Subject: Re: Enforcing rules and such
From: edward kurek (esfk@mac.com)
Date: Sat Apr 28 2007 - 13:30:43 CDT
The present security system only lets us know when someone is entering or leaving. I think we should upgrade the locking system locking devices to make it more difficult to breakin. The camera system we had when the last breakin occoured didn't stop the thieves from returning.
On Saturday, April 28, 2007, at 01:10PM, "Jim Thomas" <jthomas@sun.soci.niu.edu> wrote:
>
>Robin, Michael, and others have raised some interesting points in their
>last posts. Some quick responses:
>
>1) The new digital security cameras were installed to monitor the
>premises. Anybody can access the real-time images on their tvs. This
>allows you to see who buzzes you at the lobby, who might be loitering
>by the front door, and--assuming we all tune in occasionally--if there
>is any suspicious activity in the parking areas.
>
>2) The new system became operational this week. But, neither 1P nor the
>Board sit there and monitor it. We have better things to do and this isn't
>Orwell's 1984. However, if we see dog droppings or urine that hasn't
>been cleaned up, digital playback allows going back to see who didn't
>clean it up. It also allows us to go back and check for how damage might
>occur (to parking gates, by delivery people). The system isn't use to
>spy, period! It's reactive: When something happens, we can now check it
>out.
>
>3) The belief that initial warnings were sufficient is incorrect. Since
>those warnings, people still used the front door (despite the note on it),
>and one dog did it's thing in the rear lobby. We indicated that, to
>start, we'd post the pix so that others would know there IS a continued
>problem, and to illustrate that the Board is trying to be responsive
>to continued complaints by other owners (who also pay mortgages and taxes
>and live in the our community).
>
>4) We have a faily liberal dog policy. We've upped the number of dogs
>allowed in a unit to three, and we've removed the size restriction.
>This means more dogs (a good thing). But, it also means more potential
>for dog damage (an ungood thing). The Board's obligation is to try to
>balance the rights and interests of ALL owners by pushing for some
>common ground in which we respect the rights of others. We're open
>to all suggestions about how to do this. Some people want fewer dogs
>and size limits. Others don't. We'd like to keep the dog policy is
>liberal as possible, and this requires cooperation and some give-and-take
>between dog owners and others.
>
>5) Some posters have suggested that the Board is all talk and no action on
>the dog and other issues. Then, when we devise a way to take action,
>the same posters complain that we have taken action. If there are
>suggestions about what actions could be taken, it would productive to
>share them.
>
>6) Why post pictures? None of us are comfortable with this. But, after
>some discussion, we felt that it was a better first-step than to
>start fining people. Would you rather have your picture posted or pay
>a $50 fine? We've found that appeals to reason, warnings, and the rest,
>just haven't worked. They were ignored. So, we gave what we felt was
>fair warning, and some people continued to flaunt the warnings.
>
>7) It's not fair to the overwhelming majority of dog owners when a couple
>of people flaunt policies while the majority complies. Why should one
>person bother using the rear doors when others use the front lobby
>doors with impugnity?
>
>The current Board has an advantage over previous Boards: Technology.
>The increased use of email, the homepage material, digital electronics
>and the discussion list. allow us to try to keep all owners in the loop
>and give them opportunity for feedback, as many people here are doing.
>Because not everybody can make meetings, or because they find them
>boring, people can (and do) share their ideas. In return, the Board
>tries to keep all owners informed about what's going on, to explain
>rationale for decisions, and solicit input.
>
>We urge productive criticism: If you don't like a policy, or if you
>have problems with us, share it. But, when you do, it helps if you would
>also offer a solution.
>
>Jim / Board sec'y
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jim Thomas / NIU Distinguished Teaching Professor (emeritus)
> Department of Sociology, Northern Illinois University
> jthomas@sun.soci.niu.edu / http://www.jthomasniu.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Apr 30 2008 - 00:39:24 CDT