Take Action! – EMF Safety Network

February 2023 Newsletter

February 17, 2023

Hi EMF Safety Network Friends,

We are deeply grateful for the sharing of information in our network. Thank you, everyone! Not only does our mutual support expand our awareness about EMF issues, but it can inform us in ways we may not have previously considered. There is power in that!

While we aim to keep discussions focused on EMF issues, occasionally a comment comes through that may seem off topic, but we leave that to our list moderator, Warren, who helps us stay on track. As stated: “This list started for California and has now grown to include members from other US states and other countries who are also opposing smart meters and educating about EMF, and RF pollution.”

The following info is on our list subscriber page: “This discussion list is private! All members must be honest about who they are. Infiltration by industry, or their affiliates will not be tolerated and moles or persons found falsifying their identities or sharing private information from this list with opposing industry interests will be exposed publicly, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.” This important statement helps keep us safe to share.

SEBASTOPOL, CA- SMART WATER METER UPDATE……………………………………

The rollout of the Syserco Smart Water Meters installation is projected to begin at the end of February.

Although there was a concerted effort by Sandi and others last year to stop the installation of smart water meters entirely, a compromise was reached which will allow residents a free opt-out from the transmitting device/antenna that’s connected to the smart meter. Sebastopol will still be replacing all analog water meters with smart water meters regardless of opt-out. Meters without transmitters will be read manually each month.

An opt-out form is available on the Sebastopol City website: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/City-Government/Departments-Services/Public-Works/Water-and-Wastewater/AMI_Opt_out-Application-Approved-Final-9-20-22.aspx. We recommend sending in the form as soon as possible, before installation commences in the next few weeks. The city plans to inform residents of the installation with a door hanger a few days before the roll-out in their neighborhood. If you have questions, call the City of Sebastopol at: 707-823-1153. More info about the opt-out: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/City-Government/Departments-Services/Public-Works/Water-and-Wastewater/AMI_Opt_out_FAQ_Approved-Final-9-20-22.aspx

Why opt-out?

Read more: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/sebastopol-rethink-smart-water-meters/comment-page-1/ Although the City is promoting this as a water saving measure, Syserco wrote: “… there has never been a claim that the new meters save energy, save water and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” Many residents have already chosen to opt out of PG&E Smart Utility Meters due to concerns over RFR, excessive data collection, and unwanted surveillance.

The City recently sent us the following answer to our questions about the Smart Water Meter installation:

1) How will this ping rate be monitored (the rate needs to be verified). Who collects this data?

The ping rate is scheduled to be set at 3 pings per day. Two of them scheduled and one random. The data is collected from the Beacon software service that imports from the meter endpoints.

2) When will the residents be able to view and act on the opt-out application and how will it be publicized? Will this be prior to installation?

The information is on the city website. https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/City-Government/Departments-Services/Public-Works/Water-and-Wastewater Individual door hangers with the Opt-out information will also be delivered at a minimum off 48 hours prior to installation.

3) If a meter is installed and a resident requests an opt-out after installation, how soon will the antenna be removed?

Once the City receives a signed opt-out form, the establishment of the account and the removal of the data collector/transmitter can occur up to a 3 weeks period depending on the number of requests. For data recording and a clean cut off for billing purposes, the City may elect to avoid removing the data collector/transmitter until after the close of the monthly billing cycle – usually at the end of the month.

4) Are four pings a day (as recommended by the manufacturer) required? Could one transmission ping provide all the information that is needed?

The manufacture recommends 4 pings per day. The minimum recommended transfer of data is 3 times per day. Per City Council Direction, 3 pings per day with two of them scheduled and one random.

5) The spec sheet states that the average RFR broadcast will be approximately 10 dBm at the meter and the signals decrease with the square of the distance (two feet away is ¼ of one foot, etc.). How will this broadcast intensity be monitored and at what distance? (10 dBm = 1,210,000 uW/m2)

There are no current plans for monitoring.

6) What recourse do residents of Sebastopol have if the intensity or frequency is increased?
[No response]

SEBASTOPOL- CELL TOWER UPDATE…………………………………………………………..

T-Mobile (12 antenna) 80 Ft. Cell Tower Proposed for 9300 Mill Station Road, Sebastopol

An active neighborhood group has mounted a strong opposition to this permit application for 9300 Mill Station Road. Some of their reasons include:

1)   Riparian waterway and toxic microplastics pollution from faux cell tower tree.
2)   Destruction of scenic views.
3)   Safety and fire issues.
4)   Environmental effects and human health Issues from (RFR).
5)   Decreased property values.
6)   Insurance: Who will take responsibility for damages?

This location is just outside City limits, so the permit is before the County of Sonoma’s Planning Department.

Monopole Cell Tower- 32 ft. 10655 Mill Station Road, Sebastopol

Crown Castle has plans for another tower a little over a mile away, at 10655 Mill Station Rd. A small public notice was published in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat on Feb. 9, 2023 with the following info:

“Any interested party that believes the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment may file a Request for Environmental Review to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Such request may only raise environmental concerns. Information regarding the project may be found under file number A1237169 on the FCC website: www.fcc.gov/asr/applications. Request must be filed within 30 days of the notice being posed on the FCC website.”

