AC pipe handling and disposal...More information..
Yes, Bill Neal has offered to pay for something. Not sure if it was the fines or 30,000 plus to dig up and dispose of pipe that has to be dug up. His offer was turned down. This was at a recent committee meeting that was cancelled but he and others were present. Was he offering to pay with North Beach funds, or his own and was North Beach aware of this? Those present, know the answers.
I have it from reliable sources that 2 complaints were filed about the handling and disposal. One to the State and one to Federal EPA. One is said to have been done by an employee and the other by a member.
I have been contacted by a former employee, who stated in writing, that he was instructed to handle broken pipe for wrapping and disposal and was told it was safe to handle, by Bill Neal. This was done without gloves or other protective equipment.
Another member sent me pictures of exposed AC pipe that was broken and left in front of their home. It was stated that there was no use of water to control the airborne fibers.
While some of the information presented here is second hand, it in no way diminishes the seriousness of the situation. I would expect that there will be some sort of investigation before fines are made.
Law suits are a real possibility.
There is a real question of what protection there will be from insurance companies and increased future premiums, if insurance will even be available.
58 comments:
That's what insurance is for I guess. I'll gladly pay a higher premium than have to pay any fines. Also, I'd like to know more about the Bill N offer, what he offered to pay and why it was turned down? I expect (and hope it isn't ) just the tip of the iceberg, I'll bet we'll be seeing Bill N resigning soon.
While Surfside handling of the asbestos pipe was not correct. I think you need to keep in mind the exposure level. Asbestos was used as binder in many products. Floor tile, pipe, brake linings ext. When we test a building for air quality after asbestos is abated we also do a control sample outside on the street. The street level is almost always higher than the interior of the building. One reason brake linings used asbestos for many years so asbestos is everywhere, given it is at low levels. One of the worst products was fire proofing used on structural steel in buildings. It can become friable or air bourn when disturbed. The pipe and floor tile asbestos fibers are encased in the product. If you do nothing to disturb the fibers and have proper training on handling and disposal of asbestos your fine. But none of this is new news. It started in the early 70's when asbestos was banned for use in most products. Surfside needs to hire an abatement contractor to help them establish policy on how to manage and deal with removal of the product. If we were not mechanical sawing or grinding the pipe the public exposure is slight and miss handing it is somewhat of a minor offense but needs to be corrected with training and established policy.
Sure, Bill Neal and North Beach are willing to pay the fine...With a legal document made by them and written by Bill, that absolves them of any legal actions. This is what they did on the management agreement between north beach and surfside. This would be a cheap out for them rather than be sued by surfside and all the surfside employees and others that have and will suffer from the knowingly violations done by Bill Neal.
Bill Neal and north beach do not give a damn about surfside. All they care about is covering their own ass. Bill Neal won't resign as long as he can keep surfside from acting on the mess he has fostered and allowed to continue.
This weak board should consult an attorney familiar with these kinds of issues. The fools would rather spend thousands of dollars on legal fees over a shed roof than on issues that really matter.
Get real 8:00 AM,
State and Federal authorities do not consider this mess as "a minor offense" Those employees and others exposed to the miss handling and exposure do not see it as "a minor offense" If you were following the released information, you would know, by their own admission, they were using power saws to cut the pipe. You don't need "policy" on disposal of pipe. There are laws on this. Just follow the law. It is clear that Bill Neal deliberately avoided following the law. To blame policy is nothing more than a part of the cover-up. Floor tile and other products discussion by you is nothing more more than a feeble attempt at diversion of our real issue, law breaking. A fine and jail time is needed.
It's apparent that everyone on the Water Dept. crew knew that the pipe has asbestos in it, and that the State has specific requirements about handling and disposal. Employees with this knowledge are capable of making their own choices about using breathing protection. One would also assume that the lack of handling protocol was surely discussed among the Water Dept. Staff.
As this is a very long-term project it is puzzling why handling protocol was not established from the start. Mr. Neil should have been taking the lead on this, as should the BOT, by looking at the long-term project's visibility and certainty that the State would at some point be on the community's case. That lack of foresight is what is most disturbing.
