Do we know who they are? Can we enlist them in the project somehow so they can own it? This is so sad.

Are you really shocked by this? You buffed graffiti to make way for your own. Could go back and forth forever, but don't act so entitled to the space. Street art is very impermanent. If you can not accept that, maybe public street art is not really the medium for you.

Personally, I think it is fair to make a distinction between tagging and street art.

To me there is a distinction: graffiti artists create something. Taggers destroy. While we could talk forever about whether or not tagging is a form of art, I think the underlying negative motive of tagging needs to be addressed. One way was to make the underpass beautiful. Another I think should be to wash away their destruction so that they do not win (by using a cover that allows it to be washed off). But the true end to destructive tagging will only come when we get to know who they are, and somehow reach them in a way that changes their view of New Haven as something to destroy to one that allows them to be creative and participatory citizens. Doing that is the true challenge!

@Capt Obvious -

It wasn't unexpected by most.. And you have a point.. But the issue here is that 1) the tags over the photos are not "street art" and were simply tags.. 2) there is an entitlement to the space because the space was legally given to make this particular piece of work. If graffiti artists in the communities wanted their own piece of the city to call their own, they COULD organize and work to claim it and therefor have their own entitled place..

Again.. this wasn't street art over street art. It was vandalism / territory marking over street art.

@Captain Obvious. Not surprised at all. Just documenting what happened. This is a huge group project approved by the State of CT and the City funded by 230 neighbors. Its childish to even compare the two. The tags that were removed from the neighborhood were done so because they started on people's businesses and homes.

CPT OBVIOUS, I'm a huge fan of graffiti, when in its in a designated location, like over on water street....public art is beautiful when it's not vandalized....my solution, let's make another public project for a mural?? It needs to be respected

Keep adding more layers to this community art project, "vandals" and all. It is and can continue to grow into its beauty. this art is not a fixed thing, if you think the tag is ugly grab your paint/supplies and make it beautiful; ideally in that respect way. These are the first few steps of an important, and hopefully eloquent conversation; far from a tragedy.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that the tagging done over the photos was more about making a statement than making art. However, in my opinion, the statement makes sense. Also, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone thought the photo project was super awesome. I actually thought it just as much an eye-sore as some of you think graffiti/tagging is. To Erin, everyone in New Haven who writes graffiti actually has an intense love and pride for the city, which is what few seem to understand. I feel bad for everyone who put time and effort into the photo project and are now disappointed, but legal or illegal, graffiti has its own code. You go over someone's work, they will probably go over yours. That's the nature of street art. Your arguments that your project made something beautiful and theirs is just vandalism is all a matter of opinion- to which you are entitled. Just be wary of assuming your perspective is the only valid one. The animosity that has been growing between the graffiti community and the creator of this mural project goes back many years. The outrage this photo project conjured up is the result of a long standing anti-graffiti sentiment in New Haven fostered by SeeClickFix- which also answers your question of why the writers don't just simply ask for a legal space to paint. Who in their right mind would go waltzing up to the very people who have been trying to have you arrested and ask for sanctioned space? It's a catch 22. There is no trust in a system of hypocrisy and now there never will be. I sincerely feel for those who got involved in the project as a fun, community thing, but they are sadly being misled to think there is nothing more to it than that. This is a city full of many people and there is nothing inclusive or community building about this photo project. SeeClickFix is a money-making joke on the city. I'm just sorry so many people are buying it.

You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. Advice for a budding politician. Bravo, you are starting to sound like a real one. Ya know with all the lying and such. Oh and don't post any of my comments if you don't want to. Easier to control people's opinions when you censor those who disagree with you. I'm really writing them just for you anyway because you know what you do. I'm not going to waste my breathe trying to convince your fan club.

That just raised my ire. They're probably doing this at night.

It is precisely these acts of malicious tagging that have hindered graffiti's attempts to earn legitimacy. show some respect!

Closing this one out as Chris Randall spent a really long time yesterday resolving the vandalism.
Here's the update from Chris posted to the insideout group wall yesterday,
"Graffiti Update #2 : by the end of the day Damian Paglia, Anthony DeCarlo, and Jon Atherton showed up to help cover the graffiti. I got good at fixing them, but it was taking too long, so we decided to make covering up the names the #1 priority. We can finish the finer details later. It doesn't look terrible anymore and if you are driving by and look, you can barely notice evidence of damage.