All requests must be filed electronically with the FCC. This particular file number also required the request to be snail mailed to Crown Castle (not emailed). They gave this address: Crown Castle, 2000 Corporate Drive, Canonsburg, PA 15317 Attn: Regulatory Sept. 23-000421/KEB. They don’t make it easy to oppose, do they?

By the way, if you go to the FCC website to file for environmental review, you can view all the other cell towers in many states that are up for environmental review each month. There are well over 100 on this FCC site and are updated daily . You can view the FCC application and the location map: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/ASRManager/service/nationalNoticeReport.faces

SANTA ROSA- CELL TOWER UPDATE………………………………………………………….

AT&T 70 ft. Macro Cell Tower at 2400 Bluebell Drive, Santa Rosa

Once again, a small public notice appeared in the PD newspaper on Jan. 10th, this time asking for interested persons to submit a request for environmental review on the FCC website for a 70 ft. AT&T cell tower at 2400 Bluebell Drive, Santa Rosa. This same tower location had already been approved last April by the Santa Rosa Planning Commission despite an opposition report filed by Safetech4SantaRosa and concerned neighbors. I wondered what gives?

First it was approved by the Planning Commission and then it needs to go through an environmental review process with the FCC. We did file the request for FCC environmental review last week, but this time we included the need for fire safety, as this macrotower will share that same address as a battery wholesaler and warehouses lithium batteries for electric and hybrid cars. The tower will be less than 50 feet away!

The Santa Rosa Fire Department submitted a statement that there would be accessible water sources to combat potential fires on the site, but ignored the fact that cell tower fires are electrical fires that can’t be fought with water. Likewise, lithium and water react violently!

AT&T Cell Tower Upgrade, next to popular Sports Field and Public Bleachers, 750 Doyle Park Drive, Santa Rosa

A permit was pulled to “upgrade” an AT&T CELL tower from 9 to 12 antennas. We took RFR readings showing the already high readings at this tower, and submitted our findings (including a video) to the Santa Rosa Planning Commission. Unfortunately, the 12 antenna upgrade was approved, but the Commission chair said she wished she could oppose it, but needed more legal clout. Her parting words were “Please work to change the laws. Keep doing what you’re doing.”

Note: We thank our good friend, Mary, for her eagle eyes as she scours the public notices every day looking for key words like monopole, FCC, antenna structure, etc. Otherwise, how would we know? Mary has a Verizon Small Cell tower 42 ft. from her house.

The information below is from our Marin County Friend, Vicki Sievers:

LEGAL ACTION…………………………………………………………………………

iPhone Users Seek Supreme Court Review

Plaintiffs claim that a lab hired by the Chicago Tribune found that the iPhone 7, 8, and X showed exposure above the federal limit when the phones were carried close to the body. In August the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the claims, but because circuits are split on pre-emption issues, the plaintiffs are now seeking Supreme Court review. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/iphone-users-seek-scotus-review-of-radiation-preemption-ruling (requires subscription to read in full, if you’re interested ask me for the rest).

Doctors, Scientists and Engineers Join Forces to challenge UK Government on 5G Safety

The growing group is supported by a team of lawyers who are commencing legal proceedings to challenge UK government’s failure to address clearly-identified health and safety risks of wireless radiation and increased exposure from the deployment of 5G. They state: “Risks are foreseeable and preventable. Current standards are not fit for purpose and obsolete.” A case now being heard concerns fundamental rights to privacy and protection from experimentation. More here: https://actionagainst5g.org/

Three Hundred+ Towers in India found to Exceed Prescribed Limits

Dr. Joel Moskowitz (UC Berkeley Public Health) comments on this finding: “India systematically monitors cell tower radiation to ensure compliance with radio frequency exposure limits; however, in the US no agency does this. The FCC, which is captured by industry, responds to complaints about electromagnetic interference but does not systematically monitor cell tower compliance with FCC regulations. The cost of a comprehensive monitoring system would likely be covered by the fines assessed to industry for noncompliance. Moreover, workers and the public would be better protected from intense exposure to cell tower radiation.” https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/defaultinterstitial.cms

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY………………………………………………………………………

Dr. Joel Moskowitz posts New Research on Wireless Radiation Effects
As in earlier compilation postings like this one, you can scroll through to see the study titles in bold, and read reports of interest. https://www.saferemr.com/2022/06/recent-research-on-wireless-radiation.html

Bioengineering Professor Emeritus has accumulated close to 2000 studies over 30 years on Non-ionizing Radiation Effects.

Dr. Henry Lai, University of Washington, is one of the most important EMF researchers of all time. Dr. Moskowitz has posted this compilation in a document that contains abstracts for 290 of the studies published since 1997. The studies assessed the effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure on free radical-related cellular processes. See pages 164-187 for the Table that summarizes key details about each study.

