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
