RE: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti (fwd)
David Shove writes: Where in that statement did I say or imply that graffitti should be tolerated? At NO point did I say I wanted both. I want neither. But I was misrepresented in a way to dismiss my statements about billboards - and very effectively, I see. My apologies, David. I imputed arguments I've heard others make - that graffiti is ok because billboards exist - to you. But I now understand that your point was different. No intent to misrepresent, but sometimes it happens. Again, I'm sorry. David Brauer King Field Giving peace a chance on the list TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Chris Johnson wrote: Mr. Donnelly confuses correlation with causality, a common mistake. I recommend spending the time necessary to clearly undestand the difference, as it's a frequent problem when people are arguing. CD: I'm not confused about the difference between correlation and causation. I simply demonstrated the facts contained within the police report showing that most incidents of tagger graffiti are concentrated in a thriving and prosperous part of town. Sure, there are many explanations for this, but assuming a causal relationship to increased crime and deterioration is precisely what I'm urging people to avoid. CJ: This report lends just about zero credence to an argument that says graffiti does not help lead to greater crime in areas plagued with graffiti. CD: This report lends zero credence to either side of that argument. All it does is describe the spatial distribution of tagger graffiti. Make of it what you will. For now, I agree with Keith Reitman on West Broadway. The field of urban problems is scattered with much greater monsters. Conor Donnelly Waitepark TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
But as for children in the city who do tag, we would serve their victims better, as well as everyone else concerned, if our efforts were directed towards rehabilitation and education instead of punishment. I understood that a major part of rehabilitation involved taking responsibility for your actions. I would presume that includes financial responsibility for the costs of cleaning up after you. And isn't that what Sen. Berglin's bill covers? Tim Bonham, Ward 12, Standish-Ericsson Once victim of a grafitti artist so stupid he couldn't spell a 4-letter obscenity! TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
David writes: I actually think punishment has resulted in fewer incidents. If this is actually the case, David, do you think Senator Berglin's bill is still necessary? Do you think incidents of graffiti will drop further once the state goes after parents of taggers, especially parents who are living below federal poverty guidelines? And as I asked in my first posting regarding this issue, why stop at graffiti, awful as it is? Why not make parents legally and financially responsible for other crimes their children commit? We're going after parents of taggers, I suspect, because of the common perception that taggers and their parents are black and poor and of no use to society. Again, Senator Berglin's bill is a desperate attempt to counter Republican assertions that the DFL is soft on crime (i.e., blacks). Given the impulsive nature of children, I doubt that a child is going to put down that can of spray paint after considering how their actions might alter their parent's financial and legal status. Now, you can say that parents have a responsibility to teach their children right from wrong. True. But how many children of decent and conscientious parents still do bad things despite their Mom and Dad's best efforts? Quite a few, I suspect. I don't know how many of you list members out there are parents. I'm not. But I can only hope that none of you are held legally and financially responsible for all the bad things your children may do in the future. Again, given the lack of assistance our government offers to parents, compared to other industrialized nations in the West, parents, regardless of race or class, need support not punishment.---Peter Schmitz CARAG TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Even if this bill passes, once it is challenged in Court, the odds are that it will be for all pratical matters overturned, and if it goes to the Appellate Court and has an adverse ruling against it, this will be good for inner city properties. Why you ask??? Because maybe the authorities will start ticketing tenants for their irresponsible and destructive damage to buildings. Maybe the authorities will criminally charge a destructive tenant based on circumstantial evidence as they can for graffitti. They can not do this (so they say) at the present time. This will definately change bad tenant behavior! I have had 8 cases over the last 5 years where in the time between a UD Court Hearing and the time the Court gave the tenants to move out (usually a week), the tenants have knowingly and maliciously damaged my house with axes, hammers, paint etc to get back at me for evicting them for non payment of rent. The cost to repair all of these damages has run between $6,000 and $13,000 to repair. Again the bottom line is that we must hold the person who actually commits the crime responsible themselves and not someone else. I believe this strange