. options for City funding for an expanded mural program; and

F. THAT evening public consultation meetings on anti-graffiti initiatives be initiated upon completion of the report back in paragraph 5 above."

DISCUSSION

The following sections deal with staff's response to Council's resolutions of June 14, 2001.

1. Issuing Request for Proposals for Removal of Graffiti from City Property.

A Request For Proposals was issued on June 27, 2001 which closed on July 16, 2001. This matter is the subject of a separate Council report to be presented today.

2. Requiring Owners of Encroachments to Adhere To Graffiti Removal Standards

The City's standard for graffiti removal, referenced in Resolution B above, was communicated to owners of encroachments on City property. A letter was drafted (sample attached as Appendix A) and sent to the following parties:

- newspaper publishers which have newsboxes on City streets
- owners of garbage containers (dumpsters) located on City property
- B.C. Hydro
- Telus
- Pattison Outdoor (transit shelter contractor)
- Goodwill Advertising (transit bench contractor)
- Canada Post
- GVRD
- Shaw Cable

Enforcement of these standards has begun using staff of the Streets Administration Branch. Staff observe and photograph graffiti on encroachments, notify the owner, and then revisit the site after three working days have expired. If the graffiti remains, staff impound the encroachment (portable items) or else serve notice requiring the owner to remove the encroachment. This approach has been effectively used over the past year to deal with newsboxes, and is now being used to deal with other encroachments. There has been insufficient time for the effects of this enforcement practice to be assessed. It should be noted, however, that there are limited resources available for enforcement, because the two available staff are also responsible for enforcing other street activity programs such as street vending, busking, produce displays, sidewalk cafes and ice cream sales.

3. Continue with Graffiti Removal Outreach Through Community-Oriented Programs

Over the past decade community-based graffiti abatement programs have grown to the extent that of the 22 neighbourhood areas in the city, 14 have year-round volunteer programs and most of the remainder have a program under development. Typically the volunteer efforts run to the end of November and start up again in March with planning being done in late January and February.

Individual programs have grown as well and become more independent. For example, the Granville Downtown South program which has been running successfully for five years has matured so that the original community partnership brokered by the Anti-Graffiti Office has been replaced by a new structure more suited to recent changes along Granville Street north of Granville Bridge. Significantly, a new permanent partner in the program structure is the Elizabeth Fry Society, providing volunteers from among itsclient group, with organization and necessary paperwork being completed by staff at Elizabeth Fry and the Granville Downtown South Community Policing Centre. Previously the Anti-Graffiti Office performed these functions.

The Mt. Pleasant community was one of the first to realize the benefits of swift graffiti removal and one of the first some 10 years ago to mount a neighbourhood project. In the intervening years, there have been many social, demographic and economic changes in this large and diverse community. However, there has never been a year when someone wasn't willing to take on a project. A strong new plan was devised among community partners in 2001 and in August the largest clean-up campaign ever mounted in the area will be launched. This includes among others the Mt. Pleasant BIA and the Mt. Pleasant Community Policing Centre.

The newly launched Chinese Community Policing Centre on East Pender Street, in co-operation with the Chinatown BIA have organized a bi-weekly volunteer paintout. This permanent program is solidly established. Another feature of the program, an anti-graffiti mural was unveiled in July of this year.

The West Side had its first paintout in June involving more than 50 teenagers.

The anti-graffiti mural program is expanding, with information being spread mostly at street level and by graffiti writers. With 15 murals planned and executed within approximately four years, four more are anticipated to be completed by September, 2001. The most ambitious mural project to date this year was the mural entitled "Protect the Land", a multi media work on the south facing exterior wall of the Vancouver Flea Market building. An important part of the anti-graffiti mural projects is the education of young would-be artists in the process of preparing a written proposal including budget, projected timeline and list of potential sponsors. This is followed by a verbal presentation with visual aids to the property owner and sponsors. This is intended to help graffiti writers become comfortable with dealing with bureaucracies in business and in government.

The Federal Government has recently become involved as a partner in solving the graffiti problem through a $120,000 grant from the WesternDiversification Fund to United We Can. This grant is being used by United We Can to carry out graffiti-removal activities throughout the Downtown East side.

Staff will continue to develop and support new community-oriented anti-graffiti futures such as these in the future.

4. Communicating with Property Owners and Tenants

A survey of graffiti on private property was carried out by City Property Use Inspectors. Graffiti observed from the street and from lanes was marked on maps, and address information was entered into a database. These data were matched against the tax database to generate owner address information. Using this method, approximately 3,000 separate properties were identified as having graffiti, and letters in the form of Appendix B were sent out to the owners of each of these properties.

