GlobeSt.com: Your problem with building security really begins with the industry's post-Sept. 11 response, correct?

Beitler: The overreaction to building security really doesn't predate Sept. 11. That was the turning point. Prior to that, building security was like it is at any Wal-Mart. Security guards were the greeters who reacted to a problem by calling the professionals--ambulances or the police. Literally overnight these people--mostly non-professionals with only a high school degree--were cast into the roll of a professional, including carrying a gun. Therein begins the whole nightmare.

GlobeSt.com: And you feel that what they are being asked to do is meaningless?

Beitler: That's the tragedy. Nothing that's being done today could have prevented Sept. 11, and yet with no mandate on the part of government, owners at their own election have decided to spend tens of millions of dollars in the pursuit of securing their buildings with no mission or design in mind. Worse yet, the bill for this knee-jerk reaction is being foisted on the tenants. And when they learn what that bill will be, there will be a hue and cry.

GlobeSt.com: They'll just chalk it up to the price of business in the post-Sept. 11 world, no?

Beitler: I don't think so. Let's just take a look at the security measures being put in place. All the emphasis is at the front of the house. But we know that no single person can bring in enough explosives to do substantial damage. And yet, we're putting people through all types of searches, which I believe are illegal. The police department couldn't get away with doing what these people are doing. I think owners are holding themselves out for charges of illegal search and seizure. Keep in mind, while buildings are private they are within the domain of public use. And what's happening in the meantime at the back of the house? Are there metal detectors there? What about screening delivery personnel?

GlobeSt.com: So what are you proposing as an alternative?

Beitler: I'm proposing that we shift our focus from the front to the back of the house. Terrorism won't come through the revolving doors. I'm proposing that we need to place the responsibility of security on the individual tenant. Some tenants don't want any security. Others want everyone checked. That will put the cost in the hands of the people who require it. I'm advocating that meaningful background checks on security people be done before they are hired to protect us--not after. Security personnel need to be licensed and participate in ongoing training programs in security and first aid. They also need an increase in pay scale. And there needs to be serious participation on the part of tenants in safety and evacuation drills.

GlobeSt.com: Expand on that if you will.

Beitler: Tenants need to learn from the experience of walking down stairwells with hundreds of confused office workers. We tried this recently and several women became dizzy walking down the stairwells. The time to learn of such possibilities is not during an emergency. Imagine if that occurred during a real catastrophe.

GlobeSt.com: So you know about it beforehand. What do you do?

Beitler: Frankly we haven't figured it out yet, but now we can work on a solution--maybe the installation of a life-safety chair or assigning another person to assist. It's better to learn about it now so we can develop a solution.

GlobeSt.com: What else are you doing?

Beitler: We've developed pamphlets--practical security guidelines. We have a separate pamphlet for building managers and one for tenants--because the building is not responsible for your safety. You need to protect yourself. The second thing we have done is that we've put together a safety kit, something a person can grab in an emergency. It contains first aid, a smoke mask, a hammer/axe, a hundred feet of nylon line to trail in smoke and a card containing all important telephone numbers.

GlobeSt.com: You're giving this out free to your tenants?

Beitler: That might be something we do down the road. Now we are charging $150.

GlobeSt.com: Given the critical nature of what you are trying to do, why are you charging?

Beitler: There are legal considerations, and we need to get those questions answered. But you should know that some of the proceeds are going to the New York City relief fund.

GlobeSt.com: Ultimately, what's the message that you're trying to get out?

Beitler: We live in a society in which none of us takes responsibility for our own actions. All we are saying is that you need to wake up to the fact that when there's a crisis, and your life is at risk, that is not the time to say why building management isn't protecting me.

Email J. Paul Beitler