SUMMARY:

Of the 290 studies published since 1997, 263 studies (91%) reported statistically significant effects of radiofrequency radiation on free radical-related cellular processes; only 27 studies (9%) found no significant effects.
Change in cellular free radical status is a consistent effect of radiofrequency radiation exposure.
Effects can occur at low specific absorption rates (SAR) or power density of exposure. Of the 70 low intensity exposure studies, 68 studies (91%) reported significant effects on free radical-related cellular processes.To see the full summary or to download the 187-page document (pdf): https://www.saferemr.com/2018/02/effects-of-exposure-to-electromagnetic.html

SMART METERS……………………………………………………………………………………..

CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE Publishes Informative articles on Smart Meters

The first broad-scoped piece quotes many experts, and covers several downsides of Smart meters, including health, fire risk and privacy violation. The second includes how home wiring can act as an antenna, sending pulses of biologically active frequencies (with power densities greater than cell towers) into occupants’ bodies. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/smart-meters-health-privacy/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=71b08967-8feb-40be-adf9-2937efc0092c

Why Smart Meters Are Good for Utility Companies, Bad for Consumers

Don’t Want a Smart Meter? Take It Up With Your State Lawmakers, Experts Say

(link to above: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/smart-meter-state-legislation/

Green Street Radio interviews experienced NY Activist, Michele Hertz, on Smart Meter Harms

On the most recent edition of Green Street News, hosts Doug and Patti Wood welcomed their friend and colleague Michele Hertz to talk about “Not So Smart Meters.” Michelle tells how they caused her to become severely ill, and what she has done as a result. Her riveting story is similar to so many heard over the years. Minute 13:20 https://www.greenstreetnews.org/podcast/episode/90013a19/not-so-smart-meters-with-michele-hertz

EDUCATION……………………………………………………………………………………….

EHT PATREON offers February 28^th Webinar with Physicians for Safe Tech executive director, Cindy Russell

Dr. Russell is an important voice in safe technology. From EHT: “At the cutting edge of research on the health impacts of wireless technology, Dr. Russell has studied toxins for more than 20 years. Her work with Physicians for Safe Technology is focused on protecting the public, education and advocacy for environmental health and safety. She believes we can create a world where technology serves our needs without undermining our physical or environmental health.” More here: Cindy Russell 2/28 Webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_5dGubQ10S8OOaCUOJWav4w

(Note: A Patreon membership is needed for this event. EHT Patreon membership is well worthwhile, in my experience. https://www.patreon.com/ehtrust )

New Year, New EMF Safety Network Director!

Happy 2023 greetings!

Recently I, (Sandi Maurer, founding director of EMF Safety Network), was elected to the Sebastopol City Council! This is a huge honor and I’m grateful to the voters and my awesome campaign team. This is a four year term.

One of my campaign promises is to reduce EMF pollution. Because council work can be very time consuming and to eliminate any appearance of conflict of interest, we have decided to pass on the EMF Safety Network to a new director- Sidnee Cox!

Sidnee is upbeat and passionate about EMF Safety. Sidnee is tech savvy and will be able to manage multiple media platforms and she’ll be great at keeping you all informed! I am very grateful to Sidnee for her interest in carrying the EMF Safety Network forward in these challenging times.

I’m grateful for your interest, support and help over the past dozen plus years! We’ve built this Network together and with your continued support it can serve the public good for many years to come. Among the many things we’ve achieved:

Since 2009, driving and building EMF activism to better protect people and nature by: Keeping thousands of people informed and helping them take action on important EMF issues; Founding the EMF Safety Coalition discussion list where international EMF activist leaders can learn and exchange information; Creating and distributing educational flyers and hand outs; and Maintaining a website with credible information, investigative research, public surveys and resources.
Helped obtain a smart meter opt-out for all investor owned gas and electric utility customers in California: Pacific Gas and Electric, Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas, and San Diego Gas and Electric, benefiting millions of utility customers.
Worked with a coalition of organizations to defeat SB649, a CA telecommunication bill that would’ve put small cell antennas throughout every city in California.
Pressed Federal level accountability with letters to the FCC and to US Representatives and Senators and supported people with tools and templates for how to oppose 5G.
Created policy changes in Sebastopol CA including: General Plan goals to reduce EMFs, updated Telecommunications Ordinance, obtained lower kelvin LED streetlights, and a free smart water meter opt-out.

Here’s an introductory note from your new EMF Safety Network director Sidnee Cox!

Hello EMF Safety Network Friends,

First of all, a huge thank you to Sandi Maurer for starting EMF Safety Network in 2009 and developing its outreach over the past 13 years! She was a trailblazer and still is, having recently been elected to Sebastopol City Council! From her new position, Sandi will be taking on many of the issues that Sebastopol faces, but she will also continue her advocacy for environmental safety, and that includes reducing EMF pollution.