phenomenen is called common sense. Steve Meldahl Jordan (work) - Original Message - From: David Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 1:05 AM Subject: RE: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti Peter Schmitz writes: However, I doubt Senator Berglin's bill will do much to fix the problem. Especially if most tagging is done by suburban adults as other list members suggest. Having reported on this subject over the years, I'd caution list members about accepting the assertion that graffiti is all done by suburbanites. The last time I did a story on this, the police told me a majority of their arrests were of people living in the city. (And I refuse to believe suburbanites are cleverer at getting away with it.) That said, I agree with Michael A. that it doesn't really matter where graffiti taggers come from. Peter again: But as for children in the city who do tag, we would serve their victims better, as well as everyone else concerned, if our efforts were directed towards rehabilitation and education instead of punishment. snip By the way, I may be wrong, but I've perceived less tagging over the past several years with the exception of antiwar graffiti, which I think is motivated, in part, by the vandalism of antiwar lawn signs and bumper stickers I actually think punishment has resulted in fewer incidents. I think numbers have dropped in the last year or so because of the Minneapolis police department and Hennepin County Attorney's office, whose investigations aggregate a tagger's multiple property vandalisms into felony charges. I think a few stiffer sentences have served as a broad deterrent. I know that first arrests often result in rehab or community service (Sentence to Serve crews cleaning up graffiti, for example). But some persistent offenders are going to jail, more than probably in recent years. You can certainly argue about whether it's a good use of jail space to have taggers in them, but it does seem to have been effective in trimming vandalism. I know there are many folks out there who think graffiti is still unchecked in the neighborhoods. David Brauer King Field TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Symptom of a sick city. Blaming/penalizing/billing of the innocent for the actions of others. In my hometown of Minneapolis we have had in the near past and possibly right now; People in policy making positions who think graffiti is acceptable, something to be lauded and defended. The notion of punishing responsible parties or those who can legitimately hold taggers accountable is considered a bad policy. So says the previous posters on this issue. Senator Berglin is proposing to bring some small pathetic measure of accountability to the law breaker. Yet it is met with hostility by the non-affected classes. Currently the city penalizes the owner of the property for the action of any of our children. The city demands that the property owner report damage to her property, repair it by a certain date ( regardless of the cost), or else be fined, taxed or possibly deprived of your license to engage in commerce. Issues such as this make the city such an easy target for a--kicking. No personal responsibility. Get it together citizens of the city. Graffiti is a no brainer, never debatable. It is destruction of property. Craig Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Former Mpls Housing Provider Rogers MN 55374 ? Do you think incidents of graffiti will drop further once the state goes after parents of taggers, especially parents who are living below federal poverty guidelines? Sorry I didn't state my position in the original post. If what I've read here about Sen. Berglin's bill is true, it's a very bad idea. I don't think penalizing parents for their children's actions will work, and I don't think it's fair, since there are many reasons kids do bad things. I also want to briefly respond to David Shove: Those who argue that graffiti should be tolerated because billboards are subscribe to the eye for an eye ethos (literally), that I think comes up short. There are many of us who hate billboards AND graffiti - maximizing visual pollution is a really counterproductive idea. I could see a shred of morality for this argument if taggers limited their defacement to ads. But they don't. Ask the owners of the historic sandstone It's Greek To Me building, who had to pay thousands to remove a tag from the top of their builiding - I watched as chunks of sandstone came raining down from the necessary powerwashing. Or the folks in Lyndale, who paid for neighborhood welcome signs in multiple languages, only to have them defaced by fans of the band Wookie Foot bearing bumperstickers. It's easy (and often correct) to reflexively side with the powerless over the powerful. But there are many victims here who don't really qualify as the latter, and don't want to be caught in the visual crossfire. TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Michael Atherton wrote: Let's just say that graffiti is a sign post on the road to deterioration. I've lived in four cities and have watched it occur in all of them. CD: I received an off-list reply to my post regarding graffiti which contained a Mpls Police Graffiti Task force Report from Sgt. Rick Duncan dated 1-6-2003. This report contains maps of each precinct with dot