Annual graffiti tradition fails to account for finances, responsibility

On May 18, 2021, the Oregon Legislative Assembly passed HB 2526, designating the second Monday of October as Indigenous Peoples’ Day, the same day as the federally recognized Columbus Day. At Lewis & Clark, the new holiday was embraced by the community, marked with an unorthodox approach to its observance.

In 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, the LC campus was covered in graffiti on or around Indigenous Peoples’ Day. At first, the tags predominantly displayed frustration about the college’s name and mascot and their links to colonialism. In the following years, the messaging became more creative, ranging from pro-Palestine to anti-homework and beyond. While these incidents certainly did not constitute the college’s first foray into spray paint-based civil disobedience, they have become a perverse annual tradition that imposes a high cost on our community. 

The ultimate cost of graffiti arises from multiple factors. There is the direct cost of clean up, which according to past estimates has ranged from $6,000 on the low end up to “tens of thousands of dollars.” There are also administrative costs in the form of hours spent drafting official statements, investigating the perpetrator(s) and coordinating the cleanup. 

Additionally, press coverage of the graffiti could factor into a potential student’s admissions decision, resulting in the extremely high cost of an empty spot in a future first-year class — especially at a time when shrinking class sizes are an existential threat to the college’s financial security. When factoring in the indirect costs, “tens of thousands of dollars” in cleanup seems to be a modest estimate. 

That high price, to be clear, is not money well-spent. On Sept. 8, the President’s Office sent the LC community an email with the subject line “Budget Update,” candidly detailing the multimillion-dollar deficit the college is facing. While the costs related to graffiti will not be the thing to tank the institution, the ongoing crisis exacerbates the issue. It is not hard to think of better uses for that money: clubs, classes, programs, facilities, personnel, scholarships, nationally-ranked student newspapers (wink, wink) — whatever it is you care about, it would almost certainly contribute more good to the community than graffiti-related fallout. 

To avoid paying that cost, the college must find a way to prevent the graffiti from happening. Deterrence, as any international affairs major will be quick to tell you, discourages certain behaviors by creating fear of consequences or retaliation. If littering imposed a $2,000 fine, to take Singapore’s oft-cited example, very few people would risk it. Whether or not that high of a fine is morally justified or socially optimal, it would certainly be effective at disincentivising unwanted behavior. 

To disincentivise anti-social behavior, whose cost to society is greater than the benefit to the offender, one can use some combination of enforcement (the likelihood of being caught) and punishment (the severity of consequence if caught). This follows Gary Becker’s 1968 classic “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach,” the season’s hottest read — think “It Ends With Us” meets “Everything is Tuberculosis.”

Of the two options, enforcement is less suited to the LC context as it would come in the form of increased Campus Safety presence. This would mean additional hours, or even additional personnel, patrolling campus, reviewing security footage and otherwise preventing crime. The wage costs of this approach would be relatively high, but more damning is the fact that the 2023 graffitists were caught in the act by a Campus Safety officer but “fled on foot” before they could be identified. The artists behind such works as “YOU CAN TAG TOO! CAMPO IS BAD AT CATCHING PEOPLE” (2023, spray paint, Miller Center for the Humanities) remain at large. Needless to say, this enforcement effort was ineffective at deterring the 2024 graffiti.

That leaves punishment. To date, the college has never publicly announced that a student was identified or punished for any of the Indigenous Peoples’ Day vandalizations. It follows that a potential vandalizer has no reason to believe that, even if caught, they would face serious repercussions. 

As an institution, we are generally averse to punitive measures. The Community Accountability and Conflict Education webpage details the various hearings, adjudications and remedies available to students found in violation of college policies from plagiarism to underage drinking to hate speech, emphasizing the importance of learning and making amends. This ethos permeates the college, and while it is welcome in many areas, this issue is not one of them. 

To actually prevent the graffiti and its costs, the threat of punishment must be present and it must have teeth. Rather than a costly surge in enforcement, the college should clearly state its intent to penalize anyone found committing “criminal mischief” in violation of the standing Graffiti Policy. As a community, we must stigmatize destructive behavior and hold our peers accountable if they cause harm. And if another person decides to mark Indigenous Peoples’ Day by vandalizing campus, they should be punished, and the rest of the student body should be informed. 

At this point, some of you may be screaming at the page that I am describing a fascistic police state of Orwellian proportions. I read your comments and I acknowledge your emails. But the cost of these annual delinquencies are unacceptable, and we all bear them. I do not find it too much to ask that the perpetrator share in the consequences of an action they freely chose to take.

This year, Indigenous Peoples’ Day falls on Oct. 13. Whether or not the fifth-annual “Graffiti Day” will come to pass is yet to be seen, but its potential costs are clear. Should our campus once again be painted in the colors of mild delinquency, the college has a choice: clear, decisive repercussions for the perpetrator, or to set aside the money for the sixth-annual event. 

About the Author

Maya Mazor-Hoofien

Author

View All Posts