Last blog posting, I linked to a commentary on Mission Mission blog, about DPW painting over graffiti on a private residence. The posting asked, how could that be happening, if DPW does not "advertise" that service on its website.
Here is my take. Two ways.
One, DPW does the work, and the property owner pays the bill. This happens after the owner is noticed of the graffiti, and has a chance to respond at a hearing. If the owner does not show up to the hearing, or doesn't give a good excuse, then the City will bill the owner. And it sounds like it could be an expensive bill. Still, it sounds like the owner has more protection against being billed than happens for parking tickets.
Two, Alternatively, the owner shows up, and explains what has happened, and maybe, just maybe if it is fair, the City will there after remove the graffiti on its dime. The notices that I have seen posted imply that if the owner is an 80 year old women on limited income, the City will agree to clean the graffiti for her. Another option, is that the owner shows that the location is one that is hit by graffiti at an excessive rate, and that the owner has cleaned the graffiti a bunch of times already. If the owner shows that he has tried to keep the property free of graffiti, and essentially it more the City's fault for letting the graffiti situation get out of hand and the building is repeatedly graffitied, than again the City will pay for the clean up.
For those who might object to the City paying for cleaning graffiti on private property, on my twitter account, I linked an article that says that New York City will paint over graffiti on private property for free.