symbols indicating graffiti incidents classified as either tagger, gang, or unknown. These maps appear to confirm my suspicion that most tagger graffiti is concentrated in parts of the city that ARE NOT suffering decline and diminished quality of life. Lowry Hill East and surrounding Uptown areas contained 55% of all Mpls mapped tagger graffiti incidents between Oct and Dec 2002. I don't see boarded up buildings on Hennepin and Lyndale in the near future. In fact, these neighborhoods seem to be thriving, desirable places to own property and businesses. I'm not asserting that graffiti is not a crime, or that it is not vandalism, or that is is not annoying to you. Just remember that although you might not like looking at graffiti, do not assume it warns of impending deterioration of our city. So before you light your torches and get your mob together to issue citations to parents of taggers, think about what some explanations for this phenomenon could be. Then proceed to work on the hundreds of more pressing problems facing people. Conor Donnelly Waitepark It isnt always easy to separate disease from its mythology or violence from its trivialization. Not that were necessarily eager to make distinctions. -Don DeLillo, published in Dimensions A Journal of Holocaust Studies, 1989 TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Conor Donnelly wrote: I received an off-list reply to my post regarding graffiti which contained a Mpls Police Graffiti Task force Report from Sgt. Rick Duncan dated 1-6-2003. This report contains maps of each precinct with dot symbols indicating graffiti incidents classified as either tagger, gang, or unknown. These maps appear to confirm my suspicion that most tagger graffiti is concentrated in parts of the city that ARE NOT suffering decline and diminished quality of life. Lowry Hill East and surrounding Uptown areas contained 55% of all Mpls mapped tagger graffiti incidents between Oct and Dec 2002. I don't see boarded up buildings on Hennepin and Lyndale in the near future. In fact, these neighborhoods seem to be thriving, desirable places to own property and businesses. I'm not asserting that graffiti is not a crime, or that it is not vandalism, or that is is not annoying to you. Just remember that although you might not like looking at graffiti, do not assume it warns of impending deterioration of our city. Mr. Donnelly confuses correlation with causality, a common mistake. I recommend spending the time necessary to clearly undestand the difference, as it's a frequent problem when people are arguing. This report lends just about zero credence to an argument that says graffiti does not help lead to greater crime in areas plagued with graffiti. I lived in Uptown and I have friends who live in Lowry Hill; I'm very familiar with those neighborhoods. There a dozens of factors that affect the amount of tagging there and the amount of crime there. One factor alone, more tagging, is not going to overwhelm the rest of them. One reason there is more tagging in those areas is because of visibility. Most taggers aren't interested in tagging a wall in some remote, isolated location where no one will ever see it. They want people to see it, so that they can feel they've made their mark. Taggers are peeing on the bushes like dogs, to prove they are somebody, to prove they've been somewhere, and to show everyone else that they have. A second reason for greater tagging in those areas is because they have a huge number of transients. On any given weekend, you could round up everybody on the street in Uptown, and only 10% of them would be from that or the adjoining neighborhoods. In fact, the majority would probably be from the suburbs. As for crime, the Uptown neighborhoods have some of the higher over-all crime rates in Minneapolis. Fortunately for life and limb, the vast majority of those crimes are things like theft from auto, smash and grab, shoplifting, etc., again because of the large number of visitors. Why are there not boarded up buildings? Because property owners and the city have made huge efforts, over the past 20 or so years and continuing to this day, to improve the neighborhoods. They've spent lots of money fixing them up, even going so far as to spend NRP money on GRAFFITI REMOVAL. There *were* boarded up buildings in Uptown in 1980. There were boarded up buildings on Lyndale in the 1990s. Allowing gangbangers, taggers and other graffiti artists to freely vandalize one's neighborhood is just asking for trouble. Frankly, I'd like to see graffiti and other forms of vandalism become felonies as soon as they cause $500 in damage. Chris Johnson Fulton TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Peter T Schmitz wrote: Now, you can say that parents have a responsibility to teach their children right from wrong. True. But how many children of decent and conscientious parents still do bad things despite their Mom and Dad's best efforts? Quite a few, I suspect. I don't know how many of you list members out there are parents. I'm not. But I can only hope that none of you are held legally and financially responsible for all the bad things your children may do in the future. I disagree. I believe the vast majority of kids who have decent and conscientious parents making best efforts will do very few bad things. My siblings