Good Evening Mr. TJ,
Since you seem to be someone who is eager to help make Jefferson a better place to live for residents, we thought that we would engage you to ask if you could please post the below message on your blog. We have been struggling to get management to respond to and work with us when we have questions or concerns about the building. We are very disappointed.
We plan to distribute the below message throughout the building in the appropriate spaces (where management already has signage posted), but we were hoping you would please help us out by posting the below message on your blog as well.
We appreciate your time and attention dedicated to helping make the Jefferson a better place for the residents.
Best,
Concerned Residents
-----------
Fellow Residents of the Jefferson at Capitol Yards:
Do you feel like management is treating your guests as suspects just for entering the building? Do you feel like management’s Guest Policy is an attempt to create the illusion of security without management having to pay the cost of creating real security? Have you ever felt harassed or embarrassed as a result of the policy requiring escorted guests to present photo IDs to management?
The Jefferson at Capitol Yards is our home, and we shouldn’t be made to feel this way.
•Management says requiring photo IDs from escorted guests “is reasonable and an industry standard.” Have you ever lived in, visited, or even heard of another residential building that requires escorted guests to present a photo ID to management?
•Management says “All the High-rise communities in our market require similar information at entry to their building.” The Axiom, right next door and managed by the same company does not have a “photo ID required” sign at their front entrance, so why do we? Why do our friends that live there say that their escorted guests have NEVER been asked to present an ID or even sign in?
•Management has a video camera recording the front door 24 hours a day and requires residents to escort all of their guests into the building. Why, then, can they not identify a guest and his/her host from this video if there is a problem?
•The concierge frequently does not enforce the ID policy while they are at the desk. The concierge is also frequently away from the desk. And guests can avoid the front desk area altogether by entering through the parking garage. Given that their “ID required” policy is easily circumvented, wouldn’t hiring a security guard be a more logical solution?
•What happens if you have a guest from out of town and their wallet is stolen? Under this policy, they would have to go to a hotel.
•Management has repeatedly threatened that “If you do not follow the policy, if/when you do have guest over we will send our Courtesy Officer to have them removed…” How do they intend to “remove” guests from our private homes against their will? We have asked management this question, and they have not responded.
It's clear that management has not thought this policy through. Let's help them figure out ways to improve security without undue burden on residents and their guests. We're planning to do everything we can to challenge this unreasonable, invasive, and ineffective rule. But we need your help.
Please take TWO MINUTES to email us TWO TO THREE SENTENCES at jefferson.tenants@gmail.com to tell us:
•Your feelings on the policy requiring IDs from escorted guests.
•A ridiculous situation that arose from management’s unreasonable enforcement of this policy.
•Your support for our efforts to get this policy changed.
*NOTE ON ANONYMITY: All identifying information will be removed from emails before they are seen by management.
**NOTICE TO MANAGEMENT: This message has been posted throughout the building for the purpose of organizing tenants. Please do not remove or alter as the rights of tenants to organize protected under DC law (§ 42-3505.06)**
Dear Concerned Residents.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not disagree with you, and while I think that this whole matter has been handled poorly by a management team who has been neither creative nor has thought the situation out thoroughly, I do want to remind you that this policy was put into action because of some of the knuckle-headed tenants in the building who let all manner of people in here, and who seem to have no regard for anyone else other than themselves. The final straw were a couple violent and scary incidents that could have easily been a lot worse.
We'd better find a happy medium and fast because this situation is getting out of hand.
I think there are two types of people bothered by this policy. Those who want to pack the place with friends to party with, and those who abide by the rules, cause no trouble, and see no reason why they should be treated like children.
To further complicate matters, the responsibility is dumped on some poor sole at the concierge desk, who is probably working for near minimum wage, and who must take the wrath of every angry tenant and non-tenant in the building. That isn't fair to them at all and probably gets pretty scary on a regular basis. The worst case scenario could end with one of them getting seriously hurt or worse. perhaps this is whey we seem to be going through lots of them.
You know what I do when someone asks me or my guest for our ID? I show it to them, and then I go on my merry way. It takes all of a minute.
It's ridiculous that a building like this has these kinds of problems.
Management needs to be more selective about who they rent to. I know all about the leasing laws so please don't use that as an excuse. You can be a little more or a little less "encouraging" when interviewing the potential tenant without discriminating against anyone. I think the real problem is the type of tenant that the building envisions as their ideal tenant.
