We need more intelligent, socially aware people deciding what they’re going to prosecute our children for (15 felony counts for scratching his nickname into public property). We need folks like Ben Morgan, director of Quality of Life, with his twelve years “working directly with at-risk youth in the juvenile justice system,” who argues for treatment of the social issues underlying the graffiti problem. We need people like John Doffing, founder of Start Soma, a gallery dedicated to showing the work of emerging new artists, who argues for redirecting some of the $22+ million dollars per year the city spends on graffiti “cleanup” and prosecution into more constructive youth outlet programs where at-risk kids can redirect their creative energies into public art projects.

We need you, dear reader.

If you really want to get involved, one of the best ways to do so is by sitting in on one of the city’s Graffiti Advisory Board meetings on the second Thursday of every month. They’re held in City Hall, room 348, at 5:30 – 7:00pm, unless otherwise noted. Meeting agendas are available on the GAB website (linked above).

If you really, really want to get involved, look into applying for one of the vacant seats on the Board. They’re the folks who propose the policies that incarcerate our children and waste our tax dollars. You could help by offering more intelligent, compassionate, and efficient alternatives. The specific positions that lie open right now are as follows:

Vacant seat, new appointment, seat 2, must represent the Youth Court, for an indefinite term.

Vacant seat, succeeding John Omernik, seat 8, resigned, must represent private schools operating in San Francisco, for an indefinite term.

Vacant seat, succeeding Deborah Mansfield, seat 11, resigned, non voting member, must represent neighborhood organization, for an indefinite term.

Applications are available online in pdf format and should be submitted to the Clerk of the Board. If you have any questions, call the Rules Committee Clerk at 415-554-5184 and ask for Dale Johnson.

The Graffiti Advisory Board has the following responsibilities:

1. Prepare and submit to the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor a report every six months on graffiti as it affects neighborhoods and the downtown area of San Francisco, which shall include a review and evaluation of the services and programs in place to respond to graffiti, prevention strategies, and recommendations and plans as to a consolidated program of public and private efforts;
2. Advise about the coordination of information, activities and goals among existing programs funded by the City and Count and privately sponsored programs;
3. Advise about improving the efficiency in the provision of graffiti enforcement, prevention, and clean-up services.

Other relevant information and municipal documents of interest:

Some names to refer to if you want to discuss San Francisco’s stance on graffiti:

1. Machaela M. Hoctor, Deputy City Attorney, City Attorney’s Office
2. Mohammed Nuru, Deputy Director of Operations, Public Works
3. Officer Christopher Putz, San Francisco Police Department, 415-558-5543
4. Benjamin Morgan, Director, Quality of Life <ben@qualityoflife-themovie.com>
5. John Doffing, Founder, Start Soma (and by extension, the Hotel des Arts)

From How the New Graffiti Ordinance Works:

In 2004 the Board of Supervisors amended the Graffiti ordinance, so that private property owners are now responsible to abate graffiti on their property. The following is a step-by-step explanation of how the graffiti ordinance works:
1: Graffiti is reported
2. Graffiti Notice
3. Graffiti Removed
4. Hearing Requested
5. Abatement Action
6. Bill Collection

Make sure to read the whole document to get a detailed description of each step. Something interesting to note (which I have always wanted to discuss with Attorney Hoctor, but haven’t yet had the chance) is in step one, when the city’s agent “investigates the graffiti”. I would assume this is when the city acts as an “arbiter of art”, unless they’re taking every reported instance on the reporting individual’s word, which seems like foolish blind faith. I can think of several inexpensive social experiments to test the enforcibility of this policy, which hinges on how “graffiti” is defined, and how far the city’s recognition of “consent” will stretch.

From SFDPW’s Street Maintenance Standards Manual and Evaluation Form:

Graffiti: DPW is responsible for the removal of graffiti on DPW properties, i.e., street surfaces and trash receptacles. When graffiti is on public structures and buildings that do not belong to DPW (mail boxes, street signs, etc.), the department will notify the public agencies of the graffiti and of their responsibility. Abatement procedures will differ depending on the various public agencies. DPW is not responsible for abatement of graffiti on private property, but they are responsible for noticing private property owners. Although DPW is only responsible for abating graffiti on street surfaces and trash receptacles, the data collected on non-DPW and private properties will be analyzed and future abatement strategies will be developed. What is inspected: The street surface, public and private structures and buildings visible from and immediately adjacent to the streets in the 11 selected street cleaning routes. Graffiti inspection will be coordinated with the street cleaning inspection, so only the side of the street where mechanical street cleaning occurs will be evaluated.
The proposed standard is zero tolerance of graffiti and the Mayor’s policy is to remove graffiti on public property within 48 hours of reporting.

For those of you who haven’t seen the show at Hotel Biron, it comes down Sunday, so I highly recommend you get over there Saturday night.

I hear he’s showing his work in other even more discreet places in the city…it’s a shame that some of those venues have closed down recently.