and I never vandalized or left graffiti, etc. and it's because my parents made it clear to us what was right and what was wrong, that wrong was not tolerated, and that people in society had to make efforts to get along and cooperate with each other. Likewise, my parents *were* held financially liable for things we did wrong. I expect to be treated likewise as a parent for my son's behavior. Sure, there are exceptions. Some few children, despite having the best parenting will go awry, for reasons unknown. Presumably, a decent court of law will make the correct distinction based on the circumsntances. I'm not saying I'm in favor of Sen. Beglin's bill. But I am strongly in favor of personal responsiblity, as a person for one's own actions and as a parent for properly raising one's children. The sad fact is, there are a lot of totally incompetent parents out there. Chris Johnson Fulton TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, David Brauer wrote: I also want to briefly respond to David Shove: Those who argue that graffiti should be tolerated because billboards are subscribe to the eye for an eye ethos (literally), that I think comes up short. There are many of us who hate billboards AND graffiti - maximizing visual pollution is a really counterproductive idea. The following is what I said. I find BILLBOARDS even uglier - huge, pervasive, intrusive, endless, ugly ugly ugly. Symbols of corporate arrogance and greed. Property-value destroying. An insult to the environment. An insult to citizens. How beautiful it would be were they gone eradicated vanished. The problem is that the people behind them are not poor or young or powerless. It would be joyful to pass a law to fine their parents for their nature-effacing misdeeds. --David Shove Roseville Where in that statement did I say or imply that graffitti should be tolerated? Those who argue that graffiti should be tolerated because billboards are subscribe to the eye for an eye ethos (literally), that I think comes up short. There are many of us who hate billboards AND graffiti - maximizing visual pollution is a really counterproductive idea. TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti (fwd)
[computer glitch forced premature send just now] On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, David Brauer wrote: I also want to briefly respond to David Shove: Those who argue that graffiti should be tolerated because billboards are subscribe to the eye for an eye ethos (literally), that I think comes up short. There are many of us who hate billboards AND graffiti - maximizing visual pollution is a really counterproductive idea. The following is what I said. I find BILLBOARDS even uglier - huge, pervasive, intrusive, endless, ugly ugly ugly. Symbols of corporate arrogance and greed. Property-value destroying. An insult to the environment. An insult to citizens. How beautiful it would be were they gone eradicated vanished. The problem is that the people behind them are not poor or young or powerless. It would be joyful to pass a law to fine their parents for their nature-effacing misdeeds. --David Shove Roseville Where in that statement did I say or imply that graffitti should be tolerated? At NO point did I say I wanted both. I want neither. But I was misrepresented in a way to dismiss my statements about billboards - and very effectively, I see. --David Shove Roseville TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Thanks, Wizard, for your information regarding the study done in Central neighborhood, showing that taggers, as opposed to gang banger graffiti, are usually suburban white youth from 18 to 25 years of age. Question: According to Senator Berglin's bill,, how old does a tagger have to be until their parent is no longer responsible for their graffiti? If most of the tagging is done by adults, white suburban or otherwise, then why, for heaven's sake, is the DFL-controlled State Senate going after their parents? Jon Gorder tells me you should simply get your facts straight if you want to be listened to, after asserting, The vast majority of taggers and 'artists' are white. Jon, please read my posting again. Unlike you, I never claimed any particular racial or ethnic group was responsible for the vast majority of graffiti. And where do you get your presumably straight facts from? What I said was So why stop at graffiti, a crime that many of us, correctly or incorrectly, associate with marginalized populations (e.g., inner-city youth of color)? Rather than blaming a specific group for the graffiti, I wanted to call attention to the harm that can be done, especially to low-income families, if parents are held financially accountable three times over for graffiti done by their children. Like it or not, there is a perception in Minneapolis, albeit not shared by all its citizens, that inner-city black youth are the main culprits when it comes to graffiti. Many people also assume that the vast majority of drug abuse occurs among inner-city black youth. But an article I read two years ago in the Minneapolis StarTribune suggested drug abuse is more prevalent among white rural youth. Nevertheless, under our criminal justice system, it is not white youth, but black youth, who bear the brunt of punishment for drug-related offenses. Does anyone in this forum really believe it will be