This data has been further analyzed, and a map has been produced showing the location of all of the properties which have graffiti (Appendix C). This map shows a great concentration of graffiti in the north and northeast of the City, particularly in the Downtown and Downtown Eastside areas. Significant accumulations of graffiti were observed along Granville Street (in the downtown area), along Kingsway and in the vicinity of Broadway and Main. Analysis of the data showed that 86% of properties with graffiti were not owner occupied.

The letters encouraged recipients to forward their suggestions on how the City could be of assistance in dealing with the graffiti problem in the future. These responses are now being received, both verbally and in writing. All responses are being recorded and will be presented to Council at a future date.

5. Elements of an Expanded Anti-Graffiti Program

i) Enforcement and Prosecution Options For Offenders

Apprehending, prosecuting and obtaining restitution from offenders is a key element of a successful anti-graffiti strategy. If graffiti perpetrators carry out their activities with impunity, there is littlemotivation for them to stop. Discussions have been held recently with the Police Department about increasing the resources assigned to these enforcement activities, and these responsibilites have now been added to the portfolio of two Neighbourhood Police Officers in two Community Policing Centres. This is an important first step but further activity in this area is required.

ii) Eradication Programs on Private Property

a) Current Practice
Currently, City support for eradication of graffiti from private property is limited to the supply of paint and cleaning supplies to community cleanup programs, and to supply of paint to mural projects. There is currently no other City funding to assist private property owners in removing graffiti from their own property.

The City is prevented by the Vancouver Charter from giving grants directly to property owners as a means of supporting graffiti removal from private property. However, the City may be able to give a grant to an organization which can then carry out such a mandate.

b) Options for Vancouver
Should Council wish to expand its support for private property graffiti removal, staff have been contacting other cities on their graffiti removal programs. While most cities place the responsibility for removal on private property owners, some provide public support to assist these efforts. Some of the options available are listed on the following page.

POLICY OPTION	ALTERNATIVES
A. WHAT TYPE OF SUPPORT TO BE GIVEN TO REMOVAL OF GRAFFITI FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY?	A1. No support - responsibility of the private property owner. A2. Provide paint and cleaning supplies "at cost" A3. Provide free paint and cleaning supplies A4. City pays a percentage of the cost of removal of graffiti from difficult surfaces, such as masonry, stone and brick, and graffiti which is difficult to access. A5. City pays a percentage of the cost of removing all graffiti from private property A6. City pays the full cost of removal of graffiti from difficult surfaces, such as masonry, stone and brick, and graffiti which is difficult to access. A7. City pays the full cost of the cost of removing all graffiti from private property.
B. OVER WHAT GEOGRAPHIC AREA SHOULD THIS SUPPORT BE PROVIDED?	B1. Properties which are frequently targeted by graffiti vandals. B2. Surfaces visible from streets and sidewalks B3. Specific neighbourhoods B4. Entire City
C. TO WHOM SHOULD SUPPORT BE GIVEN?	C1. Individual property owners via some form of City organization. C2. Business Improvement Areas C3. Other organizations
D. WHO PROVIDES THE SUPPORT?	D1. Contractors D2. City Staff D3. Volunteers
E. SOURCE OF FUNDS	E1. Property Taxes E2. Surcharge on Business Licenses E3. Other

To assist Council in considering these options at this time, staff consulted with the private sector through a Request for Information (RFI) on the cost of graffiti removal from private property The response to this RFI was very disappointing. Only two responses were received and neither provided the requested information: one response advised that the cost per incident would be in the range of $300 - $500, and the other advised that the cost would be "cost plus 10%".

At this time, accurate cost estimates for the above policy options remain uncertain. An estimate of the cost for a one-time cleanup can be developed from the survey results together with the unit pricing which has been provided. Three thousand properties at an average cost of $500 per property could be cleaned, on a one-time basis, for a cost of $1,500,000. An ongoing removal program would clearly cost more than this, at least initially. The only estimate of these costs given by a graffiti removal contractor was provided verbally in response to a question from a Councillor at the June 14, 2001 meeting: the cost of full removal as estimated at in the range of $4 million - $5 million per year. Staff will continue to try to develop costing on the various policy options and will report this information back at a later date.

c) Feedback Received to Date
An initial survey has been conducted to gather feedback about the role Business Improvement Areas (BIAs) believe the City should play in dealing with graffiti on private property. Fifteen surveys were sent out, and eight of these were returned completed. Most of the responses were followed up with phone interviews. The two most common responses were:

1. that the City needs to set an example by keeping its own facilities and buildings free of graffiti; and
2. that there should be more strict enforcement against property owners who do not take care of their own property.

