Can-Do Spirit in War on Graffiti

Like a tagger to a bare wall, Frank Schillo keeps coming back to one central theme: Paint manufacturers must invent a spray can that can’t be used for graffiti, and Ventura County must prompt the industry to do it.

For the third time, the Ventura County supervisor is trying to ban the sale of paint sold in aerosol cans until an anti-graffiti container can replace them.

On Tuesday, County Executive Officer Johnny Johnston is expected to tell supervisors that Schillo’s proposal could paint the county into a legal corner. The cost of lawsuits could be exceedingly high, especially since the measure would affect only the handful of stores that sell paint in unincorporated areas, Johnston said.

“They need to weigh the advantages that this might provide to the county against the risks they are taking,” he said in an interview.

That risk is worth it, Schillo countered. Local governments, he noted, spend $2 million a year erasing the markings.

One idea has been to make cans inoperable unless tethered to an electrical outlet. But no one is really sure whether that technology--or any other--would work.

Schillo’s proposal calls for creation of a county “certification” panel made up of engineers, economists, law enforcement officials and lawyers. The group, appointed by supervisors, would analyze and approve the performance, safety and cost of any graffiti-proof container that inventors come up with.

That is where the legal problems arise, says Johnston, arguing that the county could face costly product liability lawsuits or litigation brought by paint manufacturers.

And it’s possible the law would have to undergo a time-consuming state environmental review.

Schillo acknowledges the hurdles. But that doesn’t mean the county should back off, the Thousand Oaks-based supervisor said.

His intent, Schillo said, has been to tackle a societal blight by spurring research and development. If Ventura County is the one to force the issue, all the better, he said.

Schillo introduced the proposed ordinance in April 2000. Similar legislation failed in the mid-1990s at the state level.

Schillo agreed to postpone a vote after paint industry representatives complained that they had not been consulted. When the measure came back to the board in June, supervisors again postponed a vote, asking for Johnston’s analysis.

Schillo said he is irritated by the delays. But he said he is ready to accept whatever verdict his colleagues make Tuesday.