Perhaps it's also time tenants in the building not put up with some of the garbage that happens around here. When someone is blowing the doors off their apartment on a regular basis, maybe there should be a tenant group that can respond and say OH NO YOU DON'T! That would make them think twice.
I agree that this is not the most convenient way to enter a building, but acting like children results in getting treated as such, even though not everyone in this building is part of the problem.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that more needs to be done in terms of security and enforcing building policies. However, I consider the ID check of escorted guests a step in that direction, and don't mind it at all. It is for our own safety,what is the big problem with taking a minute to do this?
A suggestion: It would be nice to have controlled access mechanisms on elevators and staircase doors, as many buildings in this area do.
I was furious when I had guests chased down by concierge when we spent nearly 10 minutes explaining to Katrina that our guests had left their ID's upstairs (my husband and I had gone to a baseball game). We felt harassed and embarrassed in front of our guests.
ReplyDeleteAnother time I saw an entire group of people walk right past Katrina - she did nothing to stop them, so why me and my husband and our two guests? Furthermore, we were escorting our guests in, its not as though they walked in alone without residents.
I also have been witness to concierge harassing RESIDENTS who live here to show id. Really??
This rule is absurd and borders on harassment.
I agree that concierge is put in a dangerous position, so if our building is THAT dangerous, and if me and my husband and our guests are THAT suspicious, then call 911!
Management needs to pull it together. Period.
I was shocked to learn all of these rules when I moved in. These rules were not communicated to me during my tour of the building, nor were they stated in my lease. This was complete false advertising on behalf of management and needs to be escalated.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, if this rule stated above is true, if management sends ANYONE to remove my guests by a “Courtesy Officer” I will call 911 and report malicious tenant treatment.
Tenants should NOT be punished, the people that are breaking the law should be.
There is no way those signs stay up in the elevators. The leasing office has to take prospective tenants into the elevators, and they will not want them to see something like that.
ReplyDeleteWe have to have escorted guests show ID? I saw the sign but thought that applied to delivery people, not guests. This is the rule-a-day apartment. I haven't had a guest over in a while, but if I did I wouldn't have an escorted guest show an ID - whats the point of escorting them? So I have to go to the trouble to go down and get them and also sign them in and show ID? No way.
ReplyDeleteI think it is sad that people lay all this on people in the office instead of where the responsibility really is and that is with the people who live here and act like they just got out of school and haven't matured enough to know how to act.
ReplyDeleteI personally like that there is a policy where I have to come and get my guest instead of people just showing up at my door unexpected that I may not want here.
I haven't had too much to talk to the people in the office about but when I have the people that were there seemed kind enough. Maybe it is the way some of you approach them or just life in general. A lot of you just seem like very unhappy people who look for something to complain about.
If I'm escorting a guest, I am NOT going to have them show an ID. That's ridiculous. I haven't noticed a sign at the front. Agree with the comment above - if its that bad then call 911, hire a 24 hour guard, and implement security measures on all entry/exit's in the building. But I think the leasing people need to do a better job screening people. This isn't a frat house or jail, this is our home.
ReplyDeletemy thoughts on it:
ReplyDelete1) when i moved in this was NOT the policy. i'm not sure i would have moved in if it was.
2) my key to the front door has stopped working about 4 times in one weekend. i'm really glad the conceirge was rude about it and harassed me suggesting i wasn't a resident and maybe i should wait until monday. (my ID does not show the jefferson's address)
3) i like when the conceirge is distracted (particularly around 5-6pm with the packages) and we can bring in whomever we want w/out getting questioned. this is also the case when a more rowdy group walks ahead of you.
4) isn't it interesting that anyone can come up thru the parking garage and not have to sign-in? or be escorted for that matter?
your "be more selective about who to rent to" policy is nothing but discrimination. You can't say you don't want to discriminate and then say they should be more or less encouraging to certain people. That's the definition of discrimination (based solely on age, race or appearance). It's illegal and it should be. They don't want to discriminate because it's wrong, illegal, bad business and they could be punished. Your logic of "they should only rent to people like me" and "the only way anyone should be allowed to enjoy this place is the way that I want to enjoy" it is wrong and insulting.
ReplyDeleteI am a PhD student in the area and live here with my girlfriend. I was in a fraternity, and she was in a sorority. We have been respectful, quiet tenants who have never had a problem with management. We occasionally have friends over for baseball games, or before going out. We are exactly the type of people that your policy would discourage from renting here, but have been good, respectful, and profitable tenants for JCY.
Yes, there are problems with people, some people drink too much and are too loud, but that's impossible to tell by 2 meetings when you're trying to lease the place.
