Real talk about the city’s economy, federal buildings leases, and telework impacts

[Anonymous]

How, specifically, would DC "show gratitude" towards the Federal government?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How, specifically, would DC "show gratitude" towards the Federal government?

By saying “Thank You”, obviously. How do you shoe gratitude?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't an issue unique to DC. Every city now has more teleworking folks than before. The issue is that DC has terrible traffic, terrible crime, terrible public transportation, and a terrible homeless problem, so lots of people have no desire to come into DC unless forced to do so for work reasons.

The difference in DC is that instead of trying to find solutions, the city thinks the Federal government should solve the problem for them. What does the Federal government owe to NYC, LA, SF? Why didn’t DC apply foresight to use their Federal COVID funds and one-time surplus to make strategic investments to address the obvious until it’s now nearing a crisis and the days of free and even cheap money are over.

Imagine if they spent some of those free billions given to them by the Federal government to acquire distressed commercial properties and collaborate with developers to convert them to residential with deeply affordable housing?

Instead they have dropped millions on new social programs and free bus service. Choices have consequences and to turn around after all of that profligacy of stimulus funds to turn around and put it on Federal workers and all American tax payers to solve DCs fiscal problems rightly should draw little sympathy.

I don't believe that the Feds owe DC anything, but you are wrong. Feds own quite a bit of the city. No other city. With all due respect, DC is not yet suffering from fiscal problems. As a matter of fact, DC has regained every resident that has left. Our population has hit pre covid levels.

This is not even close to correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't an issue unique to DC. Every city now has more teleworking folks than before. The issue is that DC has terrible traffic, terrible crime, terrible public transportation, and a terrible homeless problem, so lots of people have no desire to come into DC unless forced to do so for work reasons.

The difference in DC is that instead of trying to find solutions, the city thinks the Federal government should solve the problem for them. What does the Federal government owe to NYC, LA, SF? Why didn’t DC apply foresight to use their Federal COVID funds and one-time surplus to make strategic investments to address the obvious until it’s now nearing a crisis and the days of free and even cheap money are over.

Imagine if they spent some of those free billions given to them by the Federal government to acquire distressed commercial properties and collaborate with developers to convert them to residential with deeply affordable housing?

Instead they have dropped millions on new social programs and free bus service. Choices have consequences and to turn around after all of that profligacy of stimulus funds to turn around and put it on Federal workers and all American tax payers to solve DCs fiscal problems rightly should draw little sympathy.

I don't believe that the Feds owe DC anything, but you are wrong. Feds own quite a bit of the city. No other city. With all due respect, DC is not yet suffering from fiscal problems. As a matter of fact, DC has regained every resident that has left. Our population has hit pre covid levels.

This is not even close to correct.

It was reported last week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't an issue unique to DC. Every city now has more teleworking folks than before. The issue is that DC has terrible traffic, terrible crime, terrible public transportation, and a terrible homeless problem, so lots of people have no desire to come into DC unless forced to do so for work reasons.

The difference in DC is that instead of trying to find solutions, the city thinks the Federal government should solve the problem for them. What does the Federal government owe to NYC, LA, SF? Why didn’t DC apply foresight to use their Federal COVID funds and one-time surplus to make strategic investments to address the obvious until it’s now nearing a crisis and the days of free and even cheap money are over.

Imagine if they spent some of those free billions given to them by the Federal government to acquire distressed commercial properties and collaborate with developers to convert them to residential with deeply affordable housing?

Instead they have dropped millions on new social programs and free bus service. Choices have consequences and to turn around after all of that profligacy of stimulus funds to turn around and put it on Federal workers and all American tax payers to solve DCs fiscal problems rightly should draw little sympathy.

I don't believe that the Feds owe DC anything, but you are wrong. Feds own quite a bit of the city. No other city. With all due respect, DC is not yet suffering from fiscal problems. As a matter of fact, DC has regained every resident that has left. Our population has hit pre covid levels.

This is not even close to correct.

It was reported last week.

