Property owners in Indianapolis could face a $50 fine for failing to clean up or paint over graffiti under a proposal approved Tuesday by a City-County Council committee.
City leaders hope the proposed fine, coupled with a new cleanup assistance program run by local nonprofit Keep Indianapolis Beautiful, will help rid neighborhoods of such defacement.
The carrot-and-stick approach is the result of months of work by a task force involving community leaders, public safety officials and others. Co-sponsor Zach Adamson, a Democrat, said the bipartisan measure was aimed in part at absentee landlords.
Property owners could face escalating fines if they ignore city violation notices.City-County Councilor Brian Mahern once again appears to be the lone voice of reason on the council. He tried unsuccessfully to offer an amendment to strip the fine out of the proposal since that equates to "taxing the victim" of a crime. Why don't we just start levying fines against homeowners who keep bothering police every time their homes get broken into? This is another bright idea of Councilor Jeff Miller, who is an embarrassment to the Republican Party. The guy is intent on regulating and taxing people into oblivion. Last week, he pushed through a council committee a proposal that will levy on average a new property tax increase of $1,300 on Fountain Square business owners that will be controlled by an unelected, unaccountable board.
My brother-in-law has two properties in Terre Haute which face I-70. It doesn't matter how much money he spends repainting and cleaning up the graffiti the street thugs return and mark their territory within days. As long as they know there is no crime and punishment for tagging properties, the perpetrators are going to keep doing it. To blame property owners for the crimes of others is unconscionable.
4 comments:
Wait til they get round to building that misplaced levy wall on the canal- a long graffiti billboard made of Army Corps of Engineers approved concrete.
Will residents living across Westfield from the canal be expected to keep the wall clean; along with the canal in a flood event (60% of city's drinking water flows through the levy / flood contamination threatened, canal)?
"City-County Councilor Brian Mahern once again appears to be the lone voice of reason on the council. He tried unsuccessfully to offer an amendment to strip the fine out of the proposal since that equates to "taxing the victim" of a crime. Why don't we just start levying fines against homeowners who keep bothering police every time their homes get broken into?
-This is another bright idea of Councilor Jeff Miller, who is an embarrassment to the Republican Party. The guy is intent on regulating and taxing people into oblivion.
This is absolutely stupid. -Taxing victims of crime!!!
The whole idea of fining someone because some other loser puts graffiti on the walls of their business is asinine. What should be done is to catch these individuals in the act and force them to go about cleaning up graffiti and properties that have been vandalized. Instead of giving them three hot meals and a cot and cable TV, give them hard labor. The fools running the Indianapolis City Council are one reason I would never live inside Marion County even if you gave me a free house. I would rather earn my living and make a solid contribution to society than be a burden like so many of the criminals in Indianapolis and the rest of the Section 8 society that exists there. Put them all to work cleaning roadsides and maybe they'll figure out that laziness and crime doesn't pay.
FYI the graffiti law (2013 proposal 52) was passed as "GENERAL ORDINANCE NO. 38, 2013" and signed into law in September. It's not in municode yet (!).
Requiring the victim to clean up graffiti violates Art 1 Sec 21 of the Indiana constitution:
"No person's particular services shall be demanded, without just compensation."
Other laws require homeowners to shovel sidewalks, and to keep the storm sewer grates free of debris. How does the government compel people to expend their labor, given the clause of the state constitution ?
Post a Comment