While Mr. Neil is the Dept. manager, S.S. employees should be making their own decisions about safety in this case, surely using breathing protection when handling broken pipe and cutting. I don't see where the overall exposure in the community should be a matter of concern, while not following State mandated procedures IS a serious concern, and has been routine for the Surfside HOA. We're out in the sticks and will do what we want, and bury such debris in a deep hole to make it go away.
Audacious, and lacking in foresight.
While not an attorney, I would advise Mr. Neal, North Beach Water District and the Surfside Board of Trustees, to seek advice from a criminal defense attorney. Looks like they are going to need one. Sorry, but insurance does not cover criminal acts.
Now 12:10 wants to blame the employees. The blame belongs with the stupid board. You can't fix stupid.
The blame goes on the board and on Bill Neal. This includes the decision makers who created the mess. Not sure about the responsibilities of the Business Manager. She may also count among those responsible.
This is not a minor concern for the workers exposed to asbestos while handling the AC pipe, but also to residents who have been ingesting the water from those pipes for many years.
“Municipal sewer and water workers involved with the removal of asbestos cement pipes may have been exposed to asbestos fiber in the removal process, as could repair workers patching or augmenting existing transite pipe systems. However, the main risk from asbestos cement pipes comes from the possibility of ingesting water contaminated with loose fibers. Individuals who lived in areas where transite pipe was used in the water system may be at enhanced risk of developing peritoneal mesothelioma from the ingestion of asbestos material.”
Reference: https://www.mesothelioma.com/asbestos-exposure/products/cement-pipe/
Deb, "However, the main risk from asbestos cement pipes comes from the possibility of ingesting water contaminated with loose fibers. " this is incorrect the breathing of the fibers is the problem
We know from recent past history, the controlling members of the board are doing all sorts of things right now, without consulting with the rest of the board. Decisions are being made without a full board vote. They are liars and lack a sense of right or wrong. I will raise my hand at the annual member meeting to remove them.
The exposure and risks are likely more for the employees but remain a concern for all members who have ingested the water over all the years of broken and replacement of asbestos pipes. We should all be making arrangements for whatever testing may be available to determine if our health has been compromised by the water system in Surfside
12:34 .... You do not understand what you read. I did not "blame" the employees for anything. I said that they know what asbestos is, know it is in the pipe, and know how to put on a respirator or particle mask. I stated specifically that with that knowledge workers are smart enough to make a decision about their own best interests.
I also said that management and the BOT are responsible for failure to address proper disposal of the material, and assure that the HOA is "in compliance" with State regulations. As has been attested to here by knowledgeable folks, the handling risk can be easily minimized with care taken, and disposing of the material as specified by the State regulations.
I relate to your comment as I do when people wander into my car's path knowingly, as if they are entitled as pedestrians to wander randomly in traffic without event. We all need to be aware and attentive to our own self-preservation. Don't wander into traffic counting on others not to run you down, and don't knowingly breathe in harmful substances because no one said not to.
Dear misguided 3:26,
Laws exist to protect workers who are exposed to dangers due to the supervisory instructions or orders of their employers. There are many specific laws regarding the use and disposal of asbestos. Climb out from under that rock. The supervisor (Neal) is responsible to know the laws and the dangers. The supervisor is responsible for how the work was performed. He failed and therefore the hoa failed.
Read the info on the mesothelioma website, that is the source of my quote. I’m not an environmental scientist or toxicologist, so I just consider what those who specialize in these matters have to say.
Deb, your still wrong asbestos ingested will pass on thru as a rule but if you breath enough of this stuff you are in serious trouble.
The fibers once inhaled can migrate throughout your lungs and you can't cough this stuff out.
Some of the fibers become trapped in cocoons made by your body to trap these foreign fibers and it is at this point that the potential for cancer will rise assuming you live thru all the damage that the migrating fibers do your lungs and surrounding tissue.
Bob, do you believe that you were exposed to asbestos while employed by Surfside?
I'd be lying if I said no.
Did I breath in enough to cause me harm long term don't know
Thanks for asking
Bob, thanks for the clarification. As I said, this was not my assessment, but that of the methsothelioma website. Further research confirms there is a low risk of developing cancer by its ingestion.
Reference: http://www.fwr.org/pipeline/dwi0822.htm
Mr. Haskin .... You were aware that the material contained asbestos but took no precautions to avoid breathing the dust ?