I am excited and honored to be stepping into this position. I will continue the EMF Safety Network’s mission, which is “to educate and empower people by providing science and solutions to reduce EMFs, achieve public policy change, and obtain environmental justice.”

A bit about myself… Like most of us in the EMF aware community, I came upon this issue from personal experience. In 2010, I borrowed a gaussmeter from a friend as I was curious about what sort of invisible toxins were in my home environment. The magnetic fields coming from the circuit breaker on the opposite wall from where my son slept were crazy high! That was my first awakening. I immediately rearranged his sleeping space, and wondered what other sorts of invisible energies were affecting our living space.

A few years later, I purchased my first radio-frequency radiation meter (RFR). I began taking meter readings and warning friends about RFR in their homes! That’s also when I first realized that many people don’t really want to know! In 2014, a good friend developed a glioblastoma, a brain tumor. The RFR levels in her home were the highest of anyplace I had measured! She passed away six months later.

For a number of years, I had been working and volunteering in elementary schools. During that time, I had noticed an increasing use of wireless devices in the classroom. In 2019, I became quite alarmed when I was volunteering in a second grade classroom that had recently installed new routers. I could feel the “tingling” in my skin, and a strange sort of tension in the head whenever I was near the router, which was right above the children’s desks. I also overheard many of the veteran teachers wondering what was happening to the kids… “bouncing off the walls” was a typical comment. I created an aluminum coated “blocker box” for the router in our classroom (with the teacher’s permission), and immediately felt the difference. The kids could still get signal when they used their tablets, which made me realize that the signals coming off the routers were way too high under any circumstance.

In December 2019, I attended my first Santa Rosa City Council meeting and gave comments about my observed effects of the high RFR levels coming from the routers in the classroom. At that council meeting there were over 40 other EMF aware attendees, many making their own comments. In 2020, I attended my first meeting with an amazing group of activists from Safe Tech for Santa Rosa. Within a year, Safe Tech for Santa Rosa was instrumental in helping the City develop a comprehensive telecom Small Cell ordinance. While we didn’t get everything we wanted with this ordinance, it was a big step in the right direction.

In January 2021, I attended the virtual EMF Safety Medical Conference and learned even more. I also developed a good friendship with Mary Dahl, an RFR injured woman who has a small cell antenna only 42 feet from her home, and learned everything I could about building Faraday cages thanks to Satya Giordano who has worked with (now retired) Michael Neuert (https://emfcenter.com). I also learned a lot from conversations with Eric Windheim, a Sacramento based building biologist. My husband and I built Mary a large shielded 8′ x 9′ Faraday “sleep unit” which was quite the undertaking! Mary now has protected space to sleep. I’m indebted to Mary for her consistent encouragement and indomitable spirit.

I’m passionate about continuing the outreach for EMF safety. It is now more important than ever! Because of the FCC’s declarative rulings, telecom companies have become bolder, and even more wireless infrastructure is polluting our fragile environment. There is always so much to learn in this complex subject of EMF, and I intend to keep learning and networking with other safe tech groups.

My goal is to carry on the work of the EMF Safety Network, expand our outreach, and become the best resource we can be for the larger EMF Safety Community.

Thanks again for all your participation and networking over the years! Be sure to sign up to stay informed (left side column) at www.emfsafetynetwork.org and please donate to get the year off to a great start.

Sidnee Cox
PO Box 342
Windsor, CA 95492
sidnee@sonic.net
707-838-6967

PG&E and Sebastopol threatening to deploy smart meters SOON!

Smart meters are costing us money, privacy and our health and safety!

When? End of September 2022

Sebastopol banned smart meters in 2013 for “matters of public health, safety and consumer protection…” They included a $500 fine for installation! The city has repeatedly defended against PG&E’s attempts to further deploy smart meters here. In 2019 the city cited the smart meter ban in defense of Fircrest Senior Mobile Homes. PG&E complied and installed all analog meters.

Many people in Sebastopol are receiving letters from PG&E stating they will put a smart meter on your home unless you pay PG&E to opt out.

Residents in several low income, senior and multi-unit high density housing complexes are organizing against the smart meters. Years ago, both Fircrest and Burbank Homes and Gardens had submitted signed petitions with several hundred signatures from the majority of residents at both communities saying they don’t want the meters.

Why is PG&E threatening NOW? Maybe it’s because Sebastopol plans to install smart water meters in September! Last year the Sebastopol city council ignored their own laws and General Plan goals and purchased smart water meters. EMF Safety Network proposed a solution. The council has not compromised, even though the company that sold the water meters DENIED the claim that the meters saved water, energy and green house gas emissions.

We need Sebastopol to save the legacy analog meters and to defend, uphold and renew the smart meter ban to protect public health and safety.

PG&E smart meters and smart water meters emit pulsed EMF (electromagnetic fields) radiation. Peer-reviewed studies show health impacts of smart meters include sleep problems, headaches, nausea, anxiety, heart palpitations, tinnitus, concentration and memory problems, dizziness, immune and nervous system problems, and more. The World Health Organization classifies EMF radiation as a possible carcinogen, same as DDT and lead. Vulnerable groups include people with compromised immune systems, environmental sensitivities, medical implants, children, seniors and nature!

