Bowser urges Biden to end telework policies for federal workers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

It's a chicken and egg issue. Homelessness has gone up as many businesses that used to employ people on the lower end of the economic spectrum have gone out of business or reduced their staffing. One reason those businesses are struggling is the loss of the commuter workforce into the city every day. This leads to more homelessness, more tent cities. That makes parts of the city less pleasant to be in, which further harms the businesses currently operating. Increasing homelessness and decreasing business activity causes more crime. Crime is already up due to school closures which left a lot of MS and HS students at loose ends. Now those kids are 3 years older and there are fewer job opportunities for them due to telework and increasing crime. So they are more incentivized to commit crime. Meanwhile, the city is losing tax revenue from both loss of businesses and people leaving the city due to telework and rising crime. Meaning less money for both police and social services that might disrupt the increase criminality, especially among young people.

Bike lanes are irrelevant to this conversation, and there's genuine demand for bike lanes among city residents -- that's honestly a different conversation that doesn't have a ton to do with federal telework. I know you think bike lanes have substantively worsened commute times into the city, but the data doesn't back this up -- the city part of most commute has sped up do to a reduction in overall commuting, and the time increases have occurred on and surrounding the beltway, as teleworking employees are moving within suburbs more throughout the day instead of simply driving into and out of the city.

Anyway, you can't just magically solve homelessness, clean up the tent cities, and fix crime while the economy is floundering due to losing tens of thousands of consumers who used to come into the city daily. That's the whole point. I don't even like Bowser, but the loss of workers to telework and the hundreds of large office buildings now sitting idle in the middle of the city are in fact a major problem, and if something could be done to address them, it will actually enable the city to do more to combat homelessness and crime.

[Anonymous]

Bot up as much of the federal workforce as possible and then fire everyone else. Or better, build offices in International Falls Mn and El Paso and transfer all of them there, stat. Good riddance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The most fair thing would be to force the federal government to pay municipal taxes on vacant or severely underutilized office buildings. An enormous amount of DC's commercial real estate foot print is owned by the feds and is tax free. It's very limiting. If those buildings are full of federal workers whose presence leads to lots of businesses popping up to serve them, it kind of evens out. If those buildings are entirely or mostly empty, it doesn't.

If the feds had to pay vacant property taxes on empty or mostly empty buildings, they would either force people back into offices or sell the buildings.

From an economic standpoint, you don't even have to take a side here on anything -- not telework, or whether Bowser is entitled to ask for anything. The buildings are underutilized. Maximize their utility. You can do that by making them a source of tax revenue, selling them to organizations who will fill them with people, or sending federal workers back to the office. The one option that makes no economic sense is keeping the buildings as they are, tax free, but not using them. It's a waste of both city and federal resources.

The “equitable solution” is what exactly? Should they pay tax to DC on Federal parkland too? I am not sure that you understand what a Federal system of government means.

GSA manages 174 federally owned buildings and 114 leased buildings in DC. Every one of those leased buildings pays property tax to the District of Columbia. Is that “equitable” enough for you?

[Anonymous]

The only way to get people to live and work in DC is by law because it sucks

[Anonymous]

It's not just office space that is the issue though. It's all the business that were supported by the people who were using those office spaces.

It's definitely a hit to the economy but after the first year of telework, Bowser should have started making plans based on the feds not returning. It's going to be a difficult change for sure but in reality a stronger argument can be made that the federal government release office space and not continue to consume expensive office space when it doesn't have to because it costs the tax player money - or at least that is the message that could get conveyed.

That's not to say there aren't other businesses that might not want to move into DC but to do so they need less expensive leases. And Bowser's beef would then be the building owners to take steps to make reasonable leased space available.

Turning office space to residential isn't always easy apparently so that might prove more costly.

Another good use of unused space and less costly conversion - day care space. Of course that would require a less expensive lease to make providers want to enter the market but if you consider that the Feds are one of those providers then if buildings were willing to convert floors to useable child care spaces at their expense , and not increase rents, then more Federal centers could open.