any different when we start penalizing parents of taggers? While I'm confident that there isn't any racist intent on the part of Senator Berglin, her bill, if passed into law, may very well reinforce existing institutional racism in this state. When law breakers are treated differently according to race and class, as their are in this country and state, then we ought to think twice before trying to legislate away more behavior we don't like. But the proof is in the pudding. If it turns out I'm wrong about this bill after it's passed (it seems like a sure bet), I'll admit my error and apologize profusely. Again, graffiti is a problem in Minneapolis. I hate it as much as the next person. But there are better ways of addressing it rather than resorting to Draconian measures that will only single out a population that many of us, correctly or incorrectly, feel is less responsible. As for the antii-war graffiti: I've seen quite a bit of it lately in my neighborhood, too. Perhaps there wouldn't be so much if our neighborhood war mongers would leave legitimate antiwar lawn signs alone. Mine has been vandalized twice, and I saw another one in my neighborhood cut in half, altering its message considerably.---Peter Schmitz CARAG Evil is movement toward the void.---Don De Lillo, Great Jones Street TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Peter Schmitz wrote: What I said was So why stop at graffiti, a crime that many of us, correctly or incorrectly, associate with marginalized populations (e.g., inner-city youth of color)? Rather than blaming a specific group for the graffiti, I wanted to call attention to the harm that can be done, especially to low-income families, if parents are held financially accountable three times over for graffiti done by their children. Graffiti is not a victimless crime, just wait until something you own is tagged and see how much it costs you out of pocket to have it removed. And, if you want to see how much graffiti can lower the quality of our neighborhoods just try visiting some large cities on the East or West coasts. Whether graffiti is done by intercity minorities or suburban Whites is irrelevant. The effects on our neighborhoods and taxes are the same. The question should be whether this law will actually reduce this type of crime or if other types of programs and penalties would be more effective. Michael Atherton Prospect Park TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Michael Atherton wrote: And, if you want to see how much graffiti can lower the quality of our neighborhoods just try visiting some large cities on the East or West coasts. Please offer some specific examples of this claim. I understand that many people do not like seeing graffiti in their neighborhoods, some however do. It's a big stretch to assign a cause of lower quality of life to graffiti. Even a correlation with quality of life seems hard to come by in our city. My recollection of the Stribune piece a few years ago was that the highest incidence of graffiti was NOT concentrated in those neighborhoods suffering with abundant poverty and crime. Someone with a better memory might correct me on this. Please try demonstrating this corellation if you believe it's there. Until then, I can list many things that are higher on the quality of life list than graffiti. I think I heard we might be closing some libraries soon. I see this as mainly an aesthetic issue, especially on public property. Conor Donnelly WaitePark TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Great! A response from the pro-graffiti crowd. Michael Atherton wrote: Please offer some specific examples of this claim. I understand that many people do not like seeing graffiti in their neighborhoods, some however do. It's a big stretch to assign a cause of lower quality of life to graffiti. Even a correlation with quality of life seems hard to come by in our city. Ok, so it's an aesthetic taste. If you like graffiti and razor-wire then you should move to L.A., that's where I'm from. I thought it was time to leave when they started warping the freeway signs in razor-wire to keep them from being painted over. They're hard to read with graffiti all over them. If that's not a quality of life issue, I don't know what is. I'm not sure about you, but I find freeway signs to be helpful aspect of living in a large city and I have a personal aversion to razor-wire. My recollection of the Stribune piece a few years ago was that the highest incidence of graffiti was NOT concentrated in those neighborhoods suffering with abundant poverty and crime. Someone with a better memory might correct me on this. Maybe it's not concentrated in poor neighborhoods here, but is was in L.A. You don't see as much in Beverly Hills, San Marino, or Newport Beach. Please try demonstrating this correlation if you believe it's there. Until then, I can list many things that are higher on the quality of life list than graffiti. I think I heard we might be closing some libraries soon. Let's just say that graffiti is a sign post on the road to deterioration. I've lived in four cities and have watched it occur in all of them. I see this as mainly an aesthetic issue, especially on public property. Great, I'm glad. You will still be living here when I am not. I was just trying to share a little personal wisdom