Mr Cox,
Past practices makes it hard to know where asbestos items stored sometimes for years. So wearing a suit and mask all the time is not practical but it is the nature of the work. The old warehouse between the canal and the building was a storage area for years and really should be considered a hazmat area ... but you know we must keep the SHOA dues low, so corners were cut prior to my time and after sadly.
Don't attack me, SHOA has a long term problem to deal with ... It is election time and I would think the focus would be to get some competent people on the BOT to deal with the mess that exists now.
So Mr. Cox might I suggest you redirect your energy and work on cleaning out your BOT and possibly water dept management. The current leadership is dragging down SHOA and for the life of me I don't see why.
I agree. They are a millstone tied to us.
George, it seems you are happiest when you think Surfside has or is going to have legal problems. It appears you believe this validates your position that the board is corrupt and only you know how to save Surfside. SAD!!!!!!!!!
Mr. Haskin ....You are very quick to claim you are being attacked, when I have done no such thing. You were making accusations of me that were unfounded. You didn't really answer my question about wearing protection. The Water Dept has just a few employees, and I would assume that the safety of handling this stuff would have been easy to discuss. It also seems that wearing breathing protection when handling broken pipe, and cutting, would be easily done without great discomfort.
I have made it clear that I see the BOT and Mr. Neal as failing to address proper handling and disposal, but doubt that Mr. Neal insisted you to handle this stuff without protection. Apparently the material is not considered a hazard sitting in a warehouse, so taking care with cutting and handling broken pipe is the situation that is hazardous.
The State will decide the severity of the HOA's failure to follow proper procedures in disposing of the material, and may fine the community substantial sums of money -so be it - as I said, the HOA tends to thumb their nose at State regulations, and they deserve to be put on the hotseat. But I don't know that Mr. Neal will be found negligent in his management otherwise. Did the staff discuss safety regarding working with this material ?
It seems as employees you all had some say in this, and could have safeguarded yourselves by wearing breathing protection which is probably available to employees.
You apparently don't know anything about HOA politics in Surfside. The same conservative members re-elect the same candidates over and over, and anyone new is hazed, harassed, and belittled. Electing an honest BOT is resisted by all means Mr. Haskins. I hope your health is good, and wish you well. I don't blame you for anything. The HOA will have to answer some difficult questions that could have been dealt with honestly from the start. That is not the Surfside way, just take a look at Mr. Williams and his shananigans.
Sorry, your last statement is straight up B.S.
People that care enough to vote for who they choose from those that decide to run. Just because it may not be someone you agree with doesn't make a conspiracy. But let's just say your statement is true, then explained to me how did Patrick and George get elected? How did Ms. Blagg get elected last year?
It sounds to me like Not a Board member was a board member!
I think you all are making a mountain out of a mole hill after reading then "Procedures for Cutting and Handling of Asbestos Cement Pipe.
8:56 ....Ms. Blagg was appointed to fill a vacancy shortly after the election. She has been systematically abused by blog commenters, likely Trustees, ex-Trustees, and their pals. She has been accused of all kinds of nonsense, and her obvious knowledge and expertise in working on a Board has been mocked and belittled.
Patrick was given the same treatment beginning during the election, and was soon after, systematically harassed about various RV issues and is currently being sued by the HOA over bogus claims of non-compliance. Where a minor compromise on the HOA's part would have stopped this long ago, the harassment has continued going on 3 years now. Over a shed hidden in the woods, on an undeveloped cul-de-sac.
George has always been treated as an outsider, and the staged complaint session organized by Gary Williams to placate Annette deLeest and a few others was entirely inappropriate, and sought to chase George off of the BOT. At his age he decided it wasn't worth putting up with the abuse and stress.
Mr. Flood has been on the BOT about 12 or more years, and is the champion of the new pipe project. In the last year and a half, he has attended only a handful of meetings in person, and we see how thorough his management was of the pipe-laying project. He has served as president and vice-president during that time.
Last year's Surf-In-Sider expressed clear bias in their comments prior to the election, ballots and proxies were not mailed to a substantial portion of members, the proxies were unclear in their instructions, and this year, the Annual Meeting has been announced to occur on the wrong date. Progress on the Tech Comm. which sought to establish electronic voting for this year, was intentionally delayed for months by Williams, deLeest, Winegar, and Clancy.