Or even DC govt could get into the child care business by getting the same deal for themselves or even getting cheaper leases.

Just begging people to come back to office buildings isn't going to work at this point. The ship has sailed and she needs to look in a new direction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

It's a chicken and egg issue. Homelessness has gone up as many businesses that used to employ people on the lower end of the economic spectrum have gone out of business or reduced their staffing. One reason those businesses are struggling is the loss of the commuter workforce into the city every day. This leads to more homelessness, more tent cities. That makes parts of the city less pleasant to be in, which further harms the businesses currently operating. Increasing homelessness and decreasing business activity causes more crime. Crime is already up due to school closures which left a lot of MS and HS students at loose ends. Now those kids are 3 years older and there are fewer job opportunities for them due to telework and increasing crime. So they are more incentivized to commit crime. Meanwhile, the city is losing tax revenue from both loss of businesses and people leaving the city due to telework and rising crime. Meaning less money for both police and social services that might disrupt the increase criminality, especially among young people.

Bike lanes are irrelevant to this conversation, and there's genuine demand for bike lanes among city residents -- that's honestly a different conversation that doesn't have a ton to do with federal telework. I know you think bike lanes have substantively worsened commute times into the city, but the data doesn't back this up -- the city part of most commute has sped up do to a reduction in overall commuting, and the time increases have occurred on and surrounding the beltway, as teleworking employees are moving within suburbs more throughout the day instead of simply driving into and out of the city.

Anyway, you can't just magically solve homelessness, clean up the tent cities, and fix crime while the economy is floundering due to losing tens of thousands of consumers who used to come into the city daily. That's the whole point. I don't even like Bowser, but the loss of workers to telework and the hundreds of large office buildings now sitting idle in the middle of the city are in fact a major problem, and if something could be done to address them, it will actually enable the city to do more to combat homelessness and crime.

Bike lanes are not irrelevant if they are not increasing business in downtown DC, which is what proponents claim they are supposed to do because of “dozens of studies”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

It's a chicken and egg issue. Homelessness has gone up as many businesses that used to employ people on the lower end of the economic spectrum have gone out of business or reduced their staffing. One reason those businesses are struggling is the loss of the commuter workforce into the city every day. This leads to more homelessness, more tent cities. That makes parts of the city less pleasant to be in, which further harms the businesses currently operating. Increasing homelessness and decreasing business activity causes more crime. Crime is already up due to school closures which left a lot of MS and HS students at loose ends. Now those kids are 3 years older and there are fewer job opportunities for them due to telework and increasing crime. So they are more incentivized to commit crime. Meanwhile, the city is losing tax revenue from both loss of businesses and people leaving the city due to telework and rising crime. Meaning less money for both police and social services that might disrupt the increase criminality, especially among young people.

Bike lanes are irrelevant to this conversation, and there's genuine demand for bike lanes among city residents -- that's honestly a different conversation that doesn't have a ton to do with federal telework. I know you think bike lanes have substantively worsened commute times into the city, but the data doesn't back this up -- the city part of most commute has sped up do to a reduction in overall commuting, and the time increases have occurred on and surrounding the beltway, as teleworking employees are moving within suburbs more throughout the day instead of simply driving into and out of the city.

Anyway, you can't just magically solve homelessness, clean up the tent cities, and fix crime while the economy is floundering due to losing tens of thousands of consumers who used to come into the city daily. That's the whole point. I don't even like Bowser, but the loss of workers to telework and the hundreds of large office buildings now sitting idle in the middle of the city are in fact a major problem, and if something could be done to address them, it will actually enable the city to do more to combat homelessness and crime.

Bike lanes are not irrelevant if they are not increasing business in downtown DC, which is what proponents claim they are supposed to do because of “dozens of studies”.