Not sure where you are getting your information, but it is not an official source. Currently 3% below 2020 population according to Census Bureau.
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


You sound like a dinosaur. Things have changed and we’re not going back to the old way, get over it. Even when all the old managers are in the office, we don’t have meetings in conference rooms anymore. Everyone is sitting in their office or cube alone during meetings where we are all in the same building- how does that make any sense? Work from home has more advantages than disadvantages, and now we use programs like teams for things like training. Why would I go back to having someone looking over my shoulder when I can just share my screen over teams and talk to them? And since I am sharing my screen anyway, why do we even need to be in the same room?


+10000. These types of people simply can’t evolve and accept we have technology that no longer requires physical presence. The technology was around pre-Covid but out of necessity we were forced to use it in 2020. Now people are used to it. There’s simply no need for me to go into an office to have a conversation I can have over video chat. Just like once cell phones became common there was no reason for us to sit around at home next to our landline in case we received a call.

I may be a dinosaur but here's what I hate about work from home and the idea that video chat/training is a substitute for in-person interaction: (1) People are easily distracted on video. When you are meeting someone in person, it is a lot harder to be distracted by your email/texts/crying toddler/barking dog, etc. No, I don't want to go back to endless conference rooms, but all virtual isn't the answer either. (2) You absorb a lot of useful information/job skills/market knowledge from the conversations you have with older professionals at work. You don't get that training sitting on your sofa on your laptop. An architect friend of mine was forced to hire first years who insisted upon work from home as a condition to employment. He reflected that after the first year the work product of the work-at-homes was so poor that the firm wasn't able to bill for it. Bad for the firm. Bad for the young professional. (3) There is no substitute for actually building relationships with the people with whom you do business. It is VERY difficult to do that in an all video/text/email environment. I fired a consultant last week who simply wouldn't interact on the phone but insisted on sending everything in email. What's worse, even the young account manager responded with email instead of a phone call when I specifically asked for a call before deciding to pull the plug (and we are a large account). I instead called another "dinosaur" who picked up the phone and n one conversation resolved the issue and got me the agreement I needed. When I emailed the account manager who had not called me back and told him they were fired; he STILL didn't pick up the phone. In the future, those members of the younger professional generation who learn how to keep the best of the old (in person collaboration, relationship building) while strategically using the "work from anywhere" technology when it creates efficiency instead of impeding it, are going to be the professionals who advance the quickest. No one wants to mentor someone who thinks they already know it all and doesn't need to leave their house or learn how to hold a conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


You sound like a dinosaur. Things have changed and we’re not going back to the old way, get over it. Even when all the old managers are in the office, we don’t have meetings in conference rooms anymore. Everyone is sitting in their office or cube alone during meetings where we are all in the same building- how does that make any sense? Work from home has more advantages than disadvantages, and now we use programs like teams for things like training. Why would I go back to having someone looking over my shoulder when I can just share my screen over teams and talk to them? And since I am sharing my screen anyway, why do we even need to be in the same room?


+10000. These types of people simply can’t evolve and accept we have technology that no longer requires physical presence. The technology was around pre-Covid but out of necessity we were forced to use it in 2020. Now people are used to it. There’s simply no need for me to go into an office to have a conversation I can have over video chat. Just like once cell phones became common there was no reason for us to sit around at home next to our landline in case we received a call.