Thank you John DeStefano for coming by and offering support and City Services. I'll call you tomorrow. Thank you Paul Panamarenko for the paint mixing tips. Thank you Jeffrey Kerekes for experimenting with removal tactics with me at 9AM. Thank you Lisa Siedlarz for bringing more paint. Thank you Gene and Sara for bringing me refreshments and food. Thank you anonymous person for calling the cops on me for doing graffiti on the wall at 11AM (that is a serious thanks because you were paying attention and you cared enough to call it in). Thank you random man that I almost got into a fistfight with because you decided that it would be a good time to justify the tags as art and also enter into the "what is art/ what is graffiti" philosophical debate. *content removed for language

A lot of today sucked, but you all (on facebook and with me at the underpass) lifted me up, and you lifted us up. Thank you all so much for that. We have something really special here.

I would (ideally) like to include these guys in our project, or at the very least, get a dialogue going with them. On a different tangent, maybe we can offer a reward for their capture. If they don't knock this @#$% off I have a premonition that lots of harm and damage will subjected onto them."

Thank you, Ben. I am a senior citizen and try to keep up with all the things happening on SCF. This
graffiti really bothered me but I am happy to hear that it is resolved. Keep up the good work. You
make people like me proud to say we're from NH.

Cap'n,
Sincerely saddened by your points and your personal offense at what we have created both in the mural and Seeclickfix. There are many creators of this project And many business owners who have been hurt by vandalism. Because I am willing to voice my concerns for others and
Myself publicly and helped to create a platform for others to do the same does not make me the only person who does not want their property destroyed.
I heard some really angry things being said today from lots of people and I am trying to calm them down. If you really think that I am the only person who wants this to stop there are many many more now who are being vocal about this.

All that said, I really would like to get this to stop. Do you have an obvious solution? Will helping the writers get permission for their own wall help or is it a lost cause?

I'm seeing a lot of people talk about the difference between tagging and "real' graffiti. I'm laughing because it's always funny to see people spout off about something they are quite ignorant about. The tags you see everyday and on your mural are most likely done by people who also rock out amazing murals like the ones some of you have posted as examples of "real" graffiti art. To the gentleman who says that it is this type of "malicious" tagging that has hindered graffitis legitimacy I say, you could not be more wrong. In the culture of graffiti it is precisely these acts of PROTEST (not vandalism as you call it) that give graffiti ALL the legitimacy it needs. The whole point of graffiti is to take back public space and show that it is owned by no one. This mural project was an intentional smack-in-the-face to all the graffiti artists who used to write on this underpass. It was saying, "You can't paint here, but we can."

Of course, emotions are running extra high because the nature of this photo project is very personal. Personal portraits of children, etc., but you can not expect that everyone is going to appreciate your idea of beauty, as you have disregarded others' idea of beauty over and over again. As I've said, I feel bad for those who do not understand the varied aspects of this situation and see nothing but maliciousness. I see righteous anger.

To Chris Randall, in one breath you say you would like to include these guys or at least have dialogue with them, and in the next you threaten that "harm and damage" will come to them. Why would they be open to dialogue with one such as you? In any case, if the writers are reading this I would just like to say THANKYOU! Your protest on this self-congratulating group of hypocrites has made my day. Thank you for keepin it REAL.

Ben,
Always up for a talk, but I doubt you will like what I have to say.

Be careful of your expectations when you put something as personal as giant portraits on a public wall. BAD IDEA. Your feelings are just gonna get hurt. And to all the parents who thought it was a good idea to put giant pictures of their small children on a public space in the city, SHAME ON YOU. I could think of a lot worse things than graffiti coming of that...Wise up.

Also, Ben, I hear what you are saying that you are not the only one angered by the tags. I can see that. But if you think that there are not just as many people who were outraged by this mural project in the first place and who think that SeeClickFixEastRock is pure gentrification, you are living in a bubble. Your supporters are not the only people who have to look at the underpass and live in New Haven. Believe it or not, I am speaking for many who share my opinion. Most of whom do not even look at this site anymore because of how cliquey it is. What you do is not inclusive at all. You have alienated MANY people with this and past endeavors. As far as a solution to this art/class war, let's talk. I have no faith that a solution can be found through the use of this site. I find this site to be a catalyst for divisiveness, complaining, snitching on your neighbors, and wasting the towns time and money. (Money that could be better spent in neighborhoods with real need. Not planting more flowers in East Rock.) If you think real talk face-to-face could be positive, I'm open. This site can not fix the proverbial pot-hole that has been created between communities.