Symptoms After Exposure to Smart Meters Ron Powell PhD

Letter from Dr. David Carpenter on smart water meters.

“It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulatory agencies that designate air as ‘habitat’ so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047144/

Other expert quotes: https://emfscientist.org/index.php/science-policy/expert-emf-scientist-quotations

The following is a compilation of reports from the US , Australia and Canada about fires, explosions, electrical problems or burned out appliances due to Smart Meter installations. For a summary of the problems, read this: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Summary-of-Evidence-on-Smart-Meter-Fires.pdf

Presentation at California Conference of Arson Investigators in 2020. https://www.ourweb.tech/CCAI-presentation.pdf

Direct testimony of Norman Lambe http://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/ViewDoc.aspx?DocRefId=%7B7B8506E8-4FCB-41C1-952E-5DCF899951A5%7D

According to PG&E, 40% of Sebastopol currently has smart meters. PGE says they will advise residents that they can opt out by paying additional fees. We believe the fees are “coercion by exaction” a form of extortion. $75 initial fee and $10 a month for 3 years. Low income $10 initial fee and $5 a month for 3 years. Opting out doesn’t protect people, especially multi-unit communities.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

Contact the City of Sebastopol and ask them to save the analog meters and to defend, uphold and renew the smart meter ban to protect public health and safety.

Call 707-823-1153 Email: citycouncil@cityofsebastopol.org

Post this do not consent sign on your gas and electric meters.

Circulate this current flyer. PG&E Smart Utility Meters flyer

What about the claims that smart meters are completely safe?

“How To Geek” perpetuates a common myth and false narrative in this article, No, Smart Meters Aren’t Dangerous to Your Health”. He writes, ” Smart meters, like any other device that emits radio frequency radiation, do not pose any risk to your health.” He claims, ” RF radiation is harmless.” He provides no research, and lacks credibility. Even CPUC President Michael Peevey recognized people suffered from smart meter exposure. He wrote:

“There really are people who feel pain related to EMF” CPUC President Peevey

Dr. Ronald Powell: “Smart Meters are a community concern”

Smart Meters

Sebastopol: Rethink smart water meters

Years of support for reducing EMF’s in Sebastopol evaporated in October 2021, when the city council unanimously approved smart water meters.

Update: We hired attorney Ariel Strauss and he presented the city attorney with a compromise to only install the digital readers without antennas. The council rejected the compromise claiming the meters were a public good because of the drought. The council later approved a FREE opt out for anyone who doesn’t want the smart water meter. The meters are planned to be deployed in January 2023.

Beware of Climate Washed Smart Water Meters!

Why did Sebastopol, who banned smart meters in 2013, do this? Syserco, a registered contractor for PG&E, sold the 2.2 million dollar project to Sebastopol as a water and energy savings initiative. Council members promoted the meters as a climate action solution. When asked to provide clarifying information on the purported savings, Syserco wrote:

“…there has never been a claim that the new meters “save energy, save water and reduce greenhouse gas emissions”.

The real reason for the new meters according to Syserco is money. However, Syserco did claim the meters would save water and were energy efficient, and the staff report called the meters a “green initiative”. This is climate-washing, the use of deceptive marketing spin.

By approving the smart water meters the city failed to comply with:

Sebastopol’s 2013 Ordinance 1057 that banned smart meters for “matters of public health, safety and consumer protection…”. This ban was referenced in a letter to PG&E signed by Mayor Neysa Hinton in 2019.
Sebastopol’s 2016 General Plan Community Health and Wellness Goals call for minimizing EMF’s and community wide opt out of public utility smart meters.
2019 Telecommunications Ordinance 1123 which requires a conditional use permit for utility antennas, including: notice and public meeting to vet the cost and technical specifications prior to a planning commission review.
California Environmental Quality Act as referenced in the General plan and Telecommunication Ordinance 1123.
Sebastopol’s Zero Waste Sonoma Purchasing Policy which calls for purchasing products that minimize environmental impacts, toxins, pollution and hazards to worker and community safety, as well as to purchase durable and long lasting products. (The meter batteries are non-replaceable. The entire unit will need to be replaced if/when the battery fails.)
CA Government Code 4217.12 (a) “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a public agency may enter into an energy service contract and any necessarily related facility ground lease on terms that its governing body determines are in the best interests of the public agency if the determination is made at a regularly scheduled public hearing, public notice of which is given at least two weeks in advance, and if the governing body finds:…” (Two weeks notice was not provided to the public.)

Smart water meters will harm the EMF aware and injured community. They will harm our quality of life, disturb our sense of safety and peace and create a nuisance throughout our city. You can’t opt out of a “smart city”.

Adding 3002 smart water meters will increase EMF radiation in our community. Peer reviewed published studies find EMF radiation threatens nature and causes a wide range of health impacts: “Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans.” https://www.emfscientist.org/

Dr. David Carpenter, a Harvard trained physician and director of the Institute for Health and the Environment wrote a letter opposing smart water meters and said:

“Governments should be reducing RFR exposures, not increasing them.”

He warns that the greatest risk from exposure to radiation (RFR) is cancer, and there’s growing evidence for brain and reproductive impacts. He writes, “Some people develop a condition called electro-hypersensitivity (EHS). These individuals respond to being in the presence of RFR with a variety of symptoms, including headache, fatigue, memory loss, ringing in the ears…” among many symptoms. He further warns, “exposure to smart meters is a trigger for development of EHS.”

“It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulato- ry agencies that designate air as ‘habitat’ so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047144/

More background information!

The public process on the smart water meters decision was limited, deficient and confusing. Technical details about how the water meters worked were sparse and the issue was hidden under energy efficiency. Staff purchased the software before the meters were approved, and they ordered the meters before the financing was approved. They approved a 5 million dollar project in one late night meeting!

In February of 2021 the Sebastopol Public Works director said they were testing 56 new digital water meters. He said they would be manually read and that they did not have a radio transmitter. A few months later the city started a survey asking if the community wanted “cellular” water meters. What if they had asked, “do you want a smart water meter?” or, “do you want a city wide radar installation for water meters?” There were 329 responses to their water meter survey. 54.7% of respondents approved, 31% opposed, and 14.3% were undecided. Nearly half were opposed or undecided! The survey is an unreliable source of community input, because people were not given any details about the cost or how the meters work. Anyone could have taken the survey including the company who will profit from the sale.

Smart water meters are two way radios that collect granular data about customers water use.
Smart water meters use sound waves, batteries and transmit EMF radiation.
Santa Fe is using Badger meters and they say their system will use 4G and 5G frequencies.
Scientists are warning against 5G: http://www.5gappeal.eu
Sebastopol is borrowing over 5 million dollars to pay for improvements to city infrastructure. Included in that cost is over 2 million dollars for smart water meters. In order to pay back the money it was proposed that the city raise water rates by 4% a year for 15 years. See Sebastopol city council video to see their financial plan starting at 2:42:00
https://livestream.com/accounts/14608643/events/9837246/videos/226747937
For the past fourteen years the Sebastopol City Councils have been given many independent peer reviewed studies on the risks and harm from EMF radiation smart technologies to people and nature.
Sebastopol has taken action by writing letters to officials, banning smart meters, defending senior residents at the mobile home park from PG&E smart meters, and getting lower kelvin LED streetlights.

Sebastopol’s 2016 General Plan Community Health and Wellness Goals calls for minimizing EMF’s, including:

Minimize unsafe EMF radiation levels near sensitive areas such as schools, hospitals, playgrounds, high density residential, and libraries when planning for electrical transmission facilities repair and new construction.
Promote community education and awareness on EMF health information and stay abreast of current research and regulations.
Explore programs and legal remedies available to the City in order to reduce unsafe EMF exposure to the greatest extent allowed by State and federal law.
Advocate that all new major electrical transmission projects and telecommunications facilities evaluate EMF as part of the project’s environmental review pursuant to CEQA.
Request from PG&E and wireless telecommunications facilities providers, public disclosure of existing and proposed electrical transmission and wireless telecommunications facilities projects in the vicinity of Sebastopol and their anticipated EMF levels in the Sebastopol Planning Area.
Maintain data regarding the location, size, strength, and EMF levels of major cell and radio towers, public power facilities, including transmission and distribution lines, and other substantial public or community EMF sources in the Sebastopol Planning Area, to the extent that data and information is available.
Support efforts to approach and encourage the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to allow the City to opt out of public utility wireless data transmission systems (such as smart meters).

On Dec 21, 2021 the Sebastopol city council approved the financing for smart water meters, which were already ordered! The vote was 3-2. Sarah Gurney and Una Glass opposed. Diana Rich, Mayor Patrick Slayter and Vice Mayor Neysa Hinton approved. At this meeting the Superintendent of the Water Department dismissed evidence presented by a council member that the smart water meters transmitted a signal every 4 seconds as a “typo” and he evaded the Mayor’s question about the meter’s use of 5G technology. Meeting video here (starts at 4:55:02)

Timeline

The following is a timeline of information found in 933+ pages of emails on the smart water process:

Oct. 2018: Syserco stated the water meters could be drive-by or AMI and that AMI meters transmitted every 4 seconds at 1 watt of power and additional repeaters and collectors would need to be installed.
Oct. 2020: water meters could be drive-by or touch stick.
Jan. 2021: the options for RF transmissions were none, touch, drive-by or remote.
Feb 22, 2021 EMF Safety Network director emailed the city with questions about the 56 water meters being tested. The Public Works Director wrote to Syserco and Badger meter asking for a “standard reply” to our inquiry. At that time we were told the meters were digital, but there were no RF emissions from the water meters.
Feb 24, 2021 city staff suggested a survey and wrote that customers support radio read meters and sent some “useful information” about EMF concerns that included a page on EMF protections products and smart meter papers from CCST, EPRI, UTC, FDA, (ie government assurances that smart meters are safe.)
Feb 25, 2021 the city manager advised the Public Works Director to say the city has no plans for wireless water meters.
Feb 25, 2021 the Public Works Director supports a survey to gather a representative tally of residents desires, and not just the opinion “of a few anti-EMF voices that frequent city council meetings”.
Feb 25, 2021 the Public Works Director writes the water meters transmit “a minimal ping of information every 15 minutes”.
May 2021 the Public Works Director wants to poll the council on using radio read [wireless] meters.
June 14, 2021 the Public Works Director repeats the water meters transmit “a minimal ping of information every 15 minutes”.
July 6, 2021 at a late night city council meeting the idea of a one question survey is discussed but approved by the council and they are told the water meters transmit a “small ping 4 times a day. “
Oct.19, 2021 the Sebastopol City Council approved a $5 million dollar “energy efficiency” project, which included 3002 smart water meter antennas in the sidewalks. 5-0 vote.
Dec.9, 2021 Sebastopol signed a contract with Syserco
Dec. 16, 2021 City staff places a purchase order with Syserco for the water meters
Dec. 21, 2021 Council approved the financing in a 3-2 vote.
Dec. 23, 2021 EMFSN filed a PRA with Sebastopol on how the technology worked and sent this APPEAL to the city. We were told we cannot appeal, instead our only legal recourse is to sue.
Jan. 2021 Hired Mitch Maifeld, RF engineer to review and explain the RF emissions from water meters.
Feb. 7, 2022 Syserco denied the water, energy and greenhouse gas savings claims for smart water meters
Feb.15, 2022 Council discussed a pay to opt out of water meters and this issue will return to council for final approval. EMFSN comments sent to the city council asking for an OPT-IN: smart meter opt-in.
Feb. 17, 2022 EMFSN filed second PRA with Sebastopol
May 6, 2022 EMFSN hires attorney Ariel Strauss of Greenfire Lawfirm in Berkeley CA.
July 2022 EMFSN proposed a compromise of installing only the digital readers without the antennas. We were told the Council was split and that their reason for rejecting our compromise is that at a time of continuing drought the greater public good is best served by allowing use of the monitoring functions of the new meters.
September 2022: The city Council approves a FREE opt out of the smart water meters.

How the Orion Badger Smart Water Meters work

An RF engineer, Mitch Maifeld, reviewed the RF information from Badger Meters and the FCC. This is what we understand to be true about how the meters work..

Sebastopol ordered 3002 Badger Orion E series water meter “endpoints”. An endpoint houses one antenna.The 56 test meters Sebastopol trialed last year did not include endpoints. 3002 Badger water meters collectively transmit approximately 12,000 times a day unless they are in activation or troubleshooting mode when each meter can transmit every 15 seconds. They transmit in the 902-928mHz range. This is the same frequency range the Navy used for radar. The meters transmit pulsed radiation and use a frequency hopping system. The meters can emit spurious emissions in the 30 mhz-40 ghz range. These are created by harmonics and reflections within the action of the meter. The meters work with infrared signals. The maximum power output per meter is 1/4 watt which would add 750 watts throughout the city. The antennas are isotropic, meaning they radiate out in all directions. Water absorbs radiation. One meter can transmit about 1/2 mile, depending on factors like how tall the cell tower is, interference in the area, buildings and trees etc. They work with the internet of things cellular network and are smart city ready. No new repeaters are used. The RF engineers report for the Badger smart water meters can be found here. Here’s a comparison chart for water, electric and gas smart meters.

New study calls for EMF regulation to protect wildlife

There’s a new study by Blake Levitt, Henry Lai and Albert Manville: “Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047144/

It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulatory agencies that designate air as ‘habitat’ so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants. Wildlife loss is often unseen and undocumented until tipping points are reached. Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure standards, which do not now exist, should be set accordingly for wildlife, and environmental laws should be strictly enforced.

Global EMF Monitoring Call for volunteers

Can you BRAG about your city?

Dr. Magda Havas has initiated a Global EMF Monitoring project, calling for volunteers to measure EMF’s in their city. So far there are almost 200 volunteers from 16 countries. Here’s short breakdown of what’s required of volunteers.

1. You will need to either have or purchase a Safe & Sound Pro RF meter (either Pro I or Pro II) available at www.slt.com . If you volunteer for the Global EMF Project they will give you a discount code.
2. You will be measuring at 4 corners of 5 main intersections in your city which will take about 2 hours. Because this is a science project, it’s important to follow these instructions carefully.
3. Watch this video below for how to measure a location.

4. When you’re measuring people might ask you questions about what you’re doing. You can give them this fact sheet which will explain why you are measuring and help to educate people.

