Audio edition: An Interview With Inspector Paul Moberly

FB_20151203_00_12_41_Saved_Picture.jpg

In my opinion, based on interviews I’ve done and after reviewing many documents, the fall ’14 asbestos scandal in the OVSD was a “cooked-up” controversy that was used as a tool to manipulate the election that year and flip the school board, thus creating a heavily pro-union voting bloc – which happened on election day that year. The only thing it appears the colluding group didn’t count on or plan for were the Federal and State mandated asbestos protocols which have destroyed the financial stability of the district.

In the coming months I will share some of what I have learned; and why I think the “scandal” was predicated by a single asbestos fiber, and how additional evidence was then manipulated to create hysteria which ultimately misled many families and created chaos within the district. Again, that is my opinion after several months of research, all unpaid and on my own time.

In the meantime, a group of parents had approached me and asked if it might be possible to track down an inspector named Paul Moberly, the DSA Inspector who they felt might have information about asbestos removal at OVSD schools (he was terminated by Sandy Pringle Associates immediately upon the scandal breaking).  His name has come up recently in a number of Facebook discussions and at one point, Trustee President Gina Clayton Tarvin explained in a public post to a parent why she thought he was fired. In the second part of my interview, Mr. Moberly addresses her accusations directly.

For the record, given that Mr. Moberly claims to have received phone calls from both Pres. Tarvin and trustee John Briscoe. Surf City Chronicles reached out to both of them individually to see if they would confirm or deny that accusation, and they were both offered an opportunity to lend their own quotes to this article. Both Briscoe and Clayton-Tarvin declined to respond. 

Here is part 1 of the interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQR4PsPtDr4&feature=youtu.be

Here is Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI9CtR19kig&feature=youtu.be

Again, in part 2 of the interview, Mr. Moberly addresses the following Q/A with district parent Jim Sagara to OVSD Trustee President Gina Clayton Tarvin.

Question from district parent Jim Sagara to OVSD Trustee President Gina Clayton Tarvin:

Sagara: Who is Paul Moberly and was he fired from his position as inspector? Who fired him and why? I have an archived Facebook post in which he briefly tells of violations that his reports fell on deaf ears, and have also read a parent’s account of speaking to him. Were District officials asked to come to construction sites to observe violations? Did they show up and where is the documentation? Are there other violations that have been reported, that as of yet have not been made public? Why have no public statements from Mr. Moberly been forthcoming?

Clayton-Tarvin: Paul Moberly was the DSA inspector for the Mesa View and Hope View projects. Mr. Moberly was hired to inspect project drawings and specifications. Typically the DSA project inspector is responsible to oversee all aspects of the construction project pursuant to the requirements of the DSA approved plans and specifications, except for certain areas that are contracted under the DSA inspector’s oversight called special inspection. Asbestos operations are usually performed with special contractors and overseen by special inspection by a Certified Asbestos contractor who is able to wear protective gear and both observe and test the asbestos abatement. In this case, the special asbestos inspection company was Patriot Environmental. While Patriot Environmental was responsible to oversee all aspects of asbestos abatement at all eleven (11) schools, it is unclear whether Patriot Environmental was overseeing the Mesa View Roof removal. The District has made inquiries with Patriot Environmental, however, Patriot Environmental has not responded as to whether they were performing special inspection or if Mr. Moberly was undertaking the special inspection.

There is a typical protocol where the inspector is required to notify the contractor that there is a safety deviation. Mr. Moberly noted issues with transite roof tile removal on July 17 and July 18, 2014, when there was no environmental inspection company on site. There is a Notice of Deviation to Chapman Coast roofing dated July 31, 2014. However, other than noting the failure to comply with specified safety requirements, there is no notification of improper asbestos removal to B&M Tear Off.

There was no special inspection provided on Mesa View and Mr. Moberly did not request special inspection be hired to oversee the Mesa View roof removal operation. Thus, despite having the opportunity to stop construction and the removal of asbestos, it appears that Mr. Moberly failed to do so. When there was an asbestos violation on Saturday, August 23, 2014, a day when SCAQMD was not in operation, rather than notify the contractor to stop the improper asbestos removal, Mr. Moberly appears to have allowed the entire roof removal without a notice of non-conformance or any attempt to stop the work.

The District did not ask for Mr. Moberly to be removed from the Mesa View and Hope View projects on September 27, 2014. The District learned that the inspection company had Mr. Moberly removed, but the exact reasons are unclear. The District did receive a threatening e-mail indicating that Mr. Moberly planned on notifying the press of asbestos oversight issues that appear to have occurred and were resolved over a month prior to Mr. Moberly being removed from the projects. It appears that Mr. Moberly notified Kacey Montoya of KTLA the evening after he was removed from the projects. The District is not aware of any attempts to notify the District that work should be stopped and there is no written record of any notifications to the District that there was an asbestos issue prior to the issue coming to light on the evening news on September 27, 2014.

The only time the District is aware that Mr. Moberly was going to notify the District of asbestos or construction problems was in Mr. Moberly’s September 27, 2014 e-mail correspondence that was written only to the construction manager, the architect, and Mr. Moberly’s employer. A copy of the e- mail was provided to the District on October 2, 2014. We are unaware of any notification from Mr. Moberly. In fact, when the evening news addressed asbestos violations, multiple District administrators tried to reach Mr. Moberly to ascertain more information about the concerns that were being complained of, but Mr. Moberly did not return telephone calls.

There is a typical protocol where the inspector is required to notify the contractor that there is a safety deviation. Mr. Moberly noted issues with transite roof tile removal on July 17 and July 18, 2014, when there was no environmental inspection company on site. There is a Notice of Deviation to Chapman Coast roofing dated July 31, 2014. However, other than noting the failure to comply with specified safety requirements, there is no notification of improper asbestos removal to B&M Tear Off.

 

There was no special inspection provided on Mesa View and Mr. Moberly did not request special inspection be hired to oversee the Mesa View roof removal operation. Thus, despite having the opportunity to stop construction and the removal of asbestos, it appears that Mr. Moberly failed to do so. When there was an asbestos violation on Saturday, August 23, 2014, a day when SCAQMD was not in operation, rather than notify the contractor to stop the improper asbestos removal, Mr. Moberly appears to have allowed the entire roof removal without a notice of non-conformance or any attempt to stop the work.

The District did not ask for Mr. Moberly to be removed from the Mesa View and Hope View projects on September 27, 2014. The District learned that the inspection company had Mr. Moberly removed, but the exact reasons are unclear. The District did receive a threatening e-mail indicating that Mr. Moberly planned on notifying the press of asbestos oversight issues that appear to have occurred and were resolved over a month prior to Mr. Moberly being removed from the projects. It appears that Mr. Moberly notified Kacey Montoya of KTLA the evening after he was removed from the projects. The District is not aware of any attempts to notify the District that work should be stopped and there is no written record of any notifications to the District that there was an asbestos issue prior to the issue coming to light on the evening news on September 27, 2014.

The only time the District is aware that Mr. Moberly was going to notify the District of asbestos or construction problems was in Mr. Moberly’s September 27, 2014 e-mail correspondence that was written only to the construction manager, the architect, and Mr. Moberly’s employer. A copy of the e- mail was provided to the District on October 2, 2014. We are unaware of any notification from Mr. Moberly. In fact, when the evening news addressed asbestos violations, multiple District administrators tried to reach Mr. Moberly to ascertain more information about the concerns that were being complained of, but Mr. Moberly did not return telephone calls.

 

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Post navigation

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: