Legal – Page 2 – EMF Safety Network

Sebastopol- Enforce the smart meter ban!

December 1, 2016

An open letter to the City of Sebastopol, City Manager, Council and Staff,

Enforce the smart meter ban in Sebastopol!

In 2013 Sebastopol passed an urgency ordinance banning smart meter installation because they are a threat to health, safety and community welfare. PG&E threatened to sue, so the city did not enforce the ban. PG&E backed off installations, until recently when PG&E met with the city manager to discuss plans to deploy smart meters in Sebastopol.

We are asking the city to enforce the ban because the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has failed to adequately regulate the safety of smart meters.
• The President of the CPUC, Michael Peevey, knew smart meters were causing people pain, and he abetted PG&E’s pay to opt-out scheme, and delayed CPUC regulation.
• A pay to opt-out program is an unlawful response to smart meter problems, including privacy and property rights, radiation health risks, fire hazards, and co-located meters.
• Mayor Michael Kyes and Sarah Gurney spoke to the CPUC judge asking for community opt-out. The CPUC dismissed community opt-out without taking testimony or holding hearings.
• EMF Safety Network, and three other groups have appeals citing violations of law pending. A CPUC attorney stated the CPUC will rule on those appeals in December 2016.

We ask you to stand up to PG&E and enforce the ban until the CPUC adequately regulates smart meters, including the right of cities to avoid them.

Please agendize this issue for Dec.19th.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sandi Maurer,
Director EMF Safety Network

Chapter 8.58 SMART METERS (TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON THE INSTALLATION OF SMART METERS) https://goo.gl/49n4Yf
Overview of PG&E/CPUC emails on smart meters https://goo.gl/AzfMQU
Summary of Evidence on Smart Meter Fires: https://goo.gl/ZQQH64
EMF Safety Network CPUC Appeal (Rehearing Request) https://goo.gl/updB6M

A tribute to activists: Smart Meters Suck

Berkeley WINS Right to Know cell phone labeling law

The city of Berkeley California was recently sued by the wireless industry CTIA (Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association) over their Cell Phone Right to Know ordinance. The ordinance requires retailers to warn customers about cell phone risks. Berkeley’s advisory at point of sale states: “To assure safety, the Federal Government requires that cell phones meet radio frequency (RF) exposure guidelines. If you carry or use your phone in a pants or shirt pocket or tucked into a bra when the phone is ON and connected to a wireless network, you may exceed the federal guidelines for exposure to RF radiation. Refer to the instructions in your phone or user manual for information about how to use your phone safely.”

CTIA argued the ordinance would be misleading, give off an impression of harm, and would violate retailers’ First Amendment rights by forcing them to distribute information they might disagree with.

In September U.S. District Court Judge Chen ruled that Berkeley’s law is not a violation of the industry’s first amendment rights, but did tell Berkeley to remove one controversial line about the risk to children, which they did.

Last week’s hearing was to remove the ban, now that the line has been removed, and allow implementation. Ted Olson, attorney for the CTIA, sent Judge Chen 25 pages of further argument after his original decision. The Judge agreed to allow further argument last week. Larry Lessig, Harvard Constitutional Law Professor and Robert Post, Dean of Yale Law School are defending Berkeley pro bono.

Yesterday, less than one week after the court hearing, Judge Chen removed the ban on the Berkeley law despite CTIA’s numerous arguments. Chen also denied the wireless group’s motion to stay his order dissolving the injunction pending appeal.

Maine Supreme Court smart meter ruling ignores evidence of harm

This week the Maine Supreme Court upheld the finding of utility regulators regarding smart meter safety. The Court supported this difficult to follow position: “It is one thing to make a finding that evidence is credible regarding potential harm and quite another to find there is a legally credible threat of harm—that a credible threat of harm is in fact credible: likely and probable to result in harm.”

The court weighed health and safety precautions with utilities bottom line. “The Commission, therefore, properly rejected Friedman’s approach because it would require an impractically high threshold for ensuring safety, and as a result would render nearly all utilities unsafe.”

The Court upheld this position, even though they knew there is evidence of risk. “The Commission acknowledged that there had been some evidence presented of potential future risk posed generally by RF exposure,…”

The key to the ruling is what the court calls, “balancing the potential for harm against the usefulness and pervasiveness of the technology at issue.”

This ruling culminates a four year legal battle in Maine over the health and safety effects of smart meters. Even though the legal burden was on the utility (CMP) to show smart meters were safe, the Court ignored this and placed the burden on the customer to pay to avoid the risk of pulsed radiation smart meters emit.

Ed Friedman stated: “ The Court has miserably failed the people of Maine. They ignored independent testimony from international experts on the credible threat of harm RF exposures at smart meter levels pose, and instead chose to believe the “Marlboro Man” that smoking is good for us.”