with you. Michael Atherton Prospect Park TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Conor Donnelly wrote: Michael Atherton wrote: And, if you want to see how much graffiti can lower the quality of our neighborhoods just try visiting some large cities on the East or West coasts. Please offer some specific examples of this claim. I understand that many people do not like seeing graffiti in their neighborhoods, some however do. It's a big stretch to assign a cause of lower quality of life to graffiti. Even a correlation with quality of life seems hard to come by in our city. Like Michael, I've lived in and visited other cities where there is a lot more graffiti than here. Universally, areas with large amounts of graffiti are run down, and often unsafe. It's no stretch to say it causes a lower quality of life. Although I can't quote you chapter and verse from any study that you'd believe, the fact is it is generally accepted that graffiti makes a neighborhood look more welcome to the criminal element. In other words, large amounts of graffiti make a neighborhood look like it is run down, neglected and therefore a place where street criminals will less likely be harassed, by police or residents. It looks like the residents don't care. Once the street criminals move in then more crime follows. The some who do like seeing graffiti are an extremely tiny minority, equivalent in size to the numbers of those who like things such as shooting people they disagree with, pimping, complete anarchy, burning down buildings for fun and profit. The day something you worked hard and long for is vandalized by a tagger or other miscreant may be the day you change your tune. I see this as mainly an aesthetic issue, especially on public property. Conor Donnelly WaitePark Gosh, it's so aesthetic to see graffiti on street signs, power pedestals, city vehicles, the backs of city bus seats, playground equipment (my son today asked what one such tag said -- try explaining an obscenity to a 2-year old), and park benches. 99.9% of the taggers out there are not motivated by an artistic sense. The taxpayers own that public property, and the vast majority of us don't want to see graffiti on it. Chris Johnson Fulton TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Thank you, Terrell, for your lead. I will follow up on it this week. Let's be clear folks, just because I think Senator Berglin's bill is a bad idea that doesn't mean I approve of graffiti. Tagging is intrusive, tacky, aggressive and disrespectful. Furthermore, it often presents a serious safety problem as one of our members pointed out. I've dealt with graffiti on my property and didn't like it at all. And I get very upset whenever I find out about a struggling small business in my neighborhood that's been tagged. However, I doubt Senator Berglin's bill will do much to fix the problem. Especially if most tagging is done by suburban adults as other list members suggest. But as for children in the city who do tag, we would serve their victims better, as well as everyone else concerned, if our efforts were directed towards rehabilitation and education instead of punishment. Because we live in a fragmented and hyper-individualistic society where bullying on the part of our national leaders is exalted, many children (not to mention adults) are oblivious to the effects of their actions on others. A police force based on the community service model, rather than the military occupation model like ours, would be an effective tagging deterrent. Those on the list who have enlightened me regarding the demographics of taggers have confirmed my suspicion that the real purpose of Senator Berglin's bill is to pander to conservatives who claim that Democrats are soft on crime. If passed, I'm afraid her bill will have a devastating effect on low-income minority parents who are already stressed out to the max. If I were indulging in black and white thinking, as one of the list member's indicated yesterday, then I'd be scapegoating parents for the actions of their children. But I think the problem of graffiti is more complex than that. Effective solutions will only come from exploring root causes. By the way, I may be wrong, but I've perceived less tagging over the past several years with the exception of antiwar graffiti, which I think is motivated, in part, by the vandalism of antiwar lawn signs and bumper stickers.--Peter SchmitzCARAG Virtue is an excellent thing and we should all strive after it, but it can sometimes be a little depressing.