San Francisco Fines Businesses for Getting Vandalized
The city halted its practice of fining graffitied businesses during the pandemic. But now it's firing up its enforcement machine again.

Getting your business vandalized sounds like punishment enough. For some San Francisco business owners, it's just the beginning of their troubles.
A steady stream of restaurateurs and retailers have been complaining about the city's practice of issuing them fines for not being quick enough to remove chronic graffiti being applied to their shopfronts and street cafes.
"The graffiti, it costs me a lot of money because every tag, I've got to go paint that thing. I don't actually expect it to stop, but the most frustrating thing is, I keep on getting tagged by the city, but what can I do?" restaurant owner Viet Nguyen told ABC7 News last week.
Nguyen—who will be opening a San Francisco location of his restaurant GAO Viet Kitchen later this year—told local media he's received notice from the city that he has 30 days to clean up tags on his building or else risk a $352 fine.
"I can't even count. The paint dries and you deal with another one," Michael McNamara, manager of vegan pub Above Ground, told the San Francisco Chronicle last year of the constant graffitiing of the business. For his trouble, McNamara told the paper he'd received two $300 tickets plus a $320 inspection fee from the city's public works department.
Private property owners are required to remove graffiti within a month of a notice of violation. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the city pumped the breaks on issuing notices and fines for large stretches of the pandemic.
Supervisor Hillary Ronen, who described the fines as a "slap in the face" given all the other hardships businesses incurred during the pandemic, sponsored a successful ordinance in March 2021 forgiving graffiti fines that suspended the public works department's ability to issue more while Mayor London Breed's COVID-19 emergency order is in effect.
The mayoral emergency continues. But the slap in the face that was supposed to stop is "now slapping again" as SFist colorfully put it. In April, the board voted to re-empower the public works department to issue graffiti fines. NBC Bay Area said the department started exercising that fining power earlier this month, with Nguyen being one of the first targets.
To complement reinvigorated enforcement, the city is finalizing the details on a publicly funded graffiti abatement program. If approved, the $4 million program would send city workers to paint over graffiti of vandalized businesses that opt into the program. But given owners' complaints about the frequency at which their storefronts are tagged, one wonders if the program amounts to sweeping leaves on a windy day.
It's also not clear what public rationale exists for these fines. Unlike accumulated trash, noise, or other standard nuisances, graffiti isn't inherently offensive. Some people pay good money for graffitied murals and artwork.
The targeted businesses themselves obviously don't like being vandalized. The city has a role in policing and preventing that. But the fines only punish the victims of this vandalism while doing nothing to disincentivize lawbreakers.
The city recognized that was unfair and cruel during the pandemic. It remains so even as the virus fades.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
“To compliment reinvigorated enforcement….” Someone needs a spelling lesson.
Someone's got to appreciate burrocratic coercion. Why do you hate burrocrats?
Mmmm... burrocats
Even as a libritarion I can see the advantages of rule by tortilla stuffed with meats.
Or, I guess, rule by donkeys. That would have been the easier joke. But when I see Burro I think of the food first. Which says a lot about me as a person.
As my dad would say, some people can't tell the difference between an ass and a hole in the ground...
He said that to you often, I bet.
Mine did, but then again, he had my brother around to cause him to say it so often.
Nice reinvigorated enforcement you got there....
...be a shame if something happened to it.
Let me complement this comment.
Reason needs Tim Cavanaugh back as its grammar whip.
Especially for "pumped the breaks".
Thems the brakes!
Well, you know, grammar and spelling are tools of the white supremacist.
Fining the businesses is the only way that we can punish the innocent. San Francisco has many ways to punish innocent people and store owners must pull their own in this matter.
Punish the innocent. It's the San Francisco way.
Banksy hardest hit. Why does San Francisco hate artists so much?
On a related note, I knew a Communist ("not a Stalinist!") who wanted the government to pay all artists a living wage. I asked who decides who is an artist. She said artists do. I said Great, I am going to paint circles on walls and call myself an artist. She said that's not art. I said I'm the artist and I say it's art. She could not understand it.
Circles on walls seems a lot harder than paint drops on canvas.
That’s what they make Compass for.
If I were a professional sandwich artist, could I get reimbursed for materials and supplies? Asking for
sarcasmica friend."Why does every problem have to find it's solution in persecuting the LGBT community?" - Chemjeff
Damn. ENB was the more obvious and apt butt of that joke.
Can she make a cuban?
What is the unknown Cuban sandwich everybody has been mentioning?
It’s the same unknowable mystery as the prices of lobster rolls in Maine.
Let's not start joking about cubanos. They are something good and pure.