Oh yay, it's one-issue-Nick again. I forgot you're still alive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn't bowser reach out to the heads of all major DC law firms? Those folks still telework also (often even more than feds) and have tons more discretionary income.

Law firms will stop allowing telework as soon as Feds stop. Guaranteed.

I don’t think you know law firms very well. The only thing they care about are billable hours, winning new clients and lastly junior associate training (which is related to billable hours).

I do. They're looking for an excuse. They are traditional, i.e. do not care about benefits like tech companies.

No you don’t, because if you did you would know that they don’t need excuses. They never even follow OPM on in-climate weather. If people need to come in, they need to come in.

The first priority is profit per partner. If that is affected then they will change their tune.

Well profits are down and they are gearing up for a recession, so we will see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

Maybe you'd be happier in Florida? As much as I dislike Bowser, at least she's not Desantis.

Or you know, maybe they’ll just be happier across the river in Crystal City or whatever they have rebranded it as now. It’s a clean, safe, mixed use “urban” are with no homelessness within spitting distance of the city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why doesn't bowser reach out to the heads of all major DC law firms? Those folks still telework also (often even more than feds) and have tons more discretionary income.

Law firms will stop allowing telework as soon as Feds stop. Guaranteed.

I don’t think you know law firms very well. The only thing they care about are billable hours, winning new clients and lastly junior associate training (which is related to billable hours).

I do. They're looking for an excuse. They are traditional, i.e. do not care about benefits like tech companies.

No you don’t, because if you did you would know that they don’t need excuses. They never even follow OPM on in-climate weather. If people need to come in, they need to come in.

The first priority is profit per partner. If that is affected then they will change their tune.

Well profits are down and they are gearing up for a recession, so we will see.

That’s not how well run law firms work and why they keep diversified practice groups. During good times their revenues are dominated by M&A and during bad times they are dominated by bankruptcy. After closing 4th quarter, it’s the typical time of year for many firms to let go of staff, particularly junior associates, as they gear up for spring/summer recruitment season.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

Maybe you'd be happier in Florida? As much as I dislike Bowser, at least she's not Desantis.

Or you know, maybe they’ll just be happier across the river in Crystal City or whatever they have rebranded it as now. It’s a clean, safe, mixed use “urban” are with no homelessness within spitting distance of the city.

Why did you put urban in quote marks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

Maybe you'd be happier in Florida? As much as I dislike Bowser, at least she's not Desantis.

Or you know, maybe they’ll just be happier across the river in Crystal City or whatever they have rebranded it as now. It’s a clean, safe, mixed use “urban” are with no homelessness within spitting distance of the city.

Why did you put urban in quote marks?

Because while it is urbanized, it is not a natural urban area. More like the hybrid precursor to places like the Mosaic District.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

It's a chicken and egg issue. Homelessness has gone up as many businesses that used to employ people on the lower end of the economic spectrum have gone out of business or reduced their staffing. One reason those businesses are struggling is the loss of the commuter workforce into the city every day. This leads to more homelessness, more tent cities. That makes parts of the city less pleasant to be in, which further harms the businesses currently operating. Increasing homelessness and decreasing business activity causes more crime. Crime is already up due to school closures which left a lot of MS and HS students at loose ends. Now those kids are 3 years older and there are fewer job opportunities for them due to telework and increasing crime. So they are more incentivized to commit crime. Meanwhile, the city is losing tax revenue from both loss of businesses and people leaving the city due to telework and rising crime. Meaning less money for both police and social services that might disrupt the increase criminality, especially among young people.

Bike lanes are irrelevant to this conversation, and there's genuine demand for bike lanes among city residents -- that's honestly a different conversation that doesn't have a ton to do with federal telework. I know you think bike lanes have substantively worsened commute times into the city, but the data doesn't back this up -- the city part of most commute has sped up do to a reduction in overall commuting, and the time increases have occurred on and surrounding the beltway, as teleworking employees are moving within suburbs more throughout the day instead of simply driving into and out of the city.

