[IMC] [Imc-tenants] BUILDING SECURITY/DOOR LOCKING

[Mike Lehman]

Having dealt with this issue on and off myself since opening the 
building in 2005, I'll offer some insights and suggestions.

The main point of entry that has the most effect on the greatest number 
of building users is the postal lobby. In the past, it was our belief 
that this area needed 24/7 access because of postal business. I seem to 
recall that being in the purchase agreement, but not sure about our 
current lease with the PO. If it is confirmed by contact with the 
postmaster that this is no longer necessary, then we should establish 
what hours the lobby needs to be open, then reconfigure the west door so 
it can be locked when the lobby is closed.  There may need to be some 
modification of access for authorized afterhours IMC/RFU/tenant use 
there or elsewhere, but that is itself complicated by other issues that 
need resolved...

Speaking of that afterhours use, we have been very flexible about it 
with working groups and tenants. The building is zoned for business, so 
overnights in the building are already somewhat of a gray area, unless 
clearly work-related -- and not for sleeping in any case. Any use for 
sleeping, residential use of any kind -- even by tenants with a lease -- 
is forbidden (or at least it was before in IMC leases and I don't think 
that's changed). One way to deal with this would be to lock all outside 
doors on a separate key and/or central locking system so that access to 
the building is restricted to between appropriate hours. A set closed 
period each night will likely be too inflexible, so more expensive 
individualized access with likely be needed if going that route.

Obviously, since the building has to provide for fire exit 24/7, people 
can stay in the building, then let people in afterhours. A security 
system tied to building access may not initially avoid that, but it will 
quickly allow identification of those responsible. So would having that 
system handle keys as access cards, which would log building entry 
individually and allow deactivation of access when no longer authorized 
. So would 24/7 video-recording on the entry/exit doors. Some of these 
solutions probably go beyond what IMC folks are comfortable with -- and 
all will cost money -- but after almost a decade, I think it's starting 
to come down to what we must do, if the problem can't be solved by other 
less intrusive means.

Most of these problems can be attributed to those with authorized IMC 
access permitting others who do not into the building afterhours. Some 
of it may be innocent oversights, but it's been too consistent a pattern 
over the years if it's still going on now to really be "innocent" 
oversights at this point.  It's also a problem which can be 
comprehensively solved with authroized users cooperation without 
spending tons of money on security systems.

I completely understand we have member/tenants who believe that they 
must help those in need, regardless of the consequences. Perhaps there 
finally need to be consequences for such abusive behavior toward the IMC 
and its members and tenants, though? In each and every case where 
someone does this, they are personally responsible for any thing these 
unauthorized folks are up to, because they are also compromising the 
efforts of the IMC to provide a secure, safe building even if these 
people turn out to be trustworthy. They've likely always told themselves 
these folks let in are trustworthy, but given what's been going on, 
their judgment on this is seriously flawed.

One thing's for sure if you are letting folks into the building 
overnight...You should brief them that it's a really bad idea to be 
pushing their unauthorized behavior/presence so far that people feel 
they're getting to the point of threatening to call law enforcement on 
them. We're generally folks who prefer more peaceful ways to resolve 
conflict. But people that stupid clearly aren't thinking of resolving 
their problem of nighttime accommodation by acting in that sort of 
reasonable manner towards others surprised and disturbed by their 
presence at odd hours. And it's exactly how many blocks to the cop 
shop...? Yeah, 2 blocks.

Some may bristle at the term abusive, but that's what in fact letting 
unauthorized folks into the building overnight is. Such use compromises 
the security of all other users of the building, as well as putting the 
IMC at risk as an organization. Discussions with them in the past seemed 
to bring results (I'm not going to name names here, but will for the BoD 
if requested). That may work or may lead to the same promises of change, 
but lack of it (hey, we've got a president in DC for that)  we've 
received before. Fact is, it's a violation of their leases and grounds 
for termination of their lease on terms that will be unfavorable to 
them. I'd hate to think that it comes down to eviction as our solution 
for dealing with society's problems of homelessness. Continuance of 
existing patterns of abuse will likely mandate such eviction, especially 
if we want to try to avoid more generally expensive and intrusive 
measures such as 24/7 video surveillance of controlled building 
entrances. Those responsible need to seriously consider whether that's 
what they intend to happen by allowing such access.