Far from closed.

Cap'n, I listen to things that I don't want to hear all the time. Can you shoot me an email ctwebnet at gmail com and we can meet tomorrow for a beer or coffee or lunch. Your choice.

Just a heads up that this project came prior to Watch and Bump writing in NHV and was not a response in anyway nor is it related:

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/index.php/archives/entry/underpass_redo_envisioned_on_humphrey/

Cap'n, I respect your point of view; after all if we all thought the same way, where would the diversity come from?
While I disagree with parts of your messages, I do agree to a discussion face to face. I'll gladly hash this out in a respectful manner and come to an agreement...
The protection of citizens comes from projects like this, building community in a grassroots manner. The fantastic thing about this disagreement is the hope to bridge the gap between both sides.

Cap'N curious about why you reopened the issue?

Sorry Cap'N,
Just saw your second post. I think real talk face to face would be very positive. Where and when would be best for you?

Cap'N, I wasn't threatening nor wishing harm unto anyone. I was just stating the facts. I know lots of people in New Haven, and some of those people are the types of people that enjoy inflicting harm to people they feel deserve it. They already told me that if the tagging doesn't stop they are going to "take care of it". I would rather that it doesn't come to that.

What I really want is for us to work things out somehow. Like I've been continually saying, I'd really love for the tagger's faces included on the wall. I realize that I'm probably being too optimistic, but to me that would be ideal.

The way I see this, it's not an us vs. them thing, or a you vs. me thing. New Haven is a small place. We'll probably be here together for at least the next couple of decades or more. I would rather work together to help you get some of the things you are looking for, and not exist as adversaries. I'm not, and we're not the enemy.

"Just a heads up that this project came prior to Watch and Bump writing in NHV and was not a response in anyway nor is it related"

I was not saying that the project was a response to Watch or Bump. They just happen to be the ones to send the message that if you are going to make buffing graffiti your mission as you have for years, writers in general are not going to tolerate your attempt at street art, especially on a location where you have erased graffiti many times. If it wasn't them, it would have been someone else. And if someone tagged the mural who has never written a thing on anything, my guess is that you'd still be upset- so let's not say you are angry because it was done by kids who have tagged other buildings. The issue is the mural- and with how many people were upset about the mural, I wouldn't be surprised if many more let you know that. Bump and Watch were just the first.

oh, to answer your question, I reopened the issue because the mural is still up and we are still discussing the incident, are we not?

The photos should just be taken down

Cap'n,
When you say Bump and Watch were just the first it sounds as if you are threatening the project. Are you suggesting that you know that more damage is going to come to it?

I don't understand what happened with the potential to meet up in person, discuss the two opposing sides?
Unless a meeting has been arranged it seams strange that someone can have such a strong opinion, suggest a face to face and then not reply??
There's a number of people trying to come to a resolution and without the face to face, how can the issue(s) be resolved????

I think she/he did reply on the Independent and the intent is to meet-up at 6:30 tomorrow to discuss while folks are pasting. Cap'n, true?

Chris, everything you are saying insinuates that you actually do wish them harm, so stop the 'I'm a lover not a fighter" B.S. Whether the harm would come directly from you or some thugs you know is not a huge diff. If you think that 2 graffiti writers whose M.O. is to remain anonymous are going to let you plaster their faces on a wall, you are missing the point.

Ben, am I threatening the project? No. Just pointing out the obvious and the inevitable. If you think that graffiti writers are the only ones who hate the photos, guess again. I talked to several people who have nothing to do with graff and they all said they are tempted every time they walk by to draw on the faces (mustaches, etc). Bump and Watch happen to be graff writers and they happen to be the 1st to write on YOUR wall but I think you are focusing a bit too much on the fact that they are graff writers. ALOT of people don't like it and will probably mess with it, is a logical conclusion to draw. (Not to say that you are Mr. Popular with the graffiti community, but it's not just them that hate the mural, FYI.)

WJeder, Sorry, I posted on the Independent article that I will try to stop down at the wall on Thursday at 6:30 ish. I was told that was a good time to meet up and chat. Will you be there? I'm still open to a civil dialogue face to face.

