PORTLAND – Bitter. Angry. Frustrated.

That’s how Joe Malone half-jokingly describes property owners’ feelings about a proposed ordinance that includes penalties for those who don’t clean up graffiti within 10 days of receiving notice from the city.

“I think you’ll find that many of the property owners are kind of frustrated,” said Malone, a commercial real estate broker who owns several commercial and residential properties in the India Street neighborhood. “They really feel they’re getting victimized twice.”

That’s not the intent, said Trish McAllister, the city’s neighborhood prosecutor, who helped develop the proposal. “It’s to protect those people who are diligently trying to keep their neighborhoods and buildings clean.”

McAllister said the problem is with negligent absentee landlords, as it is with other issues, like disorderly houses and failure to clear snow.

The ordinance was proposed by the graffiti subcommittee of the Community Police Advisory Board. The City Council’s Public Safety Committee heard the proposal Tuesday and decided it needed more work before it could be sent to the council. The committee will take up the ordinance again April 12.

The proposal says owners who don’t clean graffiti from their properties could be fined $250, and $500 for subsequent violations.

The ordinance also would impose penalties such as a $500 fine, cleanup and restitution for vandals, and a ban on sales of graffiti tools like spray paint and broad-tipped markers to minors.

It would hold parents of minors responsible for fines and costs, and allow the city to remove graffiti from properties when owners fail to do so. Because of the weather, the property owner provisions would not be enforced from Jan. 1 to April 30.

McAllister said the civil penalties against vandals wouldn’t be a move away from criminal prosecution. She said prosecution will always be the priority when it’s possible.

Ric Quesada, president of Fore River Co., a real estate developer and management company, said, “I see the property owners getting left holding the bag on this one. Property owners are easy picking for the city to go after.”

Quesada said his company deals with graffiti right away, with costs ranging from a couple of hundred dollars to a couple of thousand dollars per instance. He said the city should have to prosecute and fine perpetrators and suppliers before considering fines against property owners.

Jay York is among the property owners who support the cleanup requirements. He used to own two brick buildings in Bayside, where he lives and still owns a parking lot. The retaining wall of the parking lot and a rain barrel in front of his house have been hit by graffiti in recent months.

“I’m a firm believer in removing as fast as possible,” he said. “People who do graffiti are basically incredibly selfish. All they want to do is mark their turf to get out their own message at everybody’s expense. But people have to see it for them to be fully satisfied.”

Chris O’Neil, the Portland Regional Chamber’s city affairs liaison, said it seems overly punitive to fine property owners who have been victimized by vandals. O’Neil suggests that the city take a similar approach as it does with disorderly houses — going after those with repeat offenses.

“There aren’t that many that offend, but those who do stink it up for the rest of us,” he said.

O’Neil also would like the city to delay the effective date of the property owner provisions for a year, to provide time for education and outreach.

City Councilor Edward Suslovic said he was initially skeptical of the property owner provisions, but has come to support them. He hopes owners who oppose the provisions will do the same after learning more about the ordinance.

Prompt and consistent removal is key to reducing graffiti, Suslovic said. “We need everybody to do it — including the city,” he said.

Councilor David Marshall also says property owners will feel more comfortable with the ordinance as they get a better understanding about how it would work.

“The longer you leave graffiti on your property, the greater the chances you and your neighbors are going to get tagged again,” he said.

The city has contracted with LearningWorks for graffiti removal services, with the cost running about $25,000 a year. Youths with community service obligations remove graffiti three days a week from mid-May to mid-October, under adult supervision. The nonprofit group removes graffiti from public property and, at the request of owners, from private property.

Marshall said the city should keep the program going, saying that a combination of solutions is needed to combat graffiti. 

Staff Writer Ann S. Kim can be contacted at 791-6383 or at:

akim@pressherald.com