There are too many funny little coincidences to pretend that there isn't intentional manipulation to prevent independent members from voting, or serving on the BOT. Mr. Williams decided he will just pretend that part of the Board doesn't exist - and who would that be ? Patrick, Deb Blagg, and Larry Raymer. They are not consulted on issues decided outside of meetings, which is a blatant violation of State RCWs, and S.S. covenants.
I'm talking facts here, so you're misreading your b.s. meter. Turn it around so it's pointing at you, and take another reading.
Mr. Cox, your biased opinions are not factual, merely opinions. Honestly, I'm tired of reading your BS comments on this blog. Many of us have been here much longer than you. We don't appreciate the biased and usually uninformed crap that you spew.
Blagg and others have systematically misrepresented their actual actions and intentions. I speak from a viewpoint that has witnessed the actual. I am neither a board member or the friend of a board member.
Hey at least the SHOA office staff are consistent! They CONSTANTLY MAKE REALLY STUPID mistakes and refuse to take any responsibility for the mistakes. Now sending out the wrong date for the Annual Meeting. That's so typical and freaking hilarious! Nice attention to detail ladies, as usual.
Surfside is where the "Peter Principle" is confirmed to be based on fact .... so so sad
10:56 .... You have nothing to offer that would refute what I said. It can all be documented tough guy. Not a Board member huh ? You take these FACTS very personally for that claim to be true. If you can't handle the truth, don't read my comments, or the blog. It's easily remedied. I'll continue to write what I know to be going on, and am free to express my opinions as well.
I have followed the blog and know exactly how Ms. Blagg, Patrick and Larry have been treated. I also know that there is no basis for the so-called Executive Committee to make independent decisions outside of an actual natural disaster, and the president of the HOA has no independent authority beyond simply being one of nine Trustees. ALL BOT actions are to be reviewed by the entire Board, and any action must be approved by a vote of the 9 Trustees.
This is NOT happening, and is a very blatant violation of the covenants, RCWs and a dis-service to the membership worthy of removal from office. I am well versed in HOA matters and am very familiar with Surfside documents. I don't need to b.s., I know what I'm talking about.
Blagg has not been abused on the blog. There's been many comments on the blog that would be a matter of holding her accountable to the truth. There are pictures and recordings in the possession of at least two members to prove that her word cannot be trusted.
Apparently Mr. Cox believes what he reads on the blog and uses that to prove that he has the "facts" after he has filtered it through his own biases. His outrage at being called on the BS is laughable. Many of us have read the governing documents, policy handbooks and RCW's. That does not an expert make. It takes years and years of first hand experience, research and an open mind to get a real clue about the operations of Surfside. Blow hard Mr. Cox. We've got your number.
I am only going to say this once, well for now.
Patrick Johansen, Deb Blagg, Larry Raymer and Steve Cox, are all honorable people. I do not agree with everything they say or do, but our differences are honest. They are all trying to do the right things. Disagreements on issues are encouraged, name calling and personal attacks are not.
Opinions are not facts. Cox and others might be more respected if they got this distinction straight in their minds.
I do not hide behind anonymity when posting on this blog - all of my comments have been open and transparent. Even my suggestion that the Members can take back their HOA through floor votes at the Annual Meeting.
I’m not sure if I find it laughable or frightening that someone has been stalking me to take photos or recordings. On the surface, it reveals the pitiful low that folks in Surfside are willing to go to maintain the status quo.
However, upon deeper reflection it points to the truly nefarious nature of those who seek to alienate and offend anyone who speaks out against the current regime. Stalking is also a crime in Washington in accordance with RCW 9a.46.110.
It also shows that some will not stop at harassment on this blog, but have now stepped up there game to invasion of privacy and possibly breaking the law. If there is such a recording, it could neither prove nor disprove my honesty and since I have not consented to any recordings (except in our public Board meetings), the recording would be illegal. Washington makes it a crime to intercept or record an in-person conversation or electronic communication unless all parties to the communication consent. See Wash. Rev. Code § 9.73.030(1).