Oh my god. This is just sad. Unfortunately management will likely not address any of the issues put before them. Good effort Concerned Residents.
ReplyDeletePerson who posted on Oct 6 at 2:51pm -- take a look at the other posts. And get real. Management is doing a piss poor job and needs to do a better job at customer service. I applaud the tenants who voice their opinions against bad service and dumb rules that don't serve a purpose.
ReplyDeletePeople seemed kind enough?? Is that a joke?! Have you not read the post below about how Melanie blew off a preg womans request to host a baby shower? Clearly you don't live in this building or you'd have something different to say. As soon as I signed my lease that leasing office shut me out! It's a chop shop they're running. Unqualified and down right bad leasing office.
ReplyDeleteI think there is something to be said for the folks here trying to have a voice and alleviate some of the issues that make them feel uncomfortable or unhappy as tenants here at the Jefferson.
ReplyDeleteOrganizing tenants is a way in which to address these issues and complaints in a respective, productive and active manner.
What we've read here, and received via email, is a number of messages from concerned and frustrated tenants. We hope that our efforts to organize tenants will result in much needed change on a number of issues.
That's an uncalled for generalization about the people having issues. The main problem I see is that they are understaffed for managing these three buildings properly, and haven't really thought about some of the policies they've put in place; the ID issue is only one of them. Another one is that the leasing agents are just that: leasing agents. When you have a serious request, they're powerless to make any decisions, so they just tell you to take it up with the property manager. Who is either "working on budgets", has the day off, or is at another property. This implies to me that there's one property manager for all three of these JPI buildings, which is simply not enough.
ReplyDeleteI'd gladly pay a little more rent if this community was run like it is marketed.
Agree with snakegriffin. Seems like a broad statement to say that concerned tenants voicing opinions, complaints, and suggestions have "issues". This isn't a socialist community, or is it....
ReplyDeleteWho used the "issues" in this thread?
ReplyDeleteDFT, did you just play the Commie card? ;)
I like the check-in policy...I have no problems alerting my guests beforehand about having their id (really, who doesn't carry id nowadays?)...and think it's appropriate given the level of disrespect of some tenants to others and the building. I FULLY SUPPORT THE POLICY! Those who don't should buy a house and then have whomever they want to come over at will ;-)
ReplyDeleteI've lived in DC for years in several buildings and never had to sign in an escorted guest, ever. The sign at the front door and the badgering from concierge to have people show IDs is ridiculous. And if a guest of mine doesn't have an ID (like if my friend in the Axiom comes over and doesn't bring her purse) I refuse to 1) let concierge not allow my ESCORTED guest in the building, 2) make my friend go get her ID, 3) allow a "courtesy officer" to escort my guest out of my unit. This is absurd, humiliating, unnecessary, and btw, doesn't solve the problem! I refuse - I repeat - REFUSE to have my guests treated like criminals. Shame on you management for imposing these rules on us.
ReplyDeleteYeah I had family over a few weekends ago and they found the policy very intrusive. I don't think escorted guests should have to do this. It does feel like entering jail and made my mom feel as though the building must be really unsafe-she was really uncomfortable. It got worse when every time she entered the building she was made to show her ID - she was annoyed and concerned at that point. It's just a really intrusive process. I would attend a buildin meeting to resolve this issue.
ReplyDeleteThink issues was implied from the comment that read "A lot of you just seem like very unhappy people who look for something to complain about." That was pretty offensive. We aren't unhappy people, we're unhappy about the building issues.
ReplyDeleteCheers to DFT! Because we're concerned about our living quarters doesn't make us unhappy. I have lots to be happy about! :)
ReplyDeleteFrankly, when I post cheery or informative things on the blog they don't get much response. People really aren't interested in things like "doesn't the coffee smell great when walking out in the morning?" or McFlurries are back at McDonald's!!
People are interested in the issues that concern them in the building, When this blog falls silent, it will be because all is swell in Pleasantville...or because I dropped dead. :(
Hi neighbors,
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to give some of you a chance to view the visitor policy from a different perspective. This is a free country. We are fortunate that we can live wherever we choose. I chose to live in this building in part because of the strict visitor policy. What if you were in a situation where someone was threatening, stalking or harassing you - someone who posed a physical menace to you and your family? What if it was your sister or friend who needed protection from an unstable ex-boyfriend or ex-husband? You never know what people have going on in their lives - but if you ever found yourself in such a situation, you'd probably be relieved to know that there is a community you can live in where your safety is a priority. We show our ID's when we board a plane, a federal building, or even go out to a club or buy a beer at a restaurant? So what's wrong with showing it to the conceirge in the building we all call home - a home that we would like to be safe and secure in? The policy was designed with our safety in mind. And I for one am grateful. If you or your friends don't like it, you can always find another place to live and your friends can find somewhere else to party on a Friday night. Or, for the sake of the greater good, you can take a deep breath, be a big boy or girl and play by the rules.
Have to say, most of the problems seem to be comin from just a few people and their guests. I happen to have never seen these people, just heard of them. I like my neighbors and the people I've met in the building and think its pretty lame that we all get punished for what a few other people did. Management has done a pretty bad job at creating a community feel. It seems very dictator-like -- they force rules they think will help without even asking. And from what I have read, it seems a lot of folks aren't aware of these rules until the come face-to-face with them, are angered, and the anger and confusion doesn't seem to be properly addressed. This is a big problem. Management will run the good tenants out (and it seems they have/will) if they don't start shaping up. I've heard it a few times - its like a jail here. Good, hardworking tenants are being ignored and punished and its just wrong.
ReplyDeleteDude, Thomas Jefferson, save the blog, don't let it fall silent.
The postings above are a couple of well reasoned posts. I do see the value of having a checkpoint to insure everyone's safety and the anonymous poster at 11:28 made some excellent points, none with which I disagree.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I do see the opposite position as being very valid and I agree completely that it is only a few holding the rest of us hostage. And that seems unfair.
So, it seems to my tiny little brain that the answer to this problem revolves around addressing the tenants that seem to think this is a dorm. I don't blame them...it kinda looks a little like a dorm...but as we all know, this building is home to many people.
In management's defense the District is extremely tenant friendly and it's not so easy to toss a person out of their home. However, Greystar is a large company with a LOT of experience tossing people out of their apartments, so I'm sure they have the loopholes covered.
So what is a tenant to do? Frankly I'm getting real sad reading peoples letters about their experience here being a negative one. It's no fun to pick up and move, especially if you have some major changes in your life such as the birth of a child or unexpected unemployment.
Like any business, an apartment building can't help but take on the personalities of the people who run them. How many of us have had a dysfunctional boss that creates a weird environment throughout the company.
Accordingly, this building's character is reflected directly by:
1. the management company (Greystar)
2. the regional manager
3. the building manager
then as we know...
4. The building whack jobs
I don't want to call Melanie out, because I'm sure she's a nice person, but a lot of people seemingly direct their anger at her, so.... Melanie...maybe let's try to change the culture here to a friendlier more egalitarian environment. Couldn't hurt, could it?
YOU HAVE THE POWER!
Anonymous poster. I think you’re missing the point. No one wants anyone to be able to waltz right in, so in that case, making UNescorted guests show ID is appropriate. But, this post is in regards to having escorted guests show ID -different story.
ReplyDeleteI think I can assume you wouldn’t escort your stalker in the building, correct? And from what I can see, people can’t enter the building unless they are escorted or have a key. And if someone does sneak in, we have cameras. So having escorted guests go through a rigid check-in process is over-the-top and unnecessary.
Your comment is offensive and insulting. We’re adults here and we’re being treated like children, period.
I think you’re making an AWFULLY presumptuous statement stating “If you or your friends don't like it, you can always find another place to live and your friends can find somewhere else to party on a Friday night. Or, for the sake of the greater good, you can take a deep breath, be a big boy or girl and play by the rules.”
Other people’s problems shouldn’t be my problems, and management is making other peoples bad behavior my problem – this isn’t fair and this isn’t solving the situation. It’s making it worse.
I don’t think anyone here is saying no rules, just reasonable ones that don’t make tenants feel as though their being inconvenienced or punished.
Personally, what strikes me most is that is seems that many tenants posting here have had varying experiences with how management communicates these rules. Personally, these rules/policies were never disclosed to me when I signed my lease, when I moved in, or for the duration of my living here – this is odd.
We can’t have a secret society of rule-making by management. We can’t have rules and policies put in place that are affecting tenants comfort level in the building. But most of all, we can’t have management/leasing that isn’t transparent and shoots out ad-hoc and ill-planned policies.
Anonymous poster, please think before you write. Your generalizations aren’t productive to solving the issues here. You’re essentially throwing sand in the tenants eyes.
And if I may be so bold to say, I think it's management that is making these "anonymous" posts about supporting the policy. Just saying.