In general, the BIAs expressed a strong desire to be part of the solution by organizing programs in their own communities to which the Citycould contribute financially. The majority of BIAs who responded were in favour of City support for graffiti removal being available City-wide rather than just in targeted neighbourhoods. When asked to choose between funding any increased costs out of increased business license fees or property taxes, the BIAs supported the property tax option.

iii) Educational programs

There has been insufficient time since June 14, 2001 to develop new plans for education or outreach programs. The design of these programs will need to be carried out in a way which is consistent with Council's policy decisions on overall strategy.

iv) Alternative Regulatory Approaches to the Sale of Spray Paint

This matter will be the subject of a separate report from the Director of Legal Services.

v) Corporate Sponsorships

Sponsors have the potential to be supporters of the City's community paint-outs and mural programs. It has not been possible in the time since our last report to determine what new sponsorship opportunities could be developed.

vi) Additional resource needs to address graffiti removal on public buildings, including Park Board property.

The removal of graffiti from public property and public buildings is dealt with in a separate Council report being presented today. The Park Board resource needs are being dealt with by the Park Board.

vii) Options for Expanding a City Mural Program

Work continues to identify and organize additional opportunities for murals.

6. Public Consultation Process

Council indicated through a resolution on June 14, 2001 that a public consultation process including evening meetings would be required. Staffbelieve that this process should be conducted through a variety of activities, targeted at stakeholders, including:

- business associations and BIA's
- community organizations
- property owners
- residents of Vancouver
- graffiti perpetrators

The goal of the public consultation process would be to determine preferences amongst the stakeholder groups for one or more of the policy options outlined earlier.

This report recommends that a consultant be hired to design a public process, with events and venues appropriate for each stakeholder group, and that the information from this public process be provided to Council as the basis of additional policy recommendations.

OTHER ISSUES

1. Free Walls

There have been some recent discussions about the viability of "free walls" as an option to provide graffiti writers with locations on which their graffiti would be permitted. If such walls were designated, it would be with the expectation that graffiti writers would significantly reduce their activities on other surfaces.

Experience in other cities with such walls has generally been unfavourable, especially in larger, culturally diverse cities. Typically, graffiti spills over onto adjacent buildings and into adjacent neighbourhoods. However, the possibility that some kind of understanding or accommodation can be worked out with the most active "crews" cannot be dismissed in advance. Staff are open to discussions with graffiti perpetrators as to how such free walls might be organized. We are doubtful that the activities of a significant portion of the graffiti writers could be affected by such an arrangement, but we are open to discussions with the members of this group about how this might work. We will advise Council on any significant developments.

2. Graffiti Task Force

With the current increased focus on anti-graffiti efforts together with a variety of new initiatives beginning or under consideration, it is advisable to reactivate the Graffiti Task Force. This group, comprised of representatives of various organizations from throughout the community, has kept in touch informally in recent years. The Engineering Services Department will convene a meeting of the Graffiti Task Force in early fall of this year, so that the various groups will have an opportunity to exchange information and viewpoints.

3. Interim Program

As a way of demonstrating leadership and willingness to assist private property owners in removing graffiti from their property, Council could approve an interim program which provides free paint and graffiti removal supplies to organizations which would then liaise with and forward this material to individual property owners. It is most likely that BIA's and community groups which are already involved in graffiti removal programs would interested in being participants in such a program.

Costs could be controlled by setting a budget limit, so that this support would operate on a "first come, first served" basis. It is proposed that a budget of $20,000 be established for this interim program and that the program operate in parallel with the public consultation process. Experience gained in operating this program will be of some assistance in developing cost estimates for expansion of a similar service to operate permanently on a City-wide basis.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

It will be necessary to hire a consultant to carry out the public consultation process. The consultant will be required to design each subprocess, carry out the appropriate workshops and community forums for each stakeholder, and report back on the learnings from these subprocesses. It is estimated that the cost of this consultant will be approximately $15,000.

If Council approves the proposed interim support program for removing graffiti from private property, an additional $20,000 of funding will be required.

Funding for both of these amounts is available in Contingency Reserve.

CONCLUSION

There is no doubt that the problem of graffiti on private property in Vancouver continues to worsen. If Council wishes to assist property owners with the costs of carrying out removal of graffiti from private property, cost-sharing programs can be implemented. It is recommended that these programs be developed through a public consultation process which will include business associations, community groups, individual property owners, members of the public at large, and (hopefully) members of the graffiti writing subculture. In the interim, a limited program involving provision of free paint and cleaning supplies to BIA's and other community organizations is recommended.

* * * * *

Link to Appendix A
Link to Appendix B

Appendix C not available electronically, available at City Clerk's Office.

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver