With the influx of tourism following statehood came a boom in construction, and asbestos was routinely used for cheap insulation. Since being recognized as causing mesothelioma and lung cancer, though, asbestos has been removed — carefully — from many buildings.

That is why recent allegations that a Maui housing complex for low-income families has been reluctant to do so are disturbing; further, the nonprofit housing executive who tried to mitigate the health hazard was demoted.

Government agencies need to pursue investigations to remedy the situation.

Robyne Nishida Nakao says she pushed for testing and proper removal of asbestos from ceilings and floor tiles at the Lahaina Surf housing complex, one of 14 rental properties with about 1,000 units owned and managed by the nonprofit Hale Mahaolu, Maui’s largest affordable housing provider.

Nishida Nakao has worked for the organization for 20 years, including as its deputy executive director since 2010 — but was demoted in April after urging that asbestos work be properly done. She plans legal recourse to pursue the asbestos removal but is hoping to resolve the job “retaliatory action” without legal action.

Nishida Nakao has filed a “safety or health hazard” complaint with the state Occupational Safety and Health Division (OSHD), alleging that untrained employees were handling and disposing of harmful material at Lahaina Surf and two other Hale Mahaolu properties. She maintains that employees were not provided with protective equipment.

She told the Star-Advertiser’s Nanea Kalani that some ceilings were covered up and partial replacements were made but said most of the 112 units still have asbestos, and 22 of the units are provided with housing assistance by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for low-income families, the elderly and disabled.

Roy Katsuda, Hale Mahaolu’s 32-year executive director, denied Nishida Nakao’s accusation that he had resisted her efforts to deal with asbestos cleanup, pointing to a 1981 letter from HUD that the exposure was not harmful; she replied that the tolerance levels had changed.

“We do care about our workers and residents,” Katsuda said. “If there are any kind of corrections that we have to make, we will make them. We want to do what’s right.”

The state OSHD must hold Katsuda and Hale Mahaolu to that statement. Nishida Nakao claims that March 2012 test results revealed that 10 of 17 sampled materials taken from units contained more than 1 percent asbestos fibers — the threshold for regulation under the federal Clean Air Act. If further investigation confirms unacceptable asbestos levels in the rental units, Katsuda and Hale Mahaolu must be called to account. Not only are tenants’ health at risk, but also building maintenance workers who are untrained in specialized asbestos abatement.

The Environmental Protection Agency in 1989 banned almost all uses of asbestos in the United States — breathing fibers can cause lung cancer and other lung diseases — but the asbestos in parts of buildings without government connection may remain.

The cost of removing the asbestos continues to be an issue.

As Gary Galiher, prominent Ho-nolulu attorney for mesothelioma victims, has noted, “Although asbestos was a cheap material to use, it isn’t necessarily cheap to remove. Asbestos inspections and removal can be timely and expensive.”

That, however, is a weak excuse to attempt removal on the cheap — or worse, for an organization entrusted with providing rental housing for the elderly and low-income families to improperly handle the problem.