Clerk of Courts office moves for mold work
After weeks of employees reporting headaches, burning eyes and nausea as a result of mold remediation, the Clerk of Courts office began Wednesday to move its operations from the basement of the county courthouse to the public meeting room in the newer county government building, which was built in the 1990s.
The county started mold remediation in November in parts of the 134-year-old courthouse, and employees working on the ground floor began to complain of noxious fumes and a lack of ventilation. That section of the building houses the Clerk of Courts, prothonotary and sheriff's office.
Clerk of Courts Lisa Weiland Lotz, who oversees the department, said she originally didn't think the smell would affect her employees, but she decided to move the office after chemical smells persisted during the week, with most of the clerks complaining about symptoms and side effects from exposure.“Monday, they promised no smells, but when we came in someone was applying Aerocel,” Lotz said.Aerocel is a thermal insulation, and safety guides suggest general ventilation.County Commissioner Leslie Osche countered that contractors working on the building, unlike county employees, have to follow standards set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), a federal agency under the Department of Labor that protects private employees.She said she didn't think they would use dangerous chemicals.“Every time they're doing something, the air quality is continually tested,” Osche said.She further stressed county employees have been continually updated, but “there's no magic solution.”Osche said that the sheriff's office hasn't complained and it added an air purifier in the room to get rid of any smells.The prothonotary's office is expected to make a decision when newly elected Kelly Ferrari moves into her role in the new year.Lotz said she made the decision to move because the ground floor of the courthouse where the paint, insulation and bonding agents were used did not have ventilation. She added her staff is not allowed to open windows per court rules.
“They had fans, but they were not blowing anywhere with the windows closed. There's no ventilation,” Lotz said. “Employees complained of itchy throats, runny (noses), sore eyes, headaches and other problems.”Osche and commissioners Kevin Boozel and Kim Geyer said they offered to relocate the roughly 30 to 40 people with the Clerk of Courts, prothonotary and sheriff's offices before the remediation began, but none of the departments, all headed by elected officials, took them up on the offer.Over the past year, the county began updating the insulation around pipes circulating heating and cooling throughout the building.The newer cooling system wasn't designed to work with the older pipes — which led to condensation, according to the commissioners, and served as fertile ground for mold.In the fall, the county started rebuilding parts of the wall destroyed to allow access to the pipes and clearing out parts of the wall to remove mold.
Moisture in the courthouse is nothing new, the commissioners noted. The building sits atop a water spring, leading to a moist basement.The courthouse was built in 1885, and is a three-story, brick and sandstone building. County commissioners say it has a steady stream of maintenance problems.States are given the opportunity to opt for protection of public employees, but Pennsylvania never chose to do it, according to state Rep. Patrick Harkins, D-1st, who sponsored a bill earlier this year to extend OSHA protection to public employees.The bill hasn't made it to a vote, and Harkins said it is unlikely to gain the necessary Republican support to make its way through the House and Senate.“There should be universal coverage for everybody, and I think in the long run it will save them money,” Harkins said. “If the private sector can do this, there's no reason the public can't.”Harkins said that one of the opponents of the bill is the County Commissioners Association of Pennsylvania, a statewide organization of which Boozel and Osche are members.Ken Kroski, a spokesman for the organization, said they do not believe extra regulations and fines will improve the safety of local government employees. He argued there are enough safety measures in place. He cautioned that the additional oversight would “significantly increase” administrative costs for oversights that they consider to be in place.
A spokesman with the county's union, Service Employees International Union 668, said the exposure to unhealthy elements wouldn't have been permitted if county employees were protected by OSHA. He disagreed with the commissioners' assessment that the place was safe for employees.“This is dangerous,” said union member John Listisen, “not only for the workers, but also the public coming into the building, including seniors and children with issues. It's just there and it's not going away. It's not something that the county wants to be publicly known.”Listisen said “management can do whatever they want to do, unless a worker from the private sector complains.”He said government workers have no OSHA protection.The commissioners said that work on the building was scheduled for evenings and weekends as often as possible to reduce the amount of exposure county employees faced.“When you do these types of projects, there's going to be an inconvenience,” Osche said. “This was done for everyone's health.”Geyer added, “The building wasn't designed to accommodate the number of employees down there.”The commissioners said they are exploring ways to reduce the amount of people in that part of the courthouse.Asked if he hopes public employees will eventually have OSHA protection, Listisen said, “It's not about hope. It's about the right thing. This shouldn't be a partisan issue. Health and safety of workers is a nonpartisan issue. If it's good enough for nongovernment employees, why can't it be for government workers?”