-Barbara Pym Excellent Women TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Peter Schmitz writes: However, I doubt Senator Berglin's bill will do much to fix the problem. Especially if most tagging is done by suburban adults as other list members suggest. Having reported on this subject over the years, I'd caution list members about accepting the assertion that graffiti is all done by suburbanites. The last time I did a story on this, the police told me a majority of their arrests were of people living in the city. (And I refuse to believe suburbanites are cleverer at getting away with it.) That said, I agree with Michael A. that it doesn't really matter where graffiti taggers come from. Peter again: But as for children in the city who do tag, we would serve their victims better, as well as everyone else concerned, if our efforts were directed towards rehabilitation and education instead of punishment. snip By the way, I may be wrong, but I've perceived less tagging over the past several years with the exception of antiwar graffiti, which I think is motivated, in part, by the vandalism of antiwar lawn signs and bumper stickers I actually think punishment has resulted in fewer incidents. I think numbers have dropped in the last year or so because of the Minneapolis police department and Hennepin County Attorney's office, whose investigations aggregate a tagger's multiple property vandalisms into felony charges. I think a few stiffer sentences have served as a broad deterrent. I know that first arrests often result in rehab or community service (Sentence to Serve crews cleaning up graffiti, for example). But some persistent offenders are going to jail, more than probably in recent years. You can certainly argue about whether it's a good use of jail space to have taggers in them, but it does seem to have been effective in trimming vandalism. I know there are many folks out there who think graffiti is still unchecked in the neighborhoods. David Brauer King Field TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
As I read, on-line, the StarTribune's headline Punishment for graffiti vandals' parents clears Senate , I cursed under my breath at our U.S. Senate. Those darn Republicans are at it again, I thought. So imagine my surprise and despair when I read on only to discover that this is a bill that cleared the DFL-controlled State Senate today by 62-3. The bill's sponsor is Senator Linda Berglin (at least she's earned my gratitude for reminding me why I defected to the Green Party just when Pawlenty and Bush nearly made me reassess my decision). In essence, parents of youngsters found responsible for damaging property through graffiti would be forced to come up with restoration money. Furthermore, property owners will be able to seek three times the amount it cost them to restore their property . . . So why stop at graffiti, a crime that many of us,correctly or incorrectly, associate with marginalized populations (e.g., inner-city youth of color)? Let's be fair and consistent and hold parents responsible for any and all crimes and property damage done by their children, making sure we throw triple restitution into the bargain. On second thought, maybe we should exclude shoplifting since last I heard it's the white middle-class female's crime of choice. And let's exclude the establishment of meth labs in rural areas, as dangerous as they are. We can't have Governor Pawlenty calling any special elections to fill a vacant seat in the House or Senate. And we better not forget automatic amnesty for anyone living in a fraternity who is still his mother or father's legal dependant . . . Face it, folks, Senator Berglin's bill is another sorry attempt on the part of Democrats to prove that they're as tough as Republicans. And PLEASE Democrats, don't go shaking your finger at Trent Lott or any other racist Republican, when your own party advocates laws and policies that promote institutional racism. (Remember that your former leader, Bill Clinton, rallied around the death penalty.) Race issues aside, Senator Berglin's bill is still awful. Let's say a single parent earning minimum wage has to take another job in order to pay restitution fees, that leaves his or her children more unsupervised than ever. Adding more stress to parents, particularly low-income parents, may cause their children to act out more. And what if, five years from now, a child involved in graffiti-related property damage should come from Mary Jo Copeland's orphanage? Will the state hold Mary Jo responsible? I think not. Again if we're going to have this bill let's at least be fair and consistent. Given the way justice works in this country, a higher-income parent will only have to make one phone call to their attorney to get off the hook, while a lower-income parent will be lucky to enjoy the right of due process. (Recall all the cuts that have been made in legal aide services to the poor. ) Given that our nation, state and municipality are cutting or eliminating the few government-funded suppports that were available to parents, I'd like to propose that all parents, no mater what their race, economic status or martial status may be, are entitled to more support from our government, not punitive consequences. (No one can accuse me of class warfare.) Please realize, my property has been vandalized by graffiti. Removing it is time consuming and costly. But if we really want to eliminate this problem, then we need to look at its root causes (further marginalization of children, especially low-income children, the growing gap between the rich and the poor, and the criminalization of drugs which is the main driving force behind gangs and gang-related behavior such as graffiti). Unfortunately, politicians from the DFL, like Democrats nationwide, no longer have the courage or compassion to wage war against poverty and the damage it causes to us all.