Anyway, you can't just magically solve homelessness, clean up the tent cities, and fix crime while the economy is floundering due to losing tens of thousands of consumers who used to come into the city daily. That's the whole point. I don't even like Bowser, but the loss of workers to telework and the hundreds of large office buildings now sitting idle in the middle of the city are in fact a major problem, and if something could be done to address them, it will actually enable the city to do more to combat homelessness and crime.

Bike lanes are not irrelevant if they are not increasing business in downtown DC, which is what proponents claim they are supposed to do because of “dozens of studies”.

Oh yay, it's one-issue-Nick again. I forgot you're still alive.

I don’t know who that is, but please explain why this much touted economic benefit is not working in practice? Seriously, I want to hear the answer. Because I keep hearing this trotted out but here is a real world test and the mayor has not said one word about how bike lanes were going to stimulate the downtown DC economy. Why do you think that is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Oh yay, it's one-issue-Nick again. I forgot you're still alive.

I don’t know who that is, but please explain why this much touted economic benefit is not working in practice? Seriously, I want to hear the answer. Because I keep hearing this trotted out but here is a real world test and the mayor has not said one word about how bike lanes were going to stimulate the downtown DC economy. Why do you think that is?

I know who it is, and he's an angry, angry man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol what? She needs to clean up the tent cities, crack down in crime, and eliminate the damn bike lanes everywhere first. It’s a traffic and crime ridden ****hole now.

It's a chicken and egg issue. Homelessness has gone up as many businesses that used to employ people on the lower end of the economic spectrum have gone out of business or reduced their staffing. One reason those businesses are struggling is the loss of the commuter workforce into the city every day. This leads to more homelessness, more tent cities. That makes parts of the city less pleasant to be in, which further harms the businesses currently operating. Increasing homelessness and decreasing business activity causes more crime. Crime is already up due to school closures which left a lot of MS and HS students at loose ends. Now those kids are 3 years older and there are fewer job opportunities for them due to telework and increasing crime. So they are more incentivized to commit crime. Meanwhile, the city is losing tax revenue from both loss of businesses and people leaving the city due to telework and rising crime. Meaning less money for both police and social services that might disrupt the increase criminality, especially among young people.

Bike lanes are irrelevant to this conversation, and there's genuine demand for bike lanes among city residents -- that's honestly a different conversation that doesn't have a ton to do with federal telework. I know you think bike lanes have substantively worsened commute times into the city, but the data doesn't back this up -- the city part of most commute has sped up do to a reduction in overall commuting, and the time increases have occurred on and surrounding the beltway, as teleworking employees are moving within suburbs more throughout the day instead of simply driving into and out of the city.

Anyway, you can't just magically solve homelessness, clean up the tent cities, and fix crime while the economy is floundering due to losing tens of thousands of consumers who used to come into the city daily. That's the whole point. I don't even like Bowser, but the loss of workers to telework and the hundreds of large office buildings now sitting idle in the middle of the city are in fact a major problem, and if something could be done to address them, it will actually enable the city to do more to combat homelessness and crime.

Bike lanes are not irrelevant if they are not increasing business in downtown DC, which is what proponents claim they are supposed to do because of “dozens of studies”.

Oh yay, it's one-issue-Nick again. I forgot you're still alive.

I don’t know who that is, but please explain why this much touted economic benefit is not working in practice? Seriously, I want to hear the answer. Because I keep hearing this trotted out but here is a real world test and the mayor has not said one word about how bike lanes were going to stimulate the downtown DC economy. Why do you think that is?

Maybe because the primary purpose of the bike lanes is not supposed to be economic development? Even the most ardent bike lane proponents don't argue that bike lanes are the key to stimulating the economy; they merely point out that the studies on the economic effects of bike lanes show that they have a (small) positive impact overall. You can run around pointing out that the bike lanes aren't fixing the economy all you want, but you're arguing with a straw man.