In a correspondence dated 1/7/2020, the Board President, Scott Winegar, sent me an Email where he accused me with being the cause for the costs of cleaning up the asbestos pipe handling and mess. The Board refuses to accept the responsibility in a situation that put the employees health and welfare at risk. They blame disclosure as the problem. Bottom line...they got caught.
In a rambling reply to my complaint about a Board member, he made the following statement:
" Despite the misinformation that circulated among some, our attorney reports that the matter is resolved and no fines will be levied. In fact, our attorney reported “All parties involved were pleased with the way SHOA took responsibility for its education and compliance.” Once LNI gave its approval, we were able to conclude the contract for proper disposal of the AC pipe".
Below is one of several pictures that I took and shared of the illegal pile of exposed asbestos pipe adjacent to the well field. Unknown to me at the time, they then took this pipe and buried it under the settling pond for the new carbon treatment plant. When that was discovered, they had to hire a firm to dig it up and do proper disposal at a cost of thousands of dollars.
For a larger view, click on the picture once or twice:
34 comments:
Uh, all parties happy? What about those exposed like me and other current n past water employees. Believe me, EPA is not done with Surfside.
Criminal investigation is totally separate from state L & I.
um I call BS, someone is bending the truth
WA L&I fines were levied and paid. Transaction 2933 on 11/27/2018 for $27,000.00 was paid to WA L&I. There is a note in the financial record that says they billed NBWD for 50% of the charge.
Legal fees were paid for this malfeasance. Transaction 2912 on 11/19/2018 for $30,731.47 was paid to Helsell Fetterman LLP. The note in the financial record states this was for legal fees for asbestos related issues, assessment (past due members), general, Johansen/Ringo.
This is 8:25 PM again. When Winegar took over as President, I never thought he would be any better than Williams.
I thought he would be, but we just got another failed disappointment.
Excuse me, didn't this all happen when YOU were on the board? That makes you just as much of a "criminal".
NO. I had resigned before this.
6:11 AM:
What role the Trustees have, what they knew, and when they knew it are what will determine who has "criminal" exposure.
They all would be smart to have hired their own legal counsel.
They were advised to do so by the association attorney. Some did. When they as individuals, knowingly violate laws, they are personally liable. They will not be represented by the association attorney or association insurance. There is an EPA criminal investigation. These fools only dig themselves into deeper holes.
As a newer member, I’m not sure I understand, is there an EPA criminal investigation taking place now?
show up to the Jan 18th meeting, voice your opinions, they need to know we care
Unbelievable. 8:25 if you have the data you refer to, bring it to the meeting on the 18th. If we can prove Winegar lied (let alone that he blames George because he caught them) we must ask for Winegars immediate resignation! And probably all of the Board Me bets were complicit and should also tender their resignations. Please let us assist and where did you get the info? With FOI, we should be able to get data from L&I reference the payment and to bring a libel suit against the association lawyers if they indeed told Winegar that all was settled without fines, etc. if proven, Winegar can not be trusted and will lose faith of the people he is supposed to represent, and has to immediately resign!
Yes, they're not much more than ditch diggers. They have a lot of practice.
01/07 6:36 PM:
I hope you are being able to monitor and continue to monitor your health for many years at Surfside's expense.
Stay strong and make them pay!
8:54, i am a past employee, have never been contacted by shoa, nor offered any monitoring, etc. until criminal investigation is complete, lawyer cant do much. doubt if live long enough to see any satisfaction.
I suggest that the issue be brought up at the Board Meeting, but leave the demands for resignation out of it. It will not take place on the spot, so if you want to pursue legal matters relating to this, fine. Do so outside of the meeting. No one is going to resign, and the appropriate action to take is to try to recall Trustees. That isn't at all likely to be successful either, as most of the electorate is very conservative.
Several positions will be up for election. I've been saying (as well as others) for a year and a half, that the BOT has been knee-deep in management failures and legal entanglements, unwilling to admit to it or accept responsibility. By now it is common knowledge, or some members think it's a myth created by discontents. Legal expenditures have been hidden and denied. The membership is NOT in an uproar, yet the facts have been out there.
Now we have Winegar blaming the EPA investigation on George, and claiming that they would have commenced corrective actions. That is a joke, as the BOT had oversight of Water Dept. procedures, and this stuff had been going on for at least a couple of years.