Maine Supreme court ruling: http://www.mainecoalitiontostopsmartmeters.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/2016-ME-19-Friedman-Appeal-Decision-1-26-16.pdf

Summary of Evidence on Smart Meter Fires

BePreparedSMfire In California and around world, smart meters have been linked to fires, explosions, and damaged appliances. For every fire started at the meter, in an appliance, or on wiring, smart meter causality should be suspected.

There has been a recent spate of fires in Guerneville, California which some people have blamed on the homeless. The cause of the fires are still under investigation, but some have been linked to electrical wiring, faulty heaters, and possibly arson. The link to smart meters has not been investigated.

A Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) whistleblower Pat Wrigley, who worked as a meter reader for 9 1/2 years testified at California Public Utilities Commission judicial hearing. He stated: “Smart meters cause fires” and “PG&E is covering up the risk”.

Two California fire captains contacted us about two different types of problems from smart meter arcing.

Matt Becket’s refrigerator motor intermittently sped up and their lights became brighter. He said, “As a seventeen year veteran and current Fire Captain this caused me to become very concerned.” The smart meter on his house was replaced with an analog, and there were no problems, until a new smart meter was reinstalled. This time he had two surge protectors burn out.

Another fire captain Ross writes, “I was at home doing yard work in the late afternoon when my wife came outside and told me that “half the power was off again”. This had been happening on and off for about two weeks … I then went outside to where my meter was and I could instantly smell the burnt electrical smoke. As I was looking at the meter I inadvertently placed my hand on the meter itself and almost burned my hand.”

Despite the above claims from knowledgeable whistleblowers, and media reports linking smart meters to fires and explosions, this issue has not received the serious attention it deserves.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is charged with overseeing utility safety. They knew about the risk of smart meter fires in 2009, and their staff investigated in 2013. The CPUC told the Governor and Legislature they found no problem. If there’s no problem, why aren’t the details of their investigation public? Why did they wait four years to investigate?

PG&E states they are now monitoring temperature and voltage readings of smart meters for hazardous conditions, which proves there’s a problem. If there was no problem they would not need to monitor these conditions.

Please see the Summary of Evidence on Smart Meter Fires which is culled from the EMF Safety Network Smart Meter Fires and Explosions page and documents this hazard with links to more information. We have been tracking smart meter fires since 2010.

SMUD sued for negligence, public nuisance, and unfair business practices over utility smart meters

A lawsuit against Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) has been filed in Superior Court of California. The plaintiff, John Echols, alleges three causes: negligence, public nuisance, and unfair business practices related to the forced installation of utility smart meters.

Mr. Echols refused to allow the smart meter on his residence and refused to join the opt out program due to SMUD’s discriminatory fees. He declined having a smart meter because of the dangers of pulsed radiation that smart meters emit, and the health risks to his family.

SMUD charged Echols the opt-out fees despite his argument that he never opted out, and he never opted in. SMUD eventually forced a smart meter onto his home, followed by cutting off his power completely, during a Sacramento heat wave last summer (2013). His power was eventually restored, but without a meter and his bills were estimated.

The situation continued with legal complaints made by Echols which went unresolved at SMUD. In December Echols filed the law suit against SMUD. The court filing can be found here: http://origin.library.constantcontact.com/download/get/file/1114179096387-71/Echols+v+SMUD+Complaint.pdf

In 2012 SMUD board members mocked customers who did not want smart meters on their home, and laughed about how much they’d have to pay to opt-out. A SMUD director said, “The $166 upfront will convince them they can really afford a lot of tin foil hats” [laughter]…Another director says, “But they are already wearing them!” http://emfsafetynetwork.org/smud-smart-meter-shenanigans/

While the SMUD board was laughing all the way to the bank with federal stimulus funding for smart meters, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine called for a halt to wireless smart meters to protect public health. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/american-academy-of-environmental-medicine-calls-for-a-halt-to-wireless-smart-meters/

Jury awards Vermont couple $1million in cell tower lawsuit

A jury awarded a million dollars to Olga Julinska and Felix Kniazev in a big win against Vermont Electric Power Corp for building a communications tower right next to their mountain top property.

Julinska and Kniasev are artists who purchased the mountaintop home as much for its inspiring 360 degree view as for the privacy it afforded. They said the jury verdict was a victory for themselves and every other Vermont resident bullied by an imminent domain process that takes property for public good without always compensating property owners fairly.

‘Casualty catastrophe’ – Cell phones

Insurers stop covering for cell phone use, called the next ‘casualty catastrophe’ after tobacco and asbestos; phone manufacturers hit with a class action and personal lawsuits; and the warning deep inside your mobile. Seek truth from facts with Ellie Marks, whose husband Alan is suing the industry for his brain tumor, ‘cell phone survivor’ Bret Bocook, leading radiation biologist Professor Dariusz Leszczynski, Microwave News editor Dr. Louis Slesin, Storyleak editor Anthony Gucciardi, and former senior White House adviser Dr. Devra Davis.