Just a few days ago, highway signs in San Francisco were tagged so badly you couldn't even read the street names. We're not talking about some artistic mural tucked under an overpass — this was functional infrastructure rendered useless by vandals. Drivers were left squinting at exit signs like they were reading ancient hieroglyphics.

Then, almost shockingly, the graffiti was cleaned up within days.

Let's give credit where it's due. Whether it was Caltrans, the city, or some combination of agencies, the turnaround was genuinely impressive. This is what government maintenance is supposed to look like: identify the problem, fix the problem, move on. No six-month environmental review. No community listening session about the cultural significance of spray paint on a freeway sign. Just people doing the work.

But here's the thing — we shouldn't have to celebrate basic competence like it's a moon landing. The fact that fast graffiti removal feels remarkable tells you everything about the baseline expectations San Franciscans have for their local government. We pay some of the highest taxes in the country. Keeping highway signs legible isn't above and beyond — it's the bare minimum.

And let's not skip past the underlying problem. Graffiti on highway signs isn't just an eyesore — it's a safety hazard. Drivers missing exits, making last-second lane changes, or slowing down to figure out where they are creates real danger. The people who tagged those signs weren't making an artistic statement. They were putting commuters at risk.

So yes, well done to whoever dispatched the cleanup crew. Seriously. But the real question is whether this kind of responsiveness is a one-off or a new standard. San Francisco has a graffiti problem that costs taxpayers millions annually, and reactive cleanup — no matter how fast — isn't a strategy. It's a treadmill.

We'd love to see the same urgency applied to enforcement and prevention. Until then, we'll keep clapping for the bare minimum.