The HOA has NEVER admitted to responsibility for all of this, and this letter is the first acknowledgement that the HOA took corrective action in terms of proper safety meetings and periodic reviews of proper procedures in handling asbestos. The HOA has been mum about all of this. The fines and legal costs are their responsibility, and the customary outcome of EPA violations of this magnitude.
it has been well over a year since this all started. If the EPA investigation, if there ever was an investigation, is not yet complete, when will it be? If Mr. Winegar says it is resolved, then maybe it is resolved. The time that passed would seem to indicate that was true. If the EPA did investigate the incident and did not arrest anyone or issue a fine to Surfside that would be a good thing. That would mean that federal agents, after reviewing all of the facts determined there was no crime committed and civil fines would not be warranted. This is good news. I do not want to pay higher assessments to cover an EPA fine.
You are correct Steve. If the accusations are true, Winegar, Williams, and Clancy should have the moral fiber to resign without coaxing from the members.
agreed 2:26, although I'm sure that there are those who wish they would have found something wrong and want to pay higher dues.
There is no real grounds for believing Mr. Winegar, and certainly no call to consider the HOA exonerated over issues that are nearly 2 years old, and have been kept from the members all of this time.
The Wetlands Mitigation Hearing is tomorrow in Long Beach. There may be a final determination as to how many acres will be required to be purchased by Surfside, and at what cost. The HOA is paying a South Bend attorney to represent us, with a background of handling these kinds of cases. The price charged per acre varies from $12,000 to $90,000, and it has not been established where Surfside will land in this vast range.
It is our understanding that Surfside let this go to the point that authorities were very angry about it, and said the land would be $90,000 an acre. Since then, the attorney was hired, and he probably has some respect from the authorities. It has been said that there are 3 Surfside parcels that are in violation, so it is yet unclear what the cost will be.
The Board has refused to acknowledge ANY of this and was not candid about the public hearing. With a policy of stonewalling the membership, why would we believe that Winegar has any clue what has been decided by the EPA ? When we see proof that this investigation has been concluded, we will then KNOW fact from fiction.
These are 2 separate issues, but have been part of a larger effort to hide numerous management failures that developed in Summer of 2018.
306 - As much as I would love to see that, don't bet on it. These people will only go out kicking and screaming. They have no morals or scruples, otherwise they would have resigned a long time ago.
I heard 01/07 8:25 PM is the Crazed Weasel, Bottle Man, Little Mikey.
Remember, he can't organize a sock drawer. Also, remember clean underwear checks.
Another misstatement at 10:26. Winegar is only addressing the continued misinformation and rumors that continue here and did so by supplying actual facts. Of course it ends up being a waste of his time. If I was on the board I wouldn't bother to address it since trying to be truthful only gets twisted and turned to fodder on here.
People keep coming on here saying that this is CRIMINAL, even going as far to say the Fed's are going to show up and put Trustees in handcuffs. That isn't going to happen and is only wishful thinking on their part. Now when the usual suspects come back to attack me on this answer one question. Other than fines, how many people went to jail on the Hanford spill?
The above is the opinion of those that weren't exposed, must be nice. I was, alot. Asbestos prob goes back before 2015. I was interviewed by the investigator, and it is the U.S. govt, so takes awhile depending on other priorities other than a little hoa. But be patient, they will get to us eventually.
What is wrong with that Winegar guy? Is he stupid or something? I am sure his lawyer, and he has one,and the board lawyer, both have advised him and others to keep their mouths shut. His attack on George has reopened the whole issue again. I am sure also, that the other board members wish he would keep his big mouth shut. Anyone knows, that when your in a legal mess, you say nothing. You leave that to the lawyers. He is going to regret that he said anything.
Cox, isn't the Crazed Weasel, Bottle Man, Little Mikey, 8:25 PM, full of lies?
6:03....As has already been pointed out, no PROOF of Winegar's statement has been provided, nor alluded to. And to state that the HOA was about to address the asbestos situation just before the EPA came knocking, is ridiculous. Stopped by the Highway patrol for speeding, telling the officer that you had just started slowing down, does not exonerate you.
3:06 - I didn't suggest we demand resignations, nor recalls. I also consider it weak to pick on Mike Riley. He has made numerous requests for public records relating to Surfside matters, which takes some effort, and shows that he wants to make a contribution. Whatever his point of view, there is no need to be so cruel toward him.
