Fw: Re West Carrollton City Schools Dayton, Ohio

[Guest guest]

A story to share. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jlpletitia@... Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 4:15 PM bherk@... Subject: Re West Carrollton City Schools Dayton, Ohio Hi... wanted to give you a story for your sick buildings digest. Here in WestCarrollton have been on the front lines of sick buildings for well over twoyears. Unbeknownst to the parents in this district, testing of severalschools began in 1999 along with reports to administration that some teacherswere beginning to be ill at school due to the environment. The district didnot tell the community about the results and did not follow the guidelinesset forth by the parties doing the testing. In 1999 there were 80 trash cansfilled with water in the high school, due to leaks in the roof. Neglectedbuildings are only part of the issue here. The district maintained thatnothing was wrong yet, many students and staff began to fall ill. Threeteachers filed suit against the district. One had permanent lung damage, andtwo suffered from permanent brain damage. In Sept. 2001 many parentsattending board meetings began hearing the testimony of many teachers andstudents. These teachers put their jobs on the line testifying about theirserious illnesses and the parents quickly became involved. We begannetworking in late Nov. and trying to find out the statistics on thechildren. In Nov. 2001 the Teachers Assoc. reported that out of 73 teachers,43 of them had symptoms and 20 had tested highly positive for the moldStachybotrys. The district refused to take action during this time except forpainting over the mold and repeatedly changing ceiling tiles that werestained. They maintained that it was "poor air quality" that people were suffering from, not mold. The parents obtained copies of test results of threebuildings (testing was done in May 2001) and all reports showed "massivespores of Stachybotrys" as well as other toxic molds like Penicillum andAspergillus. One students lung collapsed and many more children/teacherssuffered from a variety of moderate to severe illnesses. All the parentsthought was that these health problems were "childhood illnesses." We did notrealize that so many were suffering from similar illnesses, until we begannetworking. When the board meetings began to fill with people questioning thesafety of the buildings, the district largely ignored the pleas of it'sstakeholders. Three months after the superintendent received his 5 yearcontract renewal, a letter was sent home to the parents stating we had "airquality issues." Many of the parents spent days on the phone with the publicentities trying to reach out for help as we faced the unknown. The schooldistrict, fearing further litigation did not provide our community with these"entities" (American Lung Assoc., the Ohio Dept. of Health, the CombinedHealth District and RAPCA). We still do not know if they are aware of thelarge numbers of severe illnesses that resulted from the environment of ourschools. There was a "clean-up" scheduled for the building over Christmasbreak of the entire building. Prior air samples showed 26 spores ofStachybotrys in a classroom and many other toxic molds were present. The"training" for the clean-up was a 10 min. video explaining what to do for achemical spill not, mold remediation. The parents group went through thebuilding two days prior to it being opened back up. We took our cameras andcamcorder to film what was done. To our surprise we found no barriers up inthe "clean areas" and the entire music theory areas filled with debris anduntouched. This area housed many occupants that were very reactive and we didnot understand why this was not included in the clean-up. We also found atrophy case badly water damaged from years of neglect in a "clean area." Thetrophy case was located on an inside wall and filled with obvious mold aswell as several classrooms that were "questionable." The children returned toschool and were without heat for three days due to previously crackedboilers. The superintendent refused to close the building even though thehighest temperature was 40 degrees in most classrooms. We believe the heatwas shut off in an attempt to alter the air testing that was done one dayprior to the schools reopening. The video showing our findings was releasedto the local TV station and a letter was written to the "Tools for Schools"personnel. The "letter" was never acknowledged by the EPA Tools for Schoolsprogram. The parents could not believe that this was acceptable. A "townmeeting" was scheduled for Jan. 23rd yet, we were not offered an "open mic."Our questions regarding our children and our buildings must have been"approved" by the school district, prior to the meeting. The "panel ofexperts" could not "hear" what exactly our children and staff have been goingthru. Questions were allowed to be submitted on 3x5 cards at the meeting.However, the districts PR lady was seen "sorting" thru the questions at theback of the auditorium. When the "Tools for Schools" program was implemented4 years ago, the guidelines were clearly not followed. This fact was notmentioned by the EPA representative on the panel. The "inaction" of ourdistrict created the end result we are facing today. I contacted the StateDept. of Health prior to the town meeting to inquire about a survey of thestaff and students. The "Chief of Epidemiology" told me that there was noneed for a study that the district had completed the clean-up and testing. Irelayed to her the fact that no one has studied the effects of a severelyneglected building that contained severe mold infestation, CO2, reports ofsewer gases, asbestos and the VOC's from all the cleaning products being usedto try to clean up the building. She stated that the school is under noobligation to provide the community with this information and that there arelaws governing mold. The parents are weary of fighting a district that has noregard for life and the human suffering that is a direct result of theirinaction. Yet, we are pressing on knowing that we are an example of howthings should not be handled. Our superintendent stated in last night'smeeting that he was a "pilot" in an issue that many districts were facing.Waiting 28 months to bring in the "experts" for the victims and then keepingthem silent, is hardly an example to live by. If we are to understand theeffects of the building, we must first interview the occupants. Simplyacting on the voices of these people 28 months ago, would have prevented anenormous amount human suffering. Thank You. 1-937-293-5157