Also Chris, In response to your friends saying they are going to "take care of it" (which, sounds like a cheezy gangster movie line, by the way) they gotta know who done it first. LOL. And you don't.

Beyond that, if you are informing me of your friends threats because you THINK you know who did the tags and you want to sound like you have clout, I'd be VERY careful who you threaten in an on-line forum, my friend.

Ben, curious why you closed the issue?

Cap'n - you make a lot of good arguments where I land on both sides of the arguement. I am an artist and a big time supporter of non profits who work to attempt
to bring pride to the community where low income and crime is an issue. The general and PROVEN idea is that if the community is proud of the neighborhood and feels that there is something there specifically for them, that they will work towards taking care of it and eventually it will lessen the crime. This is, in fact, proven.

Again, I do really land on both sides of the coin here. I do think it's silly to expect to cover tags with portraits of members of the community and not have other people cover it. and to expect that it wouldn't be looked down upon by the tagging community when a bunch of "do gooders" literally come in and do the exact same thing that other tagged would be arrested for.

Here's my issue with your other points. You are ready to claim that you spoke to the community members and they hated it too. Heres the thing, I work in an industry where what I create requires understanding what the general audience will like. I know that whoever you asked was not a solid representation of the community. First, you live without a specific community of people who support what you do. It's proven that people surround themselves with those who have the same fundamental ideals and this is pretty obviously a fundamental ideal in your life. Even if you did ask random people on the street, how many? Where did you find them? How did you ask them?

My point is that you are not speaking for the community of fair haven when you say that "they" think it's ugly. You are speaking for a small group of people who were likely swayed in your direction by simply Wong acquainted to you or how you answered their question.

Here's a proposal - do you REALLY want to do someone good for the community, or do you want to do something good for the tagging /street art community?

If your arguement is that this equals the gentrification of the area and that it's hurting the entire community, prove it. Put your money where your mouth is.

Maybe we make a big white empty space in the area where the pics are and ask (via a statement written on the wall) who wants to see the pics stay and who wants to see them go. Leave some markers around and wait. If the tagging community wants to make a real point to these "do gooders" their point will prevail in the form of community support for what YOU do. People will make it known and then maybe things can be reassessed.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to help a struggling community where we see young children and families along side hookers and dirty needles (something I've seen with my own eyes right around the corner from there).

Not everything is there for the tagging community and not everything is For the do gooders. If both sides can try to have a little understanding it could go a long way. 5 pointz, fame city, and others have been pretty good examples of huge support for street artists by the mainstream.

Ps - do you live in the neighborhood?? I'm just curious.

Cap'n - you make a lot of good arguments where I land on both sides of the arguement. I am an artist and a big time supporter of non profits who work to attempt
to bring pride to the community where low income and crime is an issue. The general and PROVEN idea is that if the community is proud of the neighborhood and feels that there is something there specifically for them, that they will work towards taking care of it and eventually it will lessen the crime. This is, in fact, proven.

Again, I do really land on both sides of the coin here. I do think it's silly to expect to cover tags with portraits of members of the community and not have other people cover it. and to expect that it wouldn't be looked down upon by the tagging community when a bunch of "do gooders" literally come in and do the exact same thing that other tagged would be arrested for.

Here's my issue with your other points. You are ready to claim that you spoke to the community members and they hated it too. Heres the thing, I work in an industry where what I create requires understanding what the general audience will like. I know that whoever you asked was not a solid representation of the community. First, you live without a specific community of people who support what you do. It's proven that people surround themselves with those who have the same fundamental ideals and this is pretty obviously a fundamental ideal in your life. Even if you did ask random people on the street, how many? Where did you find them? How did you ask them?

My point is that you are not speaking for the community of fair haven when you say that "they" think it's ugly. You are speaking for a small group of people who were likely swayed in your direction by simply Wong acquainted to you or how you answered their question.

Here's a proposal - do you REALLY want to do someone good for the community, or do you want to do something good for the tagging /street art community?

If your arguement is that this equals the gentrification of the area and that it's hurting the entire community, prove it. Put your money where your mouth is.

Maybe we make a big white empty space in the area where the pics are and ask (via a statement written on the wall) who wants to see the pics stay and who wants to see them go. Leave some markers around and wait. If the tagging community wants to make a real point to these "do gooders" their point will prevail in the form of community support for what YOU do. People will make it known and then maybe things can be reassessed.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to help a struggling community where we see young children and families along side hookers and dirty needles (something I've seen with my own eyes right around the corner from there).

