Workers attempt to clear the Tauranga City Council building of toxic mould.
Workers attempt to clear the Tauranga City Council building of toxic mould.
The toxic mould saga in the council building raises many concerns, the most important of which is the threat that ratepayers will end up footing a substantial amount of the more than $1 million bill to remove the mould, fix the leaks and temporarily house the staff.
After people cameforward with health concerns, staff were evacuated when Tauranga City Council confirmed about 30 per cent of its building had tested positive for abundant levels of stachybotrys, a black toxic mould.
We have reported that Terry Wynyard, described as an "emergency recovery specialist", had been appointed to direct the council's clean-up project. After consulting "experts" - again presumably funded by ratepayers - what was their profound advice?
They advised that "vacuuming the chairs and floor and wiping down hard surfaces with hot, soapy water and drying them with paper towels would make them safe".
Wow, earth-shattering science. Why could the council's building inspectors not identify weather tightness in their own building?
Are other buildings in the city affected by mould but, as they are private enterprise, they perhaps would find a more cost-effective way of dealing with this issue while still being responsible for employee safety.
How can we be sure this is not an an over-reaction at our expense? Are the staff health concerns, reported as including skin irritation and asthma-like symptoms, proven to be related to the mould?
Most of the money to pay for Operation Clean is expected to come from depreciation reserves or loans.
Yes, the council is responsible for the safety of its workers. But did it investigate other options before raising a massive bill for ratepayers, which could have a long-term financial impact on our city?