Russell,
The suggestions below are mostly a guide to things you could likely do 
now, while you await further guidance on whether more robust measures 
are needed.

I think your strategy of coming by during the night at random to assess 
the situation and provide info on what's going on is a good first step, 
although obviously a hassle for you. I think it would be a good idea if 
others can support you in this. Maybe some others are up overnight and 
could assist? I'm a victim of several sleeping disorders that often 
leave me being up at odd hours. I may just start dropping by myself at 
random overnight when I can't sleep, because coming in and wandering the 
halls I've been down 100s of times will make me sleepy eventually -- and 
being so close it would be easy to drop by and do exactly that...and 
pass along to those who need to know what I find.

In fact, I'd suggest that anyone other than Russell who encounters 
issues such as these to communicate them -offlist- to him, Carol, the 
BoD, or whoever they think is most appropriate to let know (for 
instance, B2P or other tenants may want someone within their own smaller 
group notified and then that person is the point person on this issue to 
represent the group higher up in the IMC food chain). I think we'll then 
have an even better idea of what's happening if more people are involved 
and there are more facts documented and less rumor when things happen.

Another helpful thing would be to clearly establish what times each 
entrance is supposed to be locked, and have that clearly posted by each 
entrance. You'll likely have to check with Carol and/or the BoD on what 
those hours should be. It wouldn't surprise me if no one even knows what 
the open vs locked hours should be based on legitimate use, so that'll 
be the first step to officially establish in any case. That way, when 
unlocked doors are encountered, people will know that it SHOULD be 
locked based on the signage.  It should be posted on BOTH side of the 
door. Then they can use their key to lock it immediately if found 
unlocked when it shoudn't be. This will also help frustrate some of the 
abuses I've noted above with doors being left purposefully or 
irresponsibly unlocked to facilitate unauthorized access until that 
situation sorts itself out. Please note that this suggestion is NOT 
about restricting what hours people can be in the building for currently 
authorized use, but simply about which doors will be locked and when.
Mike Lehman

On 1/22/2013 9:24 AM, Barry Todd wrote:
> Russell,
> Very correct, I had to run someone out on Sunday.  They wouldn't leave 
> until I actually called the police.
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Russell Barnes <gomanlevel8 at aol.com 
> <mailto:gomanlevel8 at aol.com>> wrote:
>
>     GOOD MORNING,
>
>     WE HAVE A VERY SERIOUS SECURITY PROBLEM. COMPLAINTS OF HOMELESS
>     INDIVIDUALS IN THE BUILDING. IMC EMPLOYEES, TENANTS HAVE BEEN
>     LEAVING MAJOR DOORS UNLOCK THAT HAS ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE BUILDING.
>     I LOCK DOORS AS I GO THROUGH THEM FOR SECURITY REASONS.
>
>     EVERYDAY I COME TO WORK I FIND HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS IN THE
>     BUILDING. I HAVE EVEN FOUND THEM UPSTAIRS (2ND FLOOR) IN THE BREAK
>     ROOM. THEY HAVE ALSO BEEN IN THE BASEMENT. I AM TRYING SOLVE THIS
>     PROBLEM BY COMING IN TO WORK AT 2AM, 3AM,4AM. I EVEN COME BACK AT
>     VARIOUS TIMES AT NIGHT TO RELOCK DOORS THAT HAVE BEEN LEFT OPEN.
>
>     WE NEED TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM IMMEDIATELY.
>
>
>     RUSSELL BARNES
>     BUILDING MAINTENACE
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/imc/attachments/20130122/310a1130/attachment.html>