Weapons Ban Weighed in War on Graffiti : Chula Vista: Council considering tough ordinance requiring homeowners to keep all spray-paint and felt-tip markers locked up.

Keep a felt tip marker on your desk and go to jail? How about leaving a spray-paint can on a garage workbench and going to jail?

Frustrated with an increase in graffiti, Chula Vista officials want to fight the vandals with a singularly tough ordinance regulating minors’ access to aerosol paints and felt tip markers.

“This ordinance is a step in the right direction. I have lived in Chula Vista all my life, and I’m seeing the greatest amount of graffiti ever,” Councilman Jerry Rindone said. “There’s been a significant increase in the taggers and artists. Unlike gangs, they don’t mark up each other’s graffiti. But they try to outdo each other by putting their tags on more areas.”

Chula Vista already has made it illegal for minors in Chula Vista to possess felt tip markers, and state law prohibits the sale of spray-paint to minors. On Tuesday, the Chula Vista City Council will debate an ordinance that will authorize the city attorney to prosecute local residents and business owners if they do not keep markers and spray-paint cans locked up.

Under the proposal, violators could be prosecuted for a misdemeanor if spray-paint or markers carelessly left lying about are used by graffiti vandals. The punishment could be a fine of $1,500 or up to a year in jail.

Also included in the ordinance is a provision that requires property owners to remove graffiti within seven days.

City officials say the proposed ordinance will stop a rash of graffiti that has plagued this community. They say it is the first law of its kind in California, and the City Council gave its unanimous but preliminary approval to the measure earlier this month.

On Friday, City Atty. Bruce Boogaard said he had beefed up the proposed ordinance with additional provisions. He said the measure “could serve as a model for other California cities,” adding that “it incorporates several new ideas.”

In addition to restrictions on the storage of markers and spray-paints, the ordinance would require:

* Requiring minors who are wards of the court and have been convicted of graffiti vandalism to do up to 80 hours of community service in graffiti removal.

* Paying the cellular phone costs of people who use car phones to report graffiti vandalism to the city.

* Landscaping around surfaces that are a graffiti nuisance.

* Painting all utility boxes in the city the same color with a special finish to facilitate graffiti removal.

Not surprisingly, the proposal has spawned more than its share of critics among homeowners and the business community.

“It would be an extraordinary enforcement to put in place,” said Jim Biddle, president of the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce. “That’s like saying a bald person can’t drive a car, and the police will have to check to see that drivers aren’t wearing toupees.”

Local homeowners have also ridiculed the ordinance. Belinda Cortez’s reaction was typical.

“What a ridiculous law! I can understand if they said that we have to lock up things like alcohol and guns. But markers and spray-paint? Why would we want to lock them up in our own homes?” said Cortez, who recently moved to Chula Vista.

Boogaard said his office and the Police Department will show discretion in enforcing the law.

“We aren’t going to go snooping around from garage to garage or store to store looking for violations,” Boogaard said. “Rather, we’re supplementing existing law in an effort to curtail graffiti in our city, which is costing the community thousands of dollars in damage.”

Boogaard said enforcement of the ordinance will be a low priority for police.

“In order to ameliorate what is viewed as a possible invasion of privacy, we have also established an enforcement policy. We’re not really going to enforce it except in events that lead to graffiti vandalism,” he added.

If the measure is not going to be enforced, why put it on the books at all?

“The Police Department has informed us that kids are actually stealing these items from stores. . . . All we’re saying here is that spray-paint and markers need to be stored in an enclosed room or locked cabinet, where they can’t be easily taken,” Boogaard said.

The existing ordinance that makes it illegal for minors to possess markers is seldom enforced. It was adopted in April, but so far police have made no arrests under the statute, Chula Vista Police Chief William Winters said.

If the proposal survives a second vote by the council Tuesday, the ordinance will take effect 30 days later. Mayor Tim Nader, however, warned that stiff opposition from business owners makes final passage of the ordinance less than certain.

Critics argued that it will be impossible to enforce the measure unless it is applied countywide.

“It will never work unless the same law is applied throughout the county,” Biddle said. “These materials are so readily available in hundreds of retail stores. What’s to stop someone from driving to El Cajon or Spring Valley to buy or shoplift spray-paint or markers? You can’t believe that we’re going to have officers at the city limits checking suspicious cars.”

Nader said he agrees with some critics of the measure.

“One of my qualms is that it has the scent of one of those laws you put on the books that is not an enforceable law, especially the provision on how the homeowner would have to store these materials,” Nader said.

Rindone, one of the measure’s strongest supporters, agreed that there’s no guarantee that the ordinance will work.

“But it’s an attempt to find a new way to solve old, frustrating problems,” Rindone said. Before he was elected mayor last month, Nader was one of the councilmen who voted unanimously to approve the ordinance. But, in a telephone interview earlier this week, he said his support for the measure will not be a sure thing when it is discussed further Tuesday.

“I’m not sure that regulating the storage of felt-tip markers and spray-paints on private property and sanctioning it with potential criminal penalties is the most effective way to go,” Nader said.

Industry officials are keeping a wary eye on Chula Vista’s attempt at regulating felt tip markers. Diane Dixon, a spokeswoman for Avery-Dennison Corp., makers of Carter’s markers, expressed concern that regulating the storage of markers could hurt retail sales.

“We are supportive of any effort to control, remove and eliminate graffiti and its sources. . . . But we also want our product to be sold without any problems for retailers. We are in business to make these pens available to our customers. The legitimate use of these markers makes them very popular items,” Dixon said.

Chuck Peter, owner of Cornell’s Office Products in Chula Vista, said the ordinance would probably be more burdensome to larger retailers.

“The smaller businesses will probably conform with this ordinance without too much trouble,” he said. “But the larger businesses, where it’s mainly self-serve, will have a difficult time merchandising the products to conform to this. We’re sort of in the middle. It will cause some problems, though.”

Graffiti vandalism has forced many cities to look for creative solutions to deal with the problem.

In April, the Imperial Beach City Council adopted an anti-graffiti ordinance that calls for a maximum $1,000 fine and six months in jail for first-time offenders. Showing that they meant business, council members also voted to pay $150 to anyone who turns in a graffiti artist who is arrested and convicted.

The Imperial Beach measure also prohibits adults and minors from carrying spray-paint cans or felt tip markers in public buildings or parks.

Last month, voters in Los Angeles rejected a ballot initiative that called for a cleanup tax of 10 cents per spray-paint can and five cents per marker. Supporters of the “graffiti tax” said it would have raised about $500,000 annually for five years. The money was to have been used for removing graffiti.

In Chula Vista, the council allocated $125,000 in the current budget for graffiti removal and education.