It is unlawful in Charlottesville "for any person to willfully and maliciously damage or deface any public buildings, facilities or personal property … or private buildings …" etc.

As many of you are aware, the city has recently increased the fight against the desecration of surfaces, public and private. The effort was initiated by the Director of the Neighborhood Development Services (NPDS), Jim Tolbert, working with the City Manager's office.

Leaving aside for the moment the thought that one man's malicious defacement may well be another man's TOM HANKS homage, today we'll explain what's been happening after the magic marker dried.

Housing inspectors were sent out to identify properties where graffiti was "in obvious view from the street and/or public right of way," according to a knowledgeable source in City Hall.

Letters were then sent to the property owners asking them to clean it up, or the city would do it. Since the city is prevented (by state law) from billing for the cleanup, the owners seem to face fairly simple choices, depending on how bothered they are by the graffiti.
§ They can clean it or have it cleaned themselves.
§ They can let the city do it, and voluntarily contribute to the cost.
§ Or they can ignore the matter completely, knowing that the city will take care of it eventually.

Money for the graffiti cleanup comes out of general revenue funds, with no set budget - there is an account for all property maintenance, and this comes out of that, with some income for the account coming from billing property owners for other city services.

NPDS contracts for graffiti removal on private property, and the Public Works Department removes graffiti on public property.

According to NPDS, "We will clean properties as they are identified and try to keep up as best we are able." A recent article in the Daily Progress reported 100 properties to be cleaned, but according to NPDS, so far this year there have been fifty-seven cleanups, at costs ranging from $8 to $1,250, for a total expenditure of $7,332 since Jan 1. We don't know if there is any limit to what can be spent.

No one has participated in the cost to clean any property to date with the exception of the CSX railroad. They indicate that they will contribute money, but have not to date.

We got a general feeling from City authorities that the downtown area had the greatest number of incidents - approximately 75% of the properties from which graffiti was removed are in the downtown area.

The order of the properties chosen to be cleaned up was decided on the basis of what was easiest to get to, what was easiest to clean up and which cleanings constituted the most efficient use of time. A contractor might, for example, be hired to do a number of brick buildings in a particular area all at the same time. (Since the contractor is a sole proprietor, there is no overall contract for the work, and no individual project will exceed $15,000, he and his employees are not subject to the Living Wage policy of the city).

One of the more prominent examples is the Charlottesville Warehouse, at 401 East South Street: "To date we have spent approximately $1,200.00 to sandblast this building. We are working on cleaning the roof area once we have determined the best access and the appropriate tools (ladders, etc.)."

Waiting to be done is the A.G. Edwards Building. "This is still intended for cleanup. However the owner has asked that they be allowed to remove the graffiti when they paint the building this summer. This extension has been granted." (Dave Sagarin, May 9, 2002)

What do you think? Should impervious or impecunious property owners get a free cleanup? Was the idea of a Living Wage not intended to cover people who do work for the city, as well as those who work for the city? Is some of the graffiti of such decorative merit that it enhances rather than detracts from the cityscape?

Send us your thoughts, where the most representative will be published, with full attribution.