Not everything is there for the tagging community and not everything is For the do gooders. If both sides can try to have a little understanding it could go a long way. 5 pointz, fame city, and others have been pretty good examples of huge support for street artists by the mainstream.

Ps - do you live in the neighborhood?? I'm just curious.

8============================D~~~~~~~

Hey Confused,

Forgive me if I am very tired of typing and explaining myself. I've been doing a lot of it. But I do want to answer some of your questions. I do live in the neighborhood, but I never claimed to speak FOR Fair Haven. I did not walk around with a clip-board to collect statistics to try and prove something. I was merely commenting that people, who actually came up to me to talk about the project, some friends, some casual acquaintances, did express a lot of the same things I was feeling. That actually did surprise me because, at first, even I thought ONLY the graffiti community cared about this. You bring up something that I think is a great idea- Devise a way for everyone around to express how they feel about the mural (including those without computer access.)

Your statement, "I know that whoever you asked was not a solid representation of the community. First, you live without a specific community of people who support what you do.", is very presumptuous. I DO live with a specific community. Not only the one I physically live in but the art community as well. You asked if I REALLy wanted to do something good or the community OR something good for the tagging/street art community. I ask you- WHY DO I HAVE TO CHOOSE???

HEY BEN,

any way we can meet earlier than 6:30pm? That's cutting it very close to my kid's bedtime.

Totally. You want to chat at 5:30 PM? If you have access to a big sheet of white paper we can totally paste it up for people to write their thoughts on the mural. That would be super cool.

cap'n
I am just going to reply to you this once more because I dont want to talk circles and I know you've explained yourself a lot already. Remember - I am truly on both sides of the fence here.

You may not have outright claimed to speak for Fair Haven but in your comment about the community hating the photos and the people walking by displaying a general dislike for it, you are somewhat giving the idea that this project was done ONLY for those who actually did it with no thought at all to the community who it was actually created for.

The comment that people came up to you to talk about the mural is almost moot in this point because you clearly said that MOST of the people were friends of acquaintances of you. It is not me assuming anything about you, it's me understanding the psychiology of visual communication and the fact that people always surround themselves with others who have the same or similar ideals. It doesn't mean that everyone you surround yourself with is a graffiti artist or active in that world, but it does mean that anyone who you question about this in your extended and immediate group of friends and acquaintances is ALWAYS going to be skewed. There is no way to know what the majority thought on this project is until you actually get a good sample from the community.

This statement: "First, you live without a specific community of people who support what you do"
Was a typo. It meant to say you live WITH a specific community of people who support what you do. That is the reason why any questions you ask of your friends and friends of friends and acquaintances will be skewed and therefor not a direct sample of the population.

So now on to the question of.. WHY DO YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE???

The answer is simple. You can't please all of the people, all of the time. Sometimes there is not a single solution that makes both sides happy. If there is, I am MORE than willing to hear it.

I am speaking to you directly because you seem to be generally speaking for the community of people who are offended by the project, which, again, I understand and respect.

Would the graffiti community be willing to accept the fact that the actual local community/neighbors prefer to see portraits of the people in the community versus tags if that were the case? What if it comes out that the writing is on the wall and actually says that they'd rather see what's there now instead of graffiti?Would the taggers concede for the greater good to the community?

You say that tagging /graffiti is a part of the community and doing away with it just causes the gentrification of an otherwise culture rich community. I tend to agree.. That doesn't mean that I feel that it is ok to go around and tag private property, personal property, or commercial property. So if you feel that tagging is such an integral part of the community as a whole, what IS the graffiti community doing to further help that? What is your group of people doing to make a stronger impact within the community that you clearly hold dear?

I am not fully prepared to accept the fact that taggers are doing the tagging for the betterment of the neighborhood. Maybe some are.. but really how many?

I think they looking to the actual neighborhood to write on the wall is the best thing to do at this point. If the neighborhood HATES it --- well then what good is it truly doing? If the neighborhood loves it, then let's work out butts off to keep it that way and keep it clean and keep it something that isn't defaced and something to be proud of.

If the community would rather have pride in a massive public, sanctioned graffiti wall, then maybe thats another step?.. We won't know until the question is asked.. But can the people who tagged it leave it up long enough to get a true look into the community without skewing the messages one way or another?

p.s. i think it would be AWESOME to take one of the big factory buildings and turn it into a 5 pointz style community of artists.. It's essentually the same thing but without the external art!!

