Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.1 GraffitiTaskForce . . e . r CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 8, 1995 SUBJECT: Graffiti Task Force Report 1:9 (Prepared by: Bo Barker, Management Assistant) EXHIBITS ATTACHED: None RECOMMENDATION: The recommended Task Force actions impact different City departments including: City J Attorney, Administrative Services, Police, Public Works, and Planning. Due to the costs ~N'/ and other organizational issues, staff recommends the City Council deliberate on the Task Force recommendations and identify which programs should be incorporated as higher service levels for consideration during the 1995-96 budget hearings. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The staff report contains a number of recommended activities. The total estimated cost to fund and implement the actions in staff time and in new costs is $51,920. DESCRIPTION: Between Fiscal Year 1991-92 and Fiscal Year 1993-94, the cost to remove graffiti from City property increased from approximately $6,000 per year to over $30,000 per year. Information from law enforcement agencies and other cities in California concludes that graffiti vandalism is on the increase. Today,graffiti can be seen at many locations throughout the City of Dublin. It is anticipated that without greater intervention, 'it is likely that this trend will continue and even increase. At the August 22, 1994, City Council meeting, staff was directed to form a task force to address the growing problem of graffiti in the City of Dublin. In forming the Task Force, staff attempted to involve participants from various segments of the community including businesses, the school district, parents of school age children, and other citizens at large. The group met about once a month, and addressed a variety of issues relating the graffrti problem. Task Force Mission and Approach During these meetings, Task Force participants expressed a variety of views and ideas on how to deal with the graffiti problem. The Task Force worked from the premise that Dublin is fortunate in that graffiti has not become so prevalent that, through cooperation and planning, it cannot be removed entirely. With this in mind, the group attacked the problem with the goal to eliminate all graffiti as quickly as it is put up. In order to focus the many ideas, the Task Force developed a methodology for addressing the problem. Consequently, three program areas of Eradication, Enforcement and Education were developed. Next, the Task Force identified specific ~ relating to each program area and developed recommendations to address each specific issue. These recommendations were developed through a cooperative effort involving the entire Task Force, Dublin Police Services, the Public Works (Maintenance) Department and other City Staff. Through many hours of discussion, the Task Force was able to focus on nine major issues. These nine issues, along with recommended actions, cost estimates, and implementation plans are presented below. Only issues that require action by the City Council are listed. Some issues such as quick removal of graffiti from city facilitates, are not listed because the City is already doing this. Eradication - Public Aaencies (Includina Utilities. e.a. Pacific Bell. PG&E) Issue #1 : How to effectively remove graffiti from Public Property and property not owned by the City. (i.e. Zone 7, utilities, DSRSD, etc.) Some public agencies do not remove graffiti quickly or at all. Task Force Recommended Actions: 1. Establish one phone number, "The Graffiti Hotline," through which graffiti can be reported. 2. Distribute a resource list of public agencies which can be used by the public to call and report graffiti. 3. The City Manager or his designee writes a letter to other public agencies requesting the removal of the graffiti. 4. The City Council adopts a resolution to keep Dublin free of graffiti. Staff will correspond with other public agencies and impress that this is a high priority. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COPIES TO: Graffiti Task Force ITEM NO. 8.1 CITY CLERK FILE ~ . e .Implementation - Issue#1: . Currently, there is no formal mechanism for handling graffiti complaints. These calls are referred to the City's Public Works Department. As a result of establishing a "Graffiti Hotline," it is expected that the call volume will increase slightly. The Public Works Department estimates that the City will receive approximately 4 to 6 calls per week at the onset of the program. This number may decrease as time goes on. It is estimated that the hotline could require about 1- 2 hours per week of city staff time. Costs - Issue #1: The primary costs here are related to monitoring the hotline. Approximately 15 minutes per phone call would be necessary to complete the entire process from beginning to end. Since the Public Works Department already handles service calls, it is anticipated that they can absorb this activity with existing staff. Consequently, there is no measurable cost to the City. Eradication - Private Propertv Issue #2: What if the private property owner doesn't remove the graffiti. Most business owners and private property owners are aggressive in their practice of removing graffiti. However, some businesses are not as aggressive to the detriment of the entire business community. What is the best means to mandate removal of graffiti and achieve the goal of quick eradication? Task Force Recommended Actions: 1. Adopt a City Ordinance specific to graffiti consisting of the following parameters: a. Establish a process for notification. b. Establish guidelines for mandating removal. (Recommend short time