However, the problem with pointing out the potential illegality of these actions is pointless in Surfside. We have already seen Trustees disregard the laws oertaining to non-profit organizations and HOAs. They have also proven to be deft at paraphrasing and manipulating Pacific County's Zoning Ordinance to deceive the Members and even the Courts. I suspect, but cannot price that there has also been undue influence placed on County Officials and even one Commisioner to obtain statements and sworn testimony in support of the Board’s twisted interpretations of the Ordinance. In time I am certain this will be exposed and those who engaged in this unethical, if not illlegal conduct will be held accountable.
Thank you Steve Cox & George Miller for your transparent support and willingness to speak the truth on this blog.
Correction, “I suspect, but cannot prove that there has also been undue influence placed on County Officials...”
We truly have no reason not to suspect that Blagg has posted anonymously as well as using her name do we?
Do we really believe that all those anonymous comments supporting Deb were not a matter of some being made by herself? I guess we are supposed to be stupid enough to think that there is a huge cult of Deb followers in Surfside who support her every thought or opinion. Wrong.
2:51. Believe what you want. There is nothing more “radical” to be said than what I have openly posted here. I have no need to hide behind the anonymous moniker.
1:01 .... You are deluded. Such a claim that one must serve on the BOT for a lengthy period, or have a lengthy history of residence in the community to understand "the operations of Surfside" is a ridiculous claim. You apparently endorse secret agreements and belief in your own magical powers.
The workings of the HOA are to comply with our covenants, which are required to be consistent with the State RCWS. The RCWs, Bylaws and covenants describe fully the proper procedures for conducting business in the HOA. Surfside has established an Operations Manual, which overall, mirrors the other documents here mentioned. The Manual cannot contradict the RCWs, covenants, or Bylaws, but must be consistent with their content. While surfside may have been fine with pretending that the Manual can supersede these other docs, that is not accurate.
Throughout the covenants and RCWs, it is repeatedly stated that ALL HOA decisions are to be made in public meetings, and if circumstances clearly are urgent, decisions outside of a meeting can be made with the consent and approval of the entire Board, or as many as is practically possible. So this legal stuff is ongoing, and is not urgent or unique from the usual business of the HOA.
I'm curious why the attorney representing the HOA is not concerned that proper procedures are being waived by Mr. Williams, and that the legal efforts he is directing are NOT properly approved by the entire Board. This is a blatant violation, that we can only assume that the attorney chooses to ignore, or pretends is not happening. We are talking about large sums of member funds being gambled by Mr. Williams on flakey issues of a personal nature.
Shall we pretend that spending as much as $80 to a $100,000 over a shed roof so important that it needn't be properly approved by the entire BOT ? If you said "yes" you need your head examined. This has no significance to the community to justify these actions.
Thank you for the insult and opinion Mr. Cox. Those in the know, know that a lot goes on in Surfside that is not part of any records or necessarily in compliance with RCW's, governing docs or written policies.
Cox has owned a condo for about two years in Surfside and he thinks he knows it all.
Where is the "proof" we spent $80-$100,000 in legal fees? You must've confirmed that with someone right? or did you just throw those numbers out? or just repeat what you heard here?
Steve, to clarify I ran for the Board last year and was elected, placing 4th out of 8 candidates, so I filled the remainder of the term of a Trustee that resigned. Two of the remaining candidates ended up being appointed after the election (Chris Hanson relaxed George and Mark Scott later replaced Chris). I was elected as a result of a vigorous door-to-door campaign.
Correction, Hanson “replaced” Miller. Dang autocorrect.
Do you all realize how easy it is to unobtrusively snap a picture, record a video, or record a conversation? Blagg was likely recorded at some of the doorways as she spread her ideas as a candidate for the board. It does not take active stalking to find yourself in a damning picture or recording that is hanging around someplace.
Deb .... Yes, I know you ran for office, as did Winegar. You were appointed to an unfinished term by Rogers. I know that you made an impressive effort in your campaign, and I appreciate your candidness, friendly manner, and work ethic. So yes, you deserved a spot on the board, and because he had hurriedly been appointed, Winegar was elected to the position he had held for about a month, and so forth. Many signs of dysfunction led to numerous resignations.
