Much has been written about the FISC fire.
photo: Mike Rosati Photography
But why has the response to concerns about asbestos been so slow? Two weeks to issue a statement? Aren’t homeowners done with sweeping up their yards already?
More troubling is the narrative, coming from top city officials, that asbestos testing was done on the air. So far, the facts do not seem to bear this out (or the city has not released the tests that do).
On April 9, 11 days after the fire, Chief Kapler reportedly told The Island:
Kapler said the department called in folks from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the Alameda County environmental health department to sample the air in the area adjacent to the fire which was blanketed by thick brown smoke. He said the air quality management people found no evidence that lead or asbestos…
Here’s what Fire Marshal Mike Fisher told CBS 5:
Fire Marshal Michael Fisher said air quality management investigators took samples downwind of the March 29 fire and found no asbestos and no health hazard.
The BAAQMD’s incident report mentions asbestos once:
“District Staff advised the Acting City Manager regarding the potential for asbestos containing building materials and proper abatement.”
But a quick look over the test results from BAAQMD it doesn’t appear that they didn’t tested for asbestos, or at least the results aren’t in the report. (Keep in mind the Air District did not say that they tested for asbestos, they said there was a “potential” that it was in the building).
Keep in mind the timing of these test results. They were taken hours after the fire began, it is unclear where they were taken, and the results were apparently not released until days after the fire. Decisions on the ground were made without the benefit of these test results (which don’t mention asbestos).
So why are they trying to make it sound like there was all this science behind their decision?
Is there a citywide health emergency? Not likely. But covering ones rear by going beyond the truth is extremely troubling. If asbestos was not tested for, we need to find out why the fire chief and other fire personnel are saying it was. And if it was tested for, release the test results.
Hey John,
Just to clarify a few things -
Kapler didn’t tell me that information personally, he delivered it in a report to the City Council at its April 7 meeting. If folks are interested in hearing exactly what was said, the video is available on the city’s website.
Also, I talked with a spokesperson for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District last week. They’re the folks who Kapler said had taken air samples. BAAQMD told me that they had only taken one “non-representative” sample of the air inside the burning building, and no samples upwind or downwind.
I also contacted county environmental health, the other agency that was supposedly on scene, and was told they were referring calls to the city’s risk manager.
Who is the risk manager for the city?