It's the Cuban Sandwich in a paper bag with two eye holes that performs on The Gong Show:
https://youtu.be/AoFfLvy3quA
She said artists do. I said Great, I am going to paint circles on walls and call myself an artist. She said that's not art.
Again, this is an example of how easily refutable these ideologies are especially when the people expressing said ideologies base them on vague or fluid definitions (I bet you know where I'm going with this). Make them play by their own rules. "Great, now I'm X!"
It's amazing how suddenly borders and rules become bright lines.
Sometimes I wonder how long it took me to be an individualist / libertarian, then I remember things like this, shortly after my four years in the Navy, and other similar events. I think I've never been otherwise, just didn't realize it for a long time. My line about painting circles was instantaneous, more a reaction to something stupid and illogical, pointing out the inherent flaw, and every statist political system I've heard of has the same inherent flaw. Government doesn't solve anything except which warlord is in charge, and it doesn't do anything competently, including that.
No, you can't refute them because their morals are ultimately based on tribal affinities. The can decide about who is right (them) and who is wrong (you), even if you both say the same thing, without blinking. So yes, any member of her tribe can rightfully claim artist status, but you cannot.
And the old fashioned objective logic you want to use is racist patriarchy, so not allowed.
Voting always and often for The Party and attending the meetings are also always part of the pay-the-artists jackassery.
Artists already get a "living wage" if they have Section 8 housing, EBT, WIC, and Earned Income Tax Credit.
And 'stimulus' checks.
That seems to be the Progressive way of handling crime. Get stabbed, get arrested. Get vandalized, get fined.
Is spraying graffiti one of those "nonviolent crimes" which doesn't get prosecuted?
Maybe it's easier to chase after business owners than confront a graffiti artist ("mostly peaceful protests after cops harass a person of color over a minor offense").
Who riots if businesses get harassed?
Plus the businesses have more money for fines.
Rather - rename your biz to "Graffiti " and tell the city its all branding
-then refuse to pay a fine for your business art
Is spraying graffiti one of those "nonviolent crimes" which doesn't get prosecuted?
Yes.
Being graffitied is also a non-violent crime that does get prosecuted.
Just reclassify it as public art, and the businesses will meet that requirement as well. I can't believe the SF city council would consider graffiti a bad thing.
It is if you can make money off it.
I really don't give a fuck about san Fran unless it's being or was glassed.
And make no mistake, annihilation is that cities only salvation.
Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Fucking amateurs! You impose a $352 fine for graffiti and then sell $2 state-sanctioned, vinyl stickers (produced by preferred label makers) to cover the grafiti for $250 plus cost, and charge $150 per sticker for having too many vinyl stickers on the exterior of your building. Duh.
re: "what can I do?"
Leave. Come to a city that will actually enjoy your food and let you run a business sanely.
Or even better, vote out the city council busybodies who authorized this program in the first place.
Come to a city that will actually enjoy your food and let you run a business sanely.
And offer you a cheaper, safer, cleaner place to live.
That's white supremacist.
If one wants cheaper, but the same crime and dirt then Kansas City is there for you as well. You also have the benefit of being in a city that actually kicks ass.
San Francisco has things I can see that are nice, but every time I go there I feel like I'm constantly barraged by anxious people assuring me that San Francisco is great. Desperation in their eyes.
Grew up near KC, and the west side of the city is great. Would move back were it not for the weather and terrain. Benefits of KC include: Royals (yeah, they're sucking this year and will for the next long time, but the K is an awesome stadium), Chiefs and Mahomes, best BBQ in the country, great restaurants and night life, world-class art museum, lowest traffic congestion of any North American city, and friendly people. What's not to like? (Besides the awful weather and lack of mountains?)
KC is the low-key most underrated city in the US I've been to.
Well, who wants crime and dirt just because it's cheap?
Besides, Carolina Treet Barbecue Sauce is the best. 🙂
I feel like I'm constantly barraged by anxious people assuring me that San Francisco is great. Desperation in their eyes.
I live about 45 minutes from SF and I avoid it like the plague. Haven't been there in years. I vastly prefer Oakland, which has its own flaws but is a much, much nicer place.
Just leave already.
graffiti isn't inherently offensive.
Said the person who obviously doesn’t own a building.
Yeah, that's a line that doesn't give a whole lot of value to property ownership.
I'm sure they'd be fine with a bit of graffiti on their car, right? Nothing inherently offensive, just something intrusive the owner doesn't want.
Pretty soon, there will be vigilante street patrols paid to 'deter' tagging. Probably painfully.
I mean, you pretty much have to have $350 per incident set aside in the budget. Might as well write off $50 in sandwiches as donations, give them to anyone who can prove they thwarted an act of vandalism on your property, and keep quiet until someone brings you a severed hand covered in spray paint.