As for legal spending, the legal cost of taking a case to Superior Court has been estimated by Mr. Flood as being in the range I mentioned. I believe we had about $15,000 budgeted for legal costs for 2018 and we passed that point several months ago, the BOT approving more funds - how much I don't know.
I think Hanson relaxed George with a back-rub if I recall correctly. (kidding)
The nice thing about being transparent and honest - even when some may disagree with your ideas - is that you have nothing to fear or be ashamed of later. Keep in mind that damning recording - that doesn’t exist - would be a criminal act of it did exist.
Deb should keep in mind that her concept of illegalities in regard to recordings and pictures are being used all the time in news reporting, in court rooms and to intimidate people with no repercussions for the people doing the recording and picture taking. In some cases, huge fees are paid by news agencies to get access to the recordings and pictures. Is it possible that she is so accustomed to getting away with spinning the truth that it does not occur to her that there could be proof of her less than stellar honesty?
Hey Stevie. You made the statement in your 10:26 comment that Ms. Blagg was put on the board after the election which was false. She even came on here to correct you before me. I noticed you didn't come back to admit your error which isn't surprising.
You also keep with the whole "staged session" B.S. also. I was there, were you? It started off with a couple husbands making complaints to the board against a Trustee's actually statements that were false, period. There were some that also added complaints about the blog in general, including Ms. Blagg's husband. So was he also part of this grand plan you speak off?
You talk about how Ms. Blagg has been treated yet in the same comment you go after Ms. deLeest and others. I believe that easily qualifies as be a hypocrite.
Btw, I'm not 10:56. They are just another person who is, as you say, expressing their opinion. Don't like it, don't read it. Again your own advise. And that "tough guy" remark was really mature. What's next, challenging people to meet out on the playground after the July meeting?
11:08 - Steve acknowledged above that I ran for election (6/21 at 6:33) - so read before you comment and cut the BS. My husband spoke out to complain about the cowards who slander, lie and attack on the blog, but hide their identity. You know, people like yourself who pathetically refuse to post using your name so that you can stir the pot and bully in secret.
It is a good possibility that Blagg and her husband are commenting on this blog anonymously. We really don't know do we. It is interesting that she thrives on the controversies. How is it that someone knows so much about her?
Some of us learned by experience to comment anonymously to avoid the personal attacks that often follow comments. The Blaggs might simply be slow learners.
7:48 you are full of crap. Chuck doesn’t look at the blog anymore and I’m just a glutton for punishment. I really wish George would require all comments to be made by name.
7:48 I have had the same thought about Deb. She always is engaged in calling attention to herself in meetings, on the blog and in the community.
This would explain all the silly posts to the blog supporting any crazy thing that Deb posted.
So Deb,
Remember when I told you early on in your BOT venture that in Surfside, no good deed goes unpunished.
It is kinda surprising the lengths to which these fools are going through to shut you down.
Too bad you don't have more support from the homeowners, who are so much like sheep (uninformed) blindly walking down the path and over the cliff.
At some point you have to ask yourself is it worth the heartburn and stress dealing with the few fools who have unfortunately stumbled into positions of authority to harm the community as a whole for what?
I do wonder why Jim and Gary are still on the board, their longevity in these positions should make some wonder, are they hiding stuff?
Longevity??. I can understand your comment when it pertains to Flood, But since Mr. Williams just got voted in last year how do you explain that? I'm sorry but your bias is showing.
Back to Flood. Seems like the majority who vote are fine with him. You and others may not like it but that's the way it is and you need to accept it.
To Ms. Blagg:
My comment was in response to Mr. Cox concerning his accusation that the meeting was orchestrated which as someone who was there I feel was not the case. I used you husband only to show proof to my observation since he is one of your defenders. I only stated facts as how the meeting occurred. I find it interesting and quite telling that you chose to attack me, specifically for remaining anonymous, while you accept the anonymous comments who defend you.
Interesting but not surprising. It shows your true character which isn't surprising to most.
Mr. Williams has been on the board prior to this time. I believe it was for two full terms. He pushed to have the association clean up the canal even though legally the owners on the canal are responsible for that. He, of course, has property on the canal. Usually, he simply went along with whatever Flood proposed. He is not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Post a Comment