I may be a dinosaur but here's what I hate about work from home and the idea that video chat/training is a substitute for in-person interaction: (1) People are easily distracted on video. When you are meeting someone in person, it is a lot harder to be distracted by your email/texts/crying toddler/barking dog, etc. No, I don't want to go back to endless conference rooms, but all virtual isn't the answer either. (2) You absorb a lot of useful information/job skills/market knowledge from the conversations you have with older professionals at work. You don't get that training sitting on your sofa on your laptop. An architect friend of mine was forced to hire first years who insisted upon work from home as a condition to employment. He reflected that after the first year the work product of the work-at-homes was so poor that the firm wasn't able to bill for it. Bad for the firm. Bad for the young professional. (3) There is no substitute for actually building relationships with the people with whom you do business. It is VERY difficult to do that in an all video/text/email environment. I fired a consultant last week who simply wouldn't interact on the phone but insisted on sending everything in email. What's worse, even the young account manager responded with email instead of a phone call when I specifically asked for a call before deciding to pull the plug (and we are a large account). I instead called another "dinosaur" who picked up the phone and n one conversation resolved the issue and got me the agreement I needed. When I emailed the account manager who had not called me back and told him they were fired; he STILL didn't pick up the phone. In the future, those members of the younger professional generation who learn how to keep the best of the old (in person collaboration, relationship building) while strategically using the "work from anywhere" technology when it creates efficiency instead of impeding it, are going to be the professionals who advance the quickest. No one wants to mentor someone who thinks they already know it all and doesn't need to leave their house or learn how to hold a conversation.

We’ve discussed this before on this board but the issues you are pointing out are management failures and weaknesses. If you can’t find a quiet space and pay attention during a video call, you are failing as a professional and as an adult and your manager needs to talk to you. These failures are just made more obvious by telework, they aren’t created by it. If you can’t figure out a way to talk on video calls and train and connect with people, again, you are failing to adapt as a professional and an adult. I have trained multiple young employees solely through virtual and there were zero issues with getting face to face time, building relationships, and training them in every aspect of their jobs. I’ve actually become friends and mentor them too, that’s how much we were able to build a relationship.

It’s time to adapt. If you can’t adapt, you’re failing, and the rest of us don’t need to cater to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


You sound like a dinosaur. Things have changed and we’re not going back to the old way, get over it. Even when all the old managers are in the office, we don’t have meetings in conference rooms anymore. Everyone is sitting in their office or cube alone during meetings where we are all in the same building- how does that make any sense? Work from home has more advantages than disadvantages, and now we use programs like teams for things like training. Why would I go back to having someone looking over my shoulder when I can just share my screen over teams and talk to them? And since I am sharing my screen anyway, why do we even need to be in the same room?


+10000. These types of people simply can’t evolve and accept we have technology that no longer requires physical presence. The technology was around pre-Covid but out of necessity we were forced to use it in 2020. Now people are used to it. There’s simply no need for me to go into an office to have a conversation I can have over video chat. Just like once cell phones became common there was no reason for us to sit around at home next to our landline in case we received a call.

I may be a dinosaur but here's what I hate about work from home and the idea that video chat/training is a substitute for in-person interaction: (1) People are easily distracted on video. When you are meeting someone in person, it is a lot harder to be distracted by your email/texts/crying toddler/barking dog, etc. No, I don't want to go back to endless conference rooms, but all virtual isn't the answer either. (2) You absorb a lot of useful information/job skills/market knowledge from the conversations you have with older professionals at work. You don't get that training sitting on your sofa on your laptop. An architect friend of mine was forced to hire first years who insisted upon work from home as a condition to employment. He reflected that after the first year the work product of the work-at-homes was so poor that the firm wasn't able to bill for it. Bad for the firm. Bad for the young professional. (3) There is no substitute for actually building relationships with the people with whom you do business. It is VERY difficult to do that in an all video/text/email environment. I fired a consultant last week who simply wouldn't interact on the phone but insisted on sending everything in email. What's worse, even the young account manager responded with email instead of a phone call when I specifically asked for a call before deciding to pull the plug (and we are a large account). I instead called another "dinosaur" who picked up the phone and n one conversation resolved the issue and got me the agreement I needed. When I emailed the account manager who had not called me back and told him they were fired; he STILL didn't pick up the phone. In the future, those members of the younger professional generation who learn how to keep the best of the old (in person collaboration, relationship building) while strategically using the "work from anywhere" technology when it creates efficiency instead of impeding it, are going to be the professionals who advance the quickest. No one wants to mentor someone who thinks they already know it all and doesn't need to leave their house or learn how to hold a conversation.

