New Graffiti Law in Atlanta

Community Wellness or Money Making Scheme?

ISSUE: I think I have heard it all. I'm watching the news today only to be notified that a new Graffiti Law is now in effect. Oh how I weep for our future. Essential the news cast went on to explain that if a business has graffiti on the side of it's building it can be cited for such a defacement. If the graffiti isn't removed within thirty (30) days of that citation the business owner can be fined one hundred dollars ($100.00) per week or up to six (6) months in jail. If the business owner has authorized graffiti they can keep it by obtaining a sign permit. While on the outside this may seem like a good idea to keep the "Community wellness" and cleanliness to prevent the look of a downtrodden neighborhood with constant gang tagging and odes to their girlfriends or gang leaders. However, we really need to look at the consequences being held upon the business owner. Is this fair to the business owner? I say, "Not a chance." EXAMPLE: Let's go through our most common scenario where a business would have 'graffiti' would be placed upon the outside of a business. Most likely it's because of an underage boy or girl trying to prove themselves by defacing property with graffiti to put up a friend's name or a gang's name or maybe just some pretty picture. If I had a brick and mortar business I wouldn't want some punk painting my place up for their jollies as I don't want that sort of stuff on my building. So, now we have graffiti on my building that I didn't want there so I call the police to report the "crime" and hope that they catch the person to reimburse me for wanting to clean it. Now that I've filled out my report, I get a citation from the same police that I filed a report to stating that I need to have this new graffiti removed within thirty (30) days. Okay, I wait a couple of weeks trying to find a good place with some reputation of doing good work and not costing a fortune. As I am trying to run a business, not clean-up man, I just haven't had the time or possibly the money to get the graffiti removed in time. Maybe I've scheduled time with the vendor to have it removed only to be waiting on them because of this new requiring all the graffiti to be removed all over town. Supply and Demand says the price is going to go up and now I have to spend over one hundred dollars ($100.00) to have my brick siding cleaned up. I could pay less for the "paint over" method but that would remove the beauty of my brick building. Now time has passed, and I receive a fine indicating that I haven't removed the graffiti. Great, now the money I was going to spend on graffiti removal has to go to the city for not removing the graffiti in time. Not only that, but if I don't have it removed this week, another hundred dollar fine. You can see how that becomes quite the slippery slope of issues as the city continues to fine those business owners for graffiti that they didn't put there or want there while the business owners try to schedule and clean up their unwanted graffiti at the business owner's expense. Now, the local governments have a new source of revenue while the business owners have a new expense category they have to pass on to the consumer. It seems that crime does pay: the government. Would the reverse be okay? Probably not. I would like to suggest that the government be just as accountable for their laws as we are. This would suggest that we should have an accountability law for this law. If the business owner files a proper complaint to the police, the police have thirty (30) days to apprehend the person responsible for the graffiti or the business owner can fine the city for the one hundred dollars a week until the graffiti is cleaned up at the city's expense. We all know how slow the government moves in it's fight against crime so I'm sure that's probably good enough for a grand or so of extra income from the city to the business owner. I'm sure you're saying, "you know that can't happen, they are the government. It's just not practical." I say, "Screw that." If you aren't willing to back up your talk, you shouldn't be trying to give me a "shake down" with laws that require me to follow while you continue to allow this type of action to continue. If you're not willing to be accountable, then you shouldn't be in charge. This country is full of people in charge that aren't willing to be accountable. If you don't believe me, then why does Congress get a totally seperate Social Security plan if they say ours is so good. If it's so good, why don't they use it? Exactly, because if they were accountable for the success of their programs they'd be willing to use it themselves because it would be good enough. I know that last point is a little digressing of the main point, but I think you'll understand my point a little better. It's not like I don't think our government is good. I really do think it's better than most other governments and certainly one of the most powerful. But, I do find that accountability may bring down some of the power, but I think it's people would follow more patriotically knowing that it's leaders were more willing to be accountable for their actions.