Maybe it would be better if those vigilante street patrols started going after the SF government.
I've long advocated for "tagging" to be a shoot on sight crime.
A bullet in the buttocks acts as a strong deterrent to repetition of the destruction of other peoples property. And it is destruction of OP property, no matter what twists of self justification you attempt.
Unless a space is designated as a "public art wall" then any defacing of a wall, fixture, or appurtenance is by definition vandalism.
"Unlike accumulated trash, noise, or other standard nuisances, graffiti isn't inherently offensive. Some people pay good money for graffitied murals and artwork."
Graffiti is inherently offensive. Yes, there are ways that one can ape the style into something that is merely flamboyant and not offensive. But you aren't getting that for free from some bozo who paints his name onto a wall without permission. And knowing SF, they probably have exterior wall color ordinances that don't even allow the former.
> If approved, the $4 million program would send city workers to paint over graffiti of vandalized businesses that opt into the program.
I can't help but wonder what happens if the city employee doesn't fix the problem within 30 days. Is the business still fined?
If the whole idea is to pressure building owners to opt-in to the graffiti removal program, I guess I feel a bit better about this. The city caused the problem by not enforcing the law, but at least it is paying to fix the symptoms. But, it can't do that if building owners won't allow them to cover the problem.
The best case scenario is if the city gets annoyed with cleaning up graffiti and starts ramping up enforcement. Let's see some of these delinquents get sentenced to spending their weekends cleaning up graffiti for the next year.
How does the city council determine graffiti from art the business wants on its walls?
You need to apply for a permit if you want to officially put art on your exterior wall.
So just pre-graffiti your wall, and say it's part of the decor. Who can prove otherwise? Who can say which layers of paint are yours, and which an intruder's?
They can just create building regulations about how they have to look. They probably are already on the books, honestly.
Depending on your local authorities, you may run afoul of:
a) the sign ordinance
b) the zoning code
c) the architectural review board / standards
d) all of the above.
^
And once that 'public art' is in place, it will immediately be historic and you will never be allowed to modify it any way.
*ctrl-f 'authoritaria' 0/0*
To be fair, this is no article about Josh Hawley.
Paint "sucks" underneath every gang symbol on that wall. They will soon go away out of shame and embarrassment.
In the meantime, squatting and taking a dump on city streets remains legal. Go figure.
I know what I'm doing the next time I'm in SF! Now to select a location. I think outside Oracle Park where the Giants play is high on my list.
The homeless and others who do this are classified as artists who work in feces, the way others might work in oils or clay...
Last time I had dinner in SF, before a show at the Orpheum, I was treated to watching a guy take a dump right outside the restaurant window.
Nobody even batted an eye.
Truly legal in Kalamazoo, MI, now.
https://policetribune.com/kalamazoo-city-council-decriminalizes-urinating-littering-and-defecating-on-city-streets/
Kalamazoo has a ways to go to match Flint for awfulness, but they're working on it.
To be fair, it is still a civil offense. Good luck getting the homeless to care about fines. Sheesh.
San Francisco Fines Businesses for Getting Vandalized
Will they also fine people who get their car stolen while idling it in the driveway or people who don't post "No radio" signs on their car window? How about if they are victims of their catalytic converter getting sawed off, or burglary, rape, arson, or murder while being left for dead on the street?
Fuck San Francisco! All the hotties in drag and ass-less chaps in the world isn't worth it!
What they need to do is put up posters and billboards that are tempting for people to graffiti penises on them. Then set up sting operations to arrest those who go for it.
I saw this on Nathan 4 You, this is an unassailable strategy.
"I keep on getting tagged by the city, but what can I do?"
Try getting the fuck out of San Francisco. Move a medium sized town in a red state and go into business there. Not only city slickers eat Vietnamese food. Rural folk will like it, too.
Please God, no. The two California transplants who recently moved to my red state neighborhood already have signs in their yards supporting local Democrats. Not that I love my current overlords but I don’t want Cali-policy.
In the next phase of the program, SFC will pay graffiti "artists" for the crimes they commit, and will have to increase fines levied on building owners to cover the payments, plus the bureaucratic overhead.
SO badly edited, I couldn't read it. Hope it wasn't good, or important.
If the business owner keeps the 'artistic expression' in place, why are SF fines not a 1A violation?
It is obviously not content neutral, as other signage is permitted.
It's considered "blight." You can get similar fines for not keeping up your lawn.
The need to apply graffiti across every government building in Frisco has never been greater.
If you’re still trying to do business in Frisco at this point then I dunno what to tell you
Next you'll be telling me that San Francisco also fines victims of arson and vandalism. Why doesn't SF just skip to the final reveal and simply outlaw all business? This death-by-a-thousand-imbecilic-cuts is excruciating.