limits be set. Once notification is received, Owner/Manager has 3 days to respond and 7 days to remove. c. If the graffiti is not removed, the City must incorporate language in the ordinance authorizing the use of public funds and consequently implement the nuisance abatement procedures adopted in the municipal code. Implementation - Issue #2: The Zoning Investigator does not currently have time to handle all of the existing zoning enforcement issue. This is due to current workload in the Planning Department. In order to implement greater enforcement of graffiti ordinance, it is proposed that the City hire a part time Zoning Investigator. The new Zoning Investigator would handle all private property graffiti calls in addition to all other zoning enforcement activities. Costs - Issue #2: 1. The cost for the City Attorney to complete the ordinance including reviews is estimated to be 6 hours, $750. 2. Greater enforcement activity would require more time from Zoning Enforcement. It is estimated that 10 graffiti related cases may take up to 20 hours per case. (200 hours per year) Since there is already insufficient staff time available to handle the existing Zoning Enforcement this activity could only be implemented with the addition of a part-time Zoning Enforcement Officer. This cost is estimated to be $22,000. 3. If the City ultimately removes the graffiti, additional labor and material costs would be incurred. These costs would depend on the amount of activity. The maintenance department estimates that this would cost about $500 for every time they need to complete an abatement. It is estimated that this may occur 2 times a year resulting in a total estimated cost of $1000. 4. In addition to maintenance department cost, the Administrative Services Department would be required to enter a process to recover costs from the property owners. It is estimated that this process may take 4 hours per case totaling 8 hours of time per year. This equates to approximately $240 in staff time. Total Cost of for Issue #2 = $23,990 Issue #3: If the City incurs costs related to the removal of graffiti, the City may wish to pursue cost recovery (i.e., reimbursement from the vandals). How can the City recoup the cost of abatement from the vandals or parents of the vandals? Task Force Recommended Actions: Seek civil damages against prosecuted graffiti vandals. If the individual is not an adult, damages could be sought from parents. Implementation - Issue #3: Since there is little potential for the City to receive a large amount of reimbursement through this mechanism, it is recommended that the City Council ultimately authorize staff to initiate small claims proceedings as opposed to the City Attorney doing so. This will minimize the cost to the City while still achieving the results. It is estimated that the Administrative Services Department handle these proceedings similar to other subrogation cases. . . .. Costs - Issue #3: Although it is not likely that a significant amount of money will be received, it can serve as "notice" that the City is serious about stopping graffiti. In many cases, it may cost more to bring a case to court than could be obtained through a judgment. (It is sometimes more difficult to get a defendant to pay a judgment than to get the judgment in the first place.) Cost and benefrts will need to be evaluated on a case by case basis. It is estimated that there would be about 1-2 case per year. It is estimated that these activities will take approximately 4 hours per case for a total of 8 additional hours of staff time, representing approximately $240 in the Administrative Services Department. Issue #4: Task Force research shows that even though volunteers are free, administrative costs associated with sustaining a volunteer effort to remove graffiti over the long term does not make economic sense. However, getting people involved will produce increased awareness and helps deter future acts of graffiti. How can volunteers be utilized to accomplish graffiti removal without relying on them as the only resource? Task Force Recommended Actions: Use volunteers on a periodic basis to remove graffiti from locations where graffiti is not being removed. It is recommended that the Crime Prevention Unit work with the Valley Volunteer Center to pursue graffiti related projects. The Volunteer Coordinator from the Volunteer Center would handle the coordination of volunteers while the City would assist in identifying project locations. Implementation. Issue #4: The Crime Prevention Unit would act as a the city contact for the coordinator at the Volunteer Center. This would help limit staff time required to administer. The Crime Prevention Unit would relay information about areas that need graffiti abatement, but would not be required to continually administer the volunteers. The Program's success will be based on the efforts of the volunteers. Costs - Issue #4: This would require approximately 1-2 hours per month of additional coordination time for the Crime Prevention Unit per month. This represents staff time for Crime Prevention of about $600 per year. However, according to the Police Department, the current staffing level in the Crime Prevention Unit prohibits any increased service level. Thus, even though the hours for this activity are limited, items in Crime Prevention are already being prioritized with low priorities getting eliminated. The current Crime Prevention Unit consists of one half time person and the available hours for activities are very limited. Thus, the only way to introduce a volunteer program in addition to other Crime Prevention programs recommended below is to increase the staffing level of the Crime