Subject: Re: First Properties - Time for a change?
From: Jim Thomas (jthomas@sun.soci.niu.edu)
Date: Thu Oct 27 2005 - 18:19:10 CDT
I won't respond to this specific post publicly (but will respond more
generally there to try to reduce the heat).
Michael wrote:
> I'm open to constructive criticism, and am usually genuinely
> appreciative of Jim's comments--even when negative--because he backs
> them up with ideas, improvements, etc. However, in this case I simply
> feel we are being named the scapegoat for incidents that are completely
> beyond our control.
I've responded to Michael privately to explain my intentionally strident
post. I'll summarize it here:
1) My point is quite simple: A bit of communication goes a long way.
It's not the 1P is responsible for solving problems (I'm in full agreement
with Michael on this). It's that we should be kept informed by 1P.
2) As I've explained in the past, and my position hasn't changed, I'm
quite happy with 1P as property manager, and despite my flame, I would
oppose any attempt to switch. So why the flame?
3) Calmness didn't seem to work. A shot across Loretta's bow to remind her
that lack of communication reflects badly on 1P, and as the front-line
rep for 1P, she can do wonders to smooth things.
I'm just repeating here what I've said before, but what will "fix" it?
1) a direct answer to questions. In his previous post, Michael correctly
notes that he gave me the "official position" on locks. But, Loretta's
one-liner subverted Michael's clarity. A clearer, more responsive response
would have helped. Others have also asked public questions that have gone
unaddressed. What makes 1P look good is NOT that they solve problems,
but that they share information promptly and clearly (and publicly).
2) I recognize that Loretta is new and is still getting a feel for the
job. Sadly, she stepped into the hornet's nest. It might help if she
shot out an email asking for suggestions on how she can "serve our needs"
and to keep an open channel of communication, even to us curmudgeons.
3) Specifically: Some of information could be clarified and shared
more directly. Examples:
a) Jenny's query about the carpet. Delays happen, things slip through
the cracks, and so it goes. Usually, all it takes is a short "hey, there's
a delay; expect carpets replaced in January because termites changed the
blue to red." We can live with glitches. We just like to know the score
(white sox 1, Houston 0)
b) Amit and Dish: How about a response to him explaining status of
suit (if it's still in process), or at least let him know he's not being
ignored. 1P can't fix this. It can, however, symbolize concern. (I'm among
the apparently huge minority quite happy with Dish/Roddy/Solius, so I
can't complain). It would be nice, however, to know what's happening.
b) The confusion over the police reports and Georgeann's info. If 1P
has info to share, one way or the other, it might reduce rumors, fears,
and such.
c) A specific answer to my "double bolts" question (I think Michael
sent his earlier response me privately--I'd have to check).
d) Letting Loretta know (Michael) that most of us are on her side,
even when ranting. We *want* to work together. I've indicated to Loretta
that communication matters, but received nothing indicating that there's
agreement.
My suggestion: 1P, the Board, and the residents could share responsibility
for increasing communication on mutual concerns.
Hope this helps clarify things.
Jim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jan 19 2006 - 16:56:08 CST