Inglewood, Los Angeles

Last week, the state of California passed a law that forces everyone convicted of graffiti vandalism to remove the graffiti themselves, and (in some cases) keep the surface clean for up to a year.

The Los Angeles Times reported on the story on Thursday. The author of the law, Assemblyman Mike Davis (D-Los Angeles) said:

"By having to clear up the mess, they would realize how much effort and cost is involved in tidying up after them."

However, others feared that gang retaliation would be a significant problem and lead to taggers having to risk their lives in the process of cleaning off the walls:

"The cause for a lot of violence involves graffiti and either crossing it out or removing it," said Khalid Shah, director of Stop the Violence, a gang intervention program.
He said Homeboy Industries closed a program that put gang members to work removing graffiti after two young people were shot to death while cleaning walls.

The debate over the potential benefit and harm of this legislation (which Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law last Wednesday) makes one thing clear: graffiti is an urban policy issue. Politicians and gang members are both players in urban politics, and the judgments each group makes about graffiti goes beyond aesthetics.

Politicians might say they want to remove graffiti because it is an eyesore, but their criticism of it goes beyond what it looks like. Assemblyman Davis is a classic example of this: he has devoted a large part of his career in the state government to fighting crime in his district (see Smart Voter for more information). Crime prevention in Los Angeles has a lot to do with minimizing the influence of gangs in certain areas. Tagging lets it be known that a gang has a presence in a neighborhood - it is a physical sign of intimidation.

Likewise, gang members don't sprawl their tag in an area because they have a desire to express themselves artistically - they tag to mark territory, to show their strength. When their graffiti is taken down, it is an insult to their authority.

In the context of crime prevention, how people address graffiti in urban politics is dependent on how both of these groups feel. In some neighborhoods, the community can judge graffiti and decide for itself what its artistic value is. However, in other neighborhoods, the leaders (whether they are politicians or gang members) make the decisions.