It seems as though the SwinSuit Warehouse owners are embracing it..

When I was much younger, I tagged walls with my graffitti name, Sens....I was a kid and did dumb @#$%; there was no art to a tag, just a simple spray paint stroke with no depth, no real skill etc.
I VERY much understand the territorial side to tagging and I used to run a bit with TVT in the Bronx....
What I'm trying to say us that tagging has zero skill to it, other than a territorial name like a dog marking his territory...
Skill shows up in a "piece" a mural, not some silly tag...
Sorry, that's reality and cannot be argued for the above is a series of truisms...
I respect art very much, my mother is an established artist and quite good. I love murals, big graffiti pieces...that's where the skill comes into play!
My suggestion once again is to have a dedicated area for a mural and actual artwork....do you relly disagree to that Cap'n?

We would be happy to help out.

Closing the issue as I believe the project has been restored to something that is even better than the original work.

@#$%!

Hey capt not so obvious/confused (if you are the same),

I hear all your points and they are good ones. If I came off as sounding like I has canvased the area asking people what they thought of the mural, what I meant was in the past couple of days there has been some buzz about the tagging wherever I go, and it seems like just the beginning of finding out different peoples reactions. I'm curious to see how far out of my immediate and extended friend/acquaintance circle these reactions go. So far I've seen a bunch of comments on threads also saying the mural was a bad idea. We'll see what happens in the coming weeks. I think more people will come out to vocalize their opinions for one side or another. The dialogue is good, though. I hope it continues.

I am the same.. Sorry, changed the name.

I think that we need to know if the mural is making a difference in the community, but the biggest issue is that is the tagging community/world willing to accept that some of the updates improvements to the landscape, while erasing your tags, actually has a good effect for the community as a whole (outside of the graffiti artists / street art people).

If you really want to know how far the reaction spreads, you gotta go outside of your acquaintances (on BOTH sides) and do a proper inventory of reactions. How to do this would be left up in the air, but I strongly believe that the best option is to ask people to write on the wall in a designated area and see where it lands you. Can the taggers hang back long enough, though, to actually give the rest of the community a voice?

WJEder,

A bit tired of people who went through a "silly" tagging phase trying to tell me they understand graffiti. It's clear you do not from how you speak of it. Do I think a piece is better than a tag? Sometimes. Depends on the artist. As someone who used to tag (not sure if you have any talent for painting pieces/productions etc- maybe that's why you quit?) but as someone who used to tag, you know that tags are less sophisticated because they have to be done quickly. If you are one who believes that graffiti belongs on legal-walls only, again, I say you don't get it. PART of graffiti is reclaiming public space. Not for all graffiti artists, but for many. To say that your points about art can not be argued against because you deem them "truisms" is very self-righteous. Art can ALWAYS be debated.

Of course I would not disagree to a blank mural wall for artists to showcase their skill. That has been my point all along. Personal portraits are inviting to those involved, but not necessarily to a town that all have to look at it. A blank wall (with permission to paint) is inviting to all. A graffiti production across from the photos would have been a nice balance/compromise of urban public art.

We'll see what happens. The tagging has definitely started a conversation so I can't see it as being all bad.

I'm sick of hearing about this crap, especially since I said I don't want to get anymore emails about it!

Ok well since Ben wants to close the issue here and I feel he and I had a very positive face-to-face conversation (also its getting too tiring to keep up with retyping all my thoughts on multiple sites) I'm just going to be following the thread on the New Haven Independent's story covering the mural being tagged. Cap'n Confused, and anyone else that would like to continue this conversation I am REM on the Independent's comment thread. Thanks!

Wizwaz,
You can turn off comments on this issue by clicking the link from the email that this generates.

Hey Guys,
On a separate note I 'm going to open a new issue proposing a public art wall for Upper State and Cedar Hill.

Here's the link: http://seeclickfix.com/issues/196505

REM, would be great to get feedback from your peoples.

I'll gladly donate for a public art wall.....especially for graffiti murals....it can even be an endowment established to perpetuate funds each year for these type of projects....shoot, the new haven foundation might even fund?? Or a public grant etc. this way it's a lasting commitment that will continue year after year.

Ben - maybe you can talk to the owners of Erector Square... have our very own 5 Pointz