12:57:
I suggest you re-read my comment because your response makes no sense. I addressed the statement YOU made saying the Winegar blamed the investigation on George. So to use your words, where's the PROOF. Do you have access to the email he sent, because in the part that is on here no where does it say that. Now to your current comment. What I find ridiculous is you believing that Winegar would purposely misquote the attorney. Given the attorney is actually involved with this issue most reasonable people would tend to believe the person(s) who actually have first hand knowledge, not the opinions of the likes of you.
I also find it interesting how you like to talk about PROOF when time after time on various topics you like to drop rumors and when they are PROVED to be just that, a rumor and not fact, you don't own up to it and just move on to the next one.
Winwgar is in over his head. He needs to resign and run for cover. Good thing he has his own private attorney. He is going to need him.
6:03.... You stated that Winegar had provided facts regarding the rumor that the EPA issue has been officially closed. he has not. Your vague references to other things I have said means nothing at all. Disliking my point of view, and/or me personally, does not in itself discredit things that I say on the Blog. As I have stated numerous times, I NEVER knowingly make a statement that cannot be verified as true.
My only objective is to bring to the forefront what is known about HOA business that is not common knowledge, or being actively denied/covered-up by the HOA. When Mr. Winegar or the HOA attorneys bring to a public Board Meeting, black and white documentation that the EPA investigation has been concluded, and their findings, THEN we will know for a fact that it is true.
There is nothing for me to gain by misrepresenting ANYTHING regarding this community, and the folks like you who complain so bitterly, are eager to deny the Board's conscious efforts to keep information from the members which is intended to be public record.
We have seen a steady stream of cover-ups and misleading information from the HOA, and recent comments by Mr. Winegar fit that description.
While I may at times misstate or forget minor details such as dollar amounts or dates, the primary details of everything I state on the Blog are to my knowledge verifiable, and from a legitimate reliable source. You are full of baloney with your personal remarks, and seek denial of truth.
Thanks Steve.
I think your heart's in the right place.
How can we get more members engaged?
Enough members of the Board will have to be willing to make efforts to connect with the many disenfranchised owners, to do so. The site that was set-up for Electronic voting had only made a trial run, when the president of the Board, Gary Williams, ended the committee charter and program out of anger toward Deb Blagg who set it up. That site could have been utilized to make surveys of member opinion, and make covenant and policy changes, issues easily weighed in on by those who would use the site.
Many property owners in Surfside are RV owners, and haven't felt a welcome part of Surfside, I think. The war on trees in Surfside has been a constant burden for most RV lot owners, and an annoying reoccurring expense. When the rights of RV owners have been discussed, there is a vocal contingent that express great disdain for RV owners, some wanting to ban RVs (which will never happen).
The "new" pro-active enforcement policy also will create more of a division between community management and the members, with an attitude that everyone's trying to get away with something. Increasingly restrictive rules cause more confusion than order, by unwittingly creating too many grey areas open to interpretation. That breeds conflict. The new Lighting covenant is a prime example. By randomly designating light fixtures as "acceptable" or "not acceptable", it ignores the fact that wattage is the primary issue in most cases, and enclosures and valances vary greatly.
The BOT makes many concerted efforts to leave owners guessing and disengaged. Great sums of money are spent annually that are never publicly acknowledged (Co., State, and Fed. fines & legal spending), while HOAs are required by State law to operate transparently. The process that was used in deciding on the new lighting restrictions proposed, has not been made public record. There are no meeting minutes published for the last 7 months, the lighting stuff handled during the Summer.
So good question how to get more members involved in our elections and governance, when the HOA has made such an effort to avoid it. Last election only about 280 members voted out of about 2030. Some cannot vote due to compliance disagreements with the HOA. So more nebulous rules, create more conflict, more legal costs, and require more people enforcing stupid rules. This is only going to get worse.
Trustees have to want a more engaged and happy community, and make efforts to do so. Surveys of opinion would be a start. Can the pro-active plan. Keep rules clear and concise. Put specific controls on legal spending, and make a commitment publicly, to trying to avoid legal efforts, work it out with owners, get rid of the Tree policy, do not approve the lighting covenant change (keep it simple),.... Stop the war on the member's right to enjoy their property.
And that my friend is why they didn’t appoint you to fill the vacant seat on the board! Way too much common sense and you have ideas not in line with theirs. By the way look at the October trustee minutes. No mention in the old business or new business as to their decision on the vacant seat. I find that very odd as in the past minutes that issue was always discussed and a motion made in open session! Check it and see
Going simple and getting rid of the compliance covenant is essential if we are going to be a hospitable, restful seaside neighborhood. We aren’t a gated community
Thanks Steve
Post a Comment