We’ve discussed this before on this board but the issues you are pointing out are management failures and weaknesses. If you can’t find a quiet space and pay attention during a video call, you are failing as a professional and as an adult and your manager needs to talk to you. These failures are just made more obvious by telework, they aren’t created by it. If you can’t figure out a way to talk on video calls and train and connect with people, again, you are failing to adapt as a professional and an adult. I have trained multiple young employees solely through virtual and there were zero issues with getting face to face time, building relationships, and training them in every aspect of their jobs. I’ve actually become friends and mentor them too, that’s how much we were able to build a relationship.

It’s time to adapt. If you can’t adapt, you’re failing, and the rest of us don’t need to cater to that.

This. PP can’t adapt. We have fantastic technology that mean we now don’t have to physically be next to each other to see and talk to each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A bunch of GS 12s getting lunch a few times a week wasn't propping up the economy. DC needs big law and lobbyists working in the office and spending money in the city

This.

My good friends are a big law couple who are both still WFH. Her Instagram was always loaded with elaborate lunches out downtown plus long lunches filled with shopping.

The pandemic really opened the eyes of people like them to how much money they were wasting. They don't live a frugal lifestyle or anything, but instead of blowing hundreds a week on lunch and shopping, they now invest that extra money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


You sound like a dinosaur. Things have changed and we’re not going back to the old way, get over it. Even when all the old managers are in the office, we don’t have meetings in conference rooms anymore. Everyone is sitting in their office or cube alone during meetings where we are all in the same building- how does that make any sense? Work from home has more advantages than disadvantages, and now we use programs like teams for things like training. Why would I go back to having someone looking over my shoulder when I can just share my screen over teams and talk to them? And since I am sharing my screen anyway, why do we even need to be in the same room?


+10000. These types of people simply can’t evolve and accept we have technology that no longer requires physical presence. The technology was around pre-Covid but out of necessity we were forced to use it in 2020. Now people are used to it. There’s simply no need for me to go into an office to have a conversation I can have over video chat. Just like once cell phones became common there was no reason for us to sit around at home next to our landline in case we received a call.

I may be a dinosaur but here's what I hate about work from home and the idea that video chat/training is a substitute for in-person interaction: (1) People are easily distracted on video. When you are meeting someone in person, it is a lot harder to be distracted by your email/texts/crying toddler/barking dog, etc. No, I don't want to go back to endless conference rooms, but all virtual isn't the answer either. (2) You absorb a lot of useful information/job skills/market knowledge from the conversations you have with older professionals at work. You don't get that training sitting on your sofa on your laptop. An architect friend of mine was forced to hire first years who insisted upon work from home as a condition to employment. He reflected that after the first year the work product of the work-at-homes was so poor that the firm wasn't able to bill for it. Bad for the firm. Bad for the young professional. (3) There is no substitute for actually building relationships with the people with whom you do business. It is VERY difficult to do that in an all video/text/email environment. I fired a consultant last week who simply wouldn't interact on the phone but insisted on sending everything in email. What's worse, even the young account manager responded with email instead of a phone call when I specifically asked for a call before deciding to pull the plug (and we are a large account). I instead called another "dinosaur" who picked up the phone and n one conversation resolved the issue and got me the agreement I needed. When I emailed the account manager who had not called me back and told him they were fired; he STILL didn't pick up the phone. In the future, those members of the younger professional generation who learn how to keep the best of the old (in person collaboration, relationship building) while strategically using the "work from anywhere" technology when it creates efficiency instead of impeding it, are going to be the professionals who advance the quickest. No one wants to mentor someone who thinks they already know it all and doesn't need to leave their house or learn how to hold a conversation.

I am far less distracted at my house than at my office. In my office, people want to endlessly chit-chat. When I worked in a cubicle farm, I had to listen to everyone else's conversations, their coughing, etc etc. It was hugely distracting.

I prefer hybrid -- going in a couple days a week so I have that face-to-face time sometimes, and at home for when I need to focus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who would live downtown if they converted office buildings to housing? There is nothing open in some areas, it is empty at night and there are homeless people camping all over the place. I work downtown and it sucks now.