I vote for more transparency, better communication, and fair rules.
POWER TO THE TENANTS!
Whoa DFT! Let's play nice. Everyone is entitled to their opinions here and frankly, I think it's good that everyone is heard regardless of their points.
ReplyDeleteI think that's in line with your program, right?
BTW, I've gotten many posts over the years that are obviously from the management, but I think I've gotten pretty good at spotting them. that doesn't mean I call them out each time. ;) Just sayin'.
Anonymous (11:28am):
ReplyDeleteI want to say first that I do very much respect the fact that other residents may have different feelings about the policies in our building. But I think we all share your concern for security, and it seems that we may just disagree about how increased security is best achieved.
At a past apartment building, I was a victim of burglary. Now, I live with my girlfriend who is not much more than 100 pounds and there is nothing more important to me than her safety. So I, too, am very concerned about security in our community.
Just to clarify, I don't think anyone here is suggesting that we should have an open access policy for visitors. I for one am more than happy to come down to the front door to escort all of my guests in because I recognize the value of that--it ensures that everyone coming in is a welcomed guest of another resident.
What I think a lot of people don't understand is how "carding" invited guests makes us any safer. Most of the situations you describe seem to be ones in which a threat is posed by someone in the building that was not invited or escorted by any resident. In that respect I think the ID policy actually hurts security because, it seems to me, asking a single person to check IDs of all guests in a 900-person apartment complex is unrealistic. I think the fact that this is an impossible and, I’m sure, exhausting task is probably the reason that the concierge is often away from the desk or staring down into the computer screen as people flow through the doors (many of whom “tailgate” in, never present their key, and may or may not be residents).
So as I said at the top, I do respect your viewpoint, and whatever resolution we come to (assuming management eventually accepts input from residents), it’s important to me that you feel safe and comfortable as well. The thing is, I am almost certain that there IS a solution that will make us both happy! And it frustrates me to no end that management does not seem to want to have a conversation about measures that would provide real security, like securing the parking garage or hiring a security guard.
I have lived in the building for a little over a year now and I would have to say that, despite the maturity level of some of the tenants, I have been pretty happy overall. This is the first time I have been on this blog and, while many of the comments caught my attention, this discussion surprised me. I for one like the policy of requiring guests to sign in and show their IDs. The original comment in this post was surprising and it makes a number of assumptions that I disagree with.
ReplyDeleteIt is suggested that the policy of requiring guests to sign in and show their IDs is an “undue burden” and is “unreasonable, invasive, and ineffective.” Really? Let’s break that down.
Is the policy really “unreasonable?” It takes less than a minute and requires guests to write their name and show their IDs (it’s not like they are being asked to fill out an information form and do a retinal scan).
Is the policy “invasive” or, as the comment suggested “embarrassing?” I have no intention of offending anyone so I apologize if this is blunt, but I have trouble imagining the difficulty someone must face on a regular basis if they are embarrassed because they have to sign their guests in and ask them to show ID. We are asked to show our IDs in a myriad of everyday situations, and I fail to see why showing your ID to enter a “secure” building is embarrassing. My friends have never thought twice about signing in and I doubt they feel embarrassed when I have to show my ID to get into their building (they live at the Axiom by the way which has always required them to sign me in when I visit). Also, I would think that a security guard constantly posted at the front, as was suggested above, would cause more embarrassment than showing IDs.
Is the policy “ineffective?” This is the strongest argument in the comment above, but I think it misses the point. A policy is not “ineffective” just because it doesn’t work 100% of the time. I agree that it could probably be better, but that does not mean this policy is “ineffective.” If someone signs their guests in and their guests decide to throw bottles off of the roof, or vomit in the entryway, at least management has a name (which was verified by the showing of ID) and the residents responsible for that guest can be held accountable.
Finally, no one is required to live in the building. If the policy is horribly offensive there are other buildings in the city that do not have a similar policy (although it was wrong to suggest that no other buildings in the city do). I’m not saying “take it or leave it.” If people have strong suggestions for alternatives they should offer them, although I think if people are going to expend energy on something it should be more important than the check in policy. Maybe concerned residents should ask management to impose an alcohol policy or do other things that could have the potential to stop the “bad” residents from acting like college frat kids.
Anyway, that is just my view. Thanks to TJ for maintaining this blog!
Just a quick note, I do live in Axiom, and this policy exists here as well, and has existed for quite a bit.
ReplyDeleteThanks DC603.
ReplyDeleteGood to have the folks at Axiom checking in. Spread the word!