Loading...
CC - Item 5A - Graffiti Removal Program Enhancement - Box 070TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS ROSE CITY COUNCIL FROM: BILL OWE, CITY MANAGER DATE: DECEMBER 3, 2003 RE: GRAFFITI REMOVAL PROGRAM ENHANCEMENT As you are well aware, graffiti continues to be a region-wide problem. Rosemead like many local government agencies employs a range of programs including physical clean up efforts, law enforcement and judicial intervention, public information campaigns, as well as diversion and prevention efforts through our school-based S.T.A.R. program. Even with these efforts in place, graffiti remains a persistent and" troublesome blight on our communities. As an example, in recent years the City of Los Angeles reported over a 50% rise in vandalism from graffiti. While it is a widely held belief that tagger crews, not gangs, are responsible for the majority of nuisance graffiti, the impact of this form of vandalism on the community runs deep and affects the respect for authority, respect for property, and pride in the community. While we have had some success in identifying and prosecuting individuals who commit acts of graffiti vandalism, and we have redeployed resources to address the recent spikes in graffiti, we often find that graffiti is put up faster than we can remove it; thereby, resulting in undesirable lag times before removal. As you know, the city utilizes a combination of contract services and in- house staff to remove graffiti. The city contracts with Laidlaw Transit for bus shelter maintenance (the current Proposition A local transit fund appropriation is $29,600); with the City performing the balance of graffiti removal with internal staff and resources (the current general fund appropriation is $187,690). Over the past six months we have been investigating various alternative abatement approaches and best practices of other communities. Given the current unstable fiscal environment, we are reluctant to hire additional staff to deal with a problem, which can fluctuate greatly depending IGEIND;% CJUR! t1. rye O F 9.'003 ITEM'NO. upon circumstances beyond our control. Additionally, as we are satisfied that our current in- house staff is professional and is doing all they can to remove the graffiti in a timely fashion, we think it advisable that any new approach we consider be built around our core in-house staff with contracted resources handling specific supplemental services. The approach envisioned will be to re-solicit contract services for an enhanced level of bus stop maintenance with a supplemental service option for high graffiti removal services on commercial corridors. Most of the graffiti vandalism locations are in the commercial corridors and include multi-story structures that are troublesome and dangerous for our staff to reach without the use of a mechanical hoist. Accordingly, staff is in the process of crafting a Request for Proposal for bus shelter maintenance services and supplemental graffiti removal services. In order to accommodate the proposed scope of work we will need to request a supplemental appropriation from the General Fund's unappropriated reserves. We anticipate scheduling this item for Council action in February 2004. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to prepare the necessary Request for Proposals to implement the graffiti program enhancements and return to the Council with a recommendation for contract award and an appropriation adjustment for the necessary service enhancements.