Large and reasonably priced loft style condos from older buildings would be a huge attraction, but there just isn't enough of that type of building I think to make it happen. A lot of DC's commercial building stock is 1970s/1980s generation. Maybe Metro Center area has some buildings that could be attractive for conversions? Not many though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who would live downtown if they converted office buildings to housing? There is nothing open in some areas, it is empty at night and there are homeless people camping all over the place. I work downtown and it sucks now.

Large and reasonably priced loft style condos from older buildings would be a huge attraction, but there just isn't enough of that type of building I think to make it happen. A lot of DC's commercial building stock is 1970s/1980s generation. Maybe Metro Center area has some buildings that could be attractive for conversions? Not many though.

The problem with these buildings from the 70s/80s is that they fill out the whole developable envelope. “Leave no FAR behind”. So they lack things like internal atria that would facilitate conversion due to their huge floor plates that leave interior areas without access to natural light. The industrial loft conversions mitigated this problem with tall ceilings and floor to ceiling windows, both of which are things that these buildings lack.

As a result, there are very few buildings that would be good candidates for conversion. The National Press Club building is a good example of a building that should be an excellent candidate except for the fact that there would is a lot of unusable floor space because it’s just a big box and the interiors lack access to natural light.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't an issue unique to DC. Every city now has more teleworking folks than before. The issue is that DC has terrible traffic, terrible crime, terrible public transportation, and a terrible homeless problem, so lots of people have no desire to come into DC unless forced to do so for work reasons.

The difference in DC is that instead of trying to find solutions, the city thinks the Federal government should solve the problem for them. What does the Federal government owe to NYC, LA, SF? Why didn’t DC apply foresight to use their Federal COVID funds and one-time surplus to make strategic investments to address the obvious until it’s now nearing a crisis and the days of free and even cheap money are over.

Imagine if they spent some of those free billions given to them by the Federal government to acquire distressed commercial properties and collaborate with developers to convert them to residential with deeply affordable housing?

Instead they have dropped millions on new social programs and free bus service. Choices have consequences and to turn around after all of that profligacy of stimulus funds to turn around and put it on Federal workers and all American tax payers to solve DCs fiscal problems rightly should draw little sympathy.

NYC? SF? LA? All cities in STATES! DC isn’t a state. There is no other place in America comparable. DC should have statehood then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't an issue unique to DC. Every city now has more teleworking folks than before. The issue is that DC has terrible traffic, terrible crime, terrible public transportation, and a terrible homeless problem, so lots of people have no desire to come into DC unless forced to do so for work reasons.

The difference in DC is that instead of trying to find solutions, the city thinks the Federal government should solve the problem for them. What does the Federal government owe to NYC, LA, SF? Why didn’t DC apply foresight to use their Federal COVID funds and one-time surplus to make strategic investments to address the obvious until it’s now nearing a crisis and the days of free and even cheap money are over.

Imagine if they spent some of those free billions given to them by the Federal government to acquire distressed commercial properties and collaborate with developers to convert them to residential with deeply affordable housing?

Instead they have dropped millions on new social programs and free bus service. Choices have consequences and to turn around after all of that profligacy of stimulus funds to turn around and put it on Federal workers and all American tax payers to solve DCs fiscal problems rightly should draw little sympathy.

NYC? SF? LA? All cities in STATES! DC isn’t a state. There is no other place in America comparable. DC should have statehood then.

So if DC is so special that it needs a Federal hand out, then DC should not ever be a state and requires more Federal oversight. If the Federal government agrees to any of DCs requests on this, then it should come with bringing back the Control Board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Weird that people are suggesting DC is dead because nobody is working in town. If that's the case then why is the evening rush hour in DC still a nightmare?

I think most people are driving now because they only need to come in a few days a week. The metro feels empty and unsafe.

It’s full when I have used it during commuting hours. My teenager rides it to school and says it’s often packed like before Covid. I assume all these people posting stuff like above don’t live in DC.