Prevention Unit. An additional .5 of a full- time Community Safety Assistant is estimated to cost approximately $26,000. Enforcement Issue #5: Dublin Police Services has apprehended 33 vandals since 1993. A historical problem is that even when sentenced by the court, there are inadequate mechanisms in place to follow through on the punishment. How can the City make sure vandals are duly punished when they are caught? Task Force Recommended Actions: Implement the "GRAVE" (Graffiti Restitution and Vandal Education) Program. GRAVE would provide a mechanism for the courts to use in sentencing vandals. It is recommended the work program be conducted 1-2 times a year, based on need, and supervised using City maintenance personnel. The program would entail weekend work details involving graffiti vandals who repair/remove graffiti. Implementation -Issue #5: Public Works staff believes they can implement 1-2 programs a year. They have coordinated these types of activities in the past representing good experience with making the programs successful. Costs - Issue #5: Approximately $350 for personnel and materials for the first day of the GRAVE program and $300 per day for subsequent work days would be required. An additional 4 hours of administrative time in preparation for the program plus 2 hours of administrative time per subsequent work day would be necessary in the Public Works Department. The Cost for 2 Days is $650 plus approximately 8 hours of administrative support representing $320 in staff time. The direct labor costs and administrative time total $970 to fund this recommendation. . e tssue #6: Many times, business owners and citizens are unaware of what to do if they see graffiti either being done or after the fact. How do we increase arrests and maximize enforcement efforts through citizens and business involvement? Task Force Recommended Actions: Promote citizen and business involvement through the Chamber of Commerce, Merchant Alert, Service Clubs and Neighborhood Watch programs. The goal will be to not only catch graffiti vandals but also gather information about graffiti and prosecute vandals in the courts. Implementation - Issue #6: The Crime Prevention Unit is already coordinating many activities. However, there are duties that could be done, but are not, because time does not permit. In order to implement increased duties related to graffiti, the position needs to be allocated more time. Costs - Issue #6: The Crime Prevention Unit would need to include graffiti material in their presentations. At the current staffing level, the Crime Prevention Unit will not be able to complete the distribution and presentation of graffiti materials. If the position is allocated more time, as presented above, then these activities could be completed. Education Issue #7: The Task Force agrees that a component to this social problem is taking a long term view of eliminating the need or want to vandalize in this manner. How does the City address the long term through the education of the younger children (K-5) about community pride and civic responsibility? Task Force Recommended Actions: Continue with the current programs and advocate the expansion of the curriculum relative to these programs. Such activities include the Lion's "Quest" program which is aimed at middle schools. The school district has also incorporated as part of its curriculum, programs for younger children (K-5) such as the "Tribes" Program and other self-esteem and decision making programs. Implementation - Issue #7: This program will be handled by the School District. Costs. Issue #7: No direct cost to the City. Issue #8: Develop promotional materials to help educate the business community and citizens on the impacts of graffiti vandalism. Task Force Recommended Actions: 1. Complete the graffiti brochure. 2. Crime Prevention Unit maintains, updates and continues to distribute materials. 3. Be prepared to show the slide presentation to civic groups and other audiences. Implementation - Issue #8: The Crime Prevention Unit has already established mechanisms that allow organizations to receive presentations which will include the graffiti slide show. If the Crime Prevention Unit was allocated an additional half time of personnel as indicated above, increased action relative to the graffiti problem could be handled. Costs - Issue #8: The graffiti brochure is already in draft form. The Grime Prevention Unit will be required to update the brochure, perhaps annually, and coordinate its distribution. Crime Prevention will be available for slide presentations. Slide presentations are estimated to take an average of 2 hours a month or 24 hours a year representing a cost of $720 in staff time. Conclusion and Recommendation The Graffiti Task Force has spent considerable time and effort discussing these issues. Additionally, the Task Force has discussed specific issues with the District Attorney's Office and the City Attorney to be in a position of recommending solutions that make practical and legal sense to implement. The recommendations listed above are the result of considerable debate and dialogue designed to build consensus among the diverse Task Force participants. The recommended Task Force actions impact different City departments including: City Attorney, Administrative Services, Police, Public Works, and Planning. The total cost of all the programs represents $51,920 in staff time and new costs. Due to these costs and other organizational issues, staff recommends the City Council deliberate on the Task Force recommendations and identify which programs should be incorporated as higher service levels for consideration during the 1995-96 budget hearings.