-Peter Schmitz CARAG TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Peter T Schmitz wrote: As I read, on-line, the StarTribune's headline Punishment for graffiti vandals' parents clears Senate , I cursed under my breath at our U.S. Senate. Those darn Republicans are at it again, I thought. So imagine my surprise and despair when I read on only to discover that this is a bill that cleared the DFL-controlled State Senate today by 62-3. The bill's sponsor is Senator Linda Berglin (at least she's earned my gratitude for reminding me why I defected to the Green Party just when Pawlenty and Bush nearly made me reassess my decision). In essence, parents of youngsters found responsible for damaging property through graffiti would be forced to come up with restoration money. Furthermore, property owners will be able to seek three times the amount it cost them to restore their property . . . So why stop at graffiti, a crime that many of us,correctly or incorrectly, associate with marginalized populations (e.g., inner-city youth of color)? WM: A study done in Centreal neighborhood a few years ago showed that the taggers, as opposed to gang banger graffiti, are usually suburban white youth from 18 to 25 years of age. WizardMarks, Central Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
In a message dated 3/17/03 9:23:45 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Senator Berglin's bill is another sorry attempt on the part of Democrats to prove that they're as tough as Republicans. And PLEASE Democrats, don't go shaking your finger at Trent Lott or any other racist Republican, when your own party advocates laws and policies that promote institutional racism. (Remember that your former leader, Bill Clinton, rallied around the death penalty.) Race issues aside, Jon sez: Though I agree the bill is an absurd waste of time ( especially in these times ) there can hardly be any racism attached. The vast majority of taggers and artists are white. There's a lot to say about a bill like that, you should simply get your facts straight if you want to be listened to. Jon Gorder Loring Park Nothing so needs reforming as other peoples habits Pudd'nhead Wilson TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Senator Berglin and Responses to Graffiti
Thanks, Wizard, for the information regarding the study done in Central neighborhood, showing that taggers, as opposed to gang banger graffiti, are usually suburban white youth from 18 to 25 years of age. Question: According to Senator Berglin's bill, how old does a tagger have to be until their parent is no longer responsible for their graffiti? If most of the tagging is done by adults, white suburban male or otherwise, then why, for heaven's sake, is the DFL-controlled State Senate going after their parents?. . . Jon Gorder tells me you should simply get your facts straight if you want to be listened to, after asserting: The vast majority of taggers and 'artists' are white. John, please read my posting again. Unlike you, I never claimed that any particular racial or ethnic group was responsible for the vast majority of graffiti. And where do your get your presumably straight facts from?What I said was So why stop at graffiti, a crime that many of us, correctly or incorrectly, associate with marginalized populations (e.g., inner-city youth of color)? Rather than blaming any particular group for the graffiti, I wanted to call attention to the harm that can be done, especially to low-income families, if parents are held financially accountable three times over for graffiti done by their children. Like it or not, there is a perception in Minneapolis, albeit not shared by all its citizens, that inner-city black youth are the main culprits when it comes to graffiti. Many people also assume that the vast majority of drug abuse occurs among inner-city black youth. But an article I read two years ago in the Minneapolis StarTribune said drug abuse is more prevalent among white rural youth. Nevertheless, under our criminal justice system, it's not white youth, but black youth, whether they're from the city or not, who bear the brunt of punishment for drug-related offenses. Does anyone in this forum really believe it will be any different when we start going after parents of taggers? While I'm confident that there isn't any racist intent on the part of Senator Berglin, her bill, if it is passed into law, may very well reinforce existing institutional racism in this state. When law breakers are treated differently according to race and class, as they are in this country and state, then we ought to think twice before trying to legislate away more behavior we don't like. But the proof is in the pudding. If it turns out I'm wrong, bring it to my attention, list members, and I'll admit my error and apologize profusely. Again, graffiti is a problem in Minneapolis. I hate it as much as the next person. But there are better ways of addressing it than resorting to Draconian measures that will only single out a population that many of us, correctly or incorrectly, feel is less responsible. . . . As for the antiwar graffiti: I've seen quite a bit of it lately in my neighborhood, too. Perhaps there wouldn't be so much if our neighborhood war mongers would leave the legitimate antiwar lawn signs alone. Mine has been vandalized twice, and I saw another one in my neighborhood cut in half, altering its message considerably. -Peter Schmitz CARAG Evil is movement toward the void.-Don De Lillo Great Jones Street TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