5. To learn more details about this project go to their website at globalEMF.net and if you would like to volunteer please send a quick email to: info@globalEMF.net

Save the analog meters in Maine

Maine Utilities New Smart Meter Scam

Simmering in the background with little notice since early 2019, Central Maine Power Company’s (CMP’s) proposal to get rid of analog electric utility meters opened for public comment at the Maine Public Utilities Commission (MPUC). The comment period ends Monday the 22^nd. (Docket 2019-00044)

In 2011 the MPUC ordered CMP to provide two “opt out” alternatives for customers who didn’t want the controversial smart meters, an electromechanical (analog) meter, and a “radio off” smart meter. CMP was ordered to retain enough analog meters for the opt out customers. At that time they had 600,000 analog meters.

CMP now claims they are out of analog meters. They are proposing to only offer “solid state” meters. Solid state meters are in fact smart meters. “CMP appears to have violated their requirement to keep enough electromechanical meters for opt out customers”, said Ed Friedman, spokesperson for the Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters. “If they truly “misplaced” or scrapped the approximately 594,500 meters not being used by current opt out customers, they need to be held accountable.” he added.

Former State Representative Andrea Boland pointed out CMP’s history of vacant pretenses of expertise and failures. “Now”,she said, “they set out to again dissemble and deceive in an attempt to convince the MPUC that smart meters are not smart meters and the order permitting opt-outs by customers (even at a hefty monthly penalty) is not a valid order.”

Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters wants to save the analogs because smart meters, including “radio off” smart meters, create dirty electricity which is a heath hazard.

Elisa Boxer, one of the original complainants to the MPUC in 2011 said: “We presented evidence from engineers and other experts that digital solid-state meters were not an acceptable alternative to analogs for several reasons, including the emission of transients onto the home wiring. Voltage transients, otherwise known as one type of “dirty electricity,” are spikes of electromagnetic interference (EMI) that travel along the wiring in the walls and have been implicated in cancer cases worldwide.” (see Woodward & Harding oscilloscope comparisons)

Woodward & Harding-Power Quality Comparison: Smart Meter v Analog

These emissions from home wiring may be one reason why smart meters have had such devastating health effects. Dr. Beatrice Golumb MD PhD, Professor of Medicine at UC San Diego said: “Our survey study shows this smart meter induced electrical sensitivity often led to catastrophic impacts in the lives of those affected”. She requested the PUC “please ensure purely analog electromechanical meters remain available for those who wish them”, citing this as an issue of importance for the health of vulnerable members of the public.

Golumb, 2020, EMF Medical Conference 2021

Dr. Albert Manville, retired wildlife biologist specializing in bird impacts from towers, powerlines and wireless radiation wrote: “concerns with smart meters (with or without transmitters) include radiation sensitivity, cancers and other health problems caused by the radiation frequencies, issues with dirty electricity, high maintenance costs, privacy and hacking concerns, fire dangers, and unfair opt-out fees we pay each month (at best, our meter is read every other month but we’re billed each month – double dipping).”

Summary of Symptoms after Exposure to Wireless Utility Meters

Thanks to: Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters.

Landmark 5G study by New Hampshire legislative Commission recommends reducing wireless exposure

The state of New Hampshire established a legislative commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G wireless technology in 2019. They recently completed their final report which includes 15 recommendations to raise awareness, educate, promote oversight, and reduce radiofrequency radiation (RF, also known as wireless).

The commission met between September 2019 and October 2020 and included 13 members with backgrounds in physics, engineering electromagnetics, epidemiology, biostatistics, occupational health, toxicology, medicine, public health policy, business, law, and a representative from the wireless industry.

They were tasked with answering 8 questions which included: why the insurance industry has exclusions for RF damages; why cell phone manufacturers have legal advice warning about distance between cell phones and the body; why 1,000’s of peer-reviewed RF studies that show a wide range of health affects, including DNA damage, brain and heart tumors, infertility, and many other ailments, have been ignored by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC); why the FCC guidelines do not account for health effects of wireless; why the FCC RF limits are 100 times higher than other countries; why the FCC is ignoring the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of wireless as a possible carcinogen; why when the world’s leading scientists signed an appeal to protect public health from wireless radiation nothing has been done; and why the health effects of ever-growing numbers of pulse signals riding on the electromagnetic waves has not been explored.

Early on in their research the Commission learned that they could not discuss 5G without including all things wireless “…the Commission concluded that all things emitting radio frequency (RF) radiation needed to be considered together because of the interaction of all these waves.” At the heart of their discussion was whether or not RF affects humans, animals and nature. The introduction states:

There is mounting evidence that DNA damage can occur from radiation outside of the ionizing part of the spectrum.

The Commission heard from ten experts in physics, epidemiology, toxicology, and public policy. Everyone except the telecom representative acknowledged the large body of science showing RF-radiation emitted by wireless devices can effect humans, especially children, animals, insects, and plants.

The Commission endorsed 15 recommendations. “The objective of those recommendations is to bring about greater awareness of cell phone, wireless and 5G radiation health effects and to provide guidance to officials on steps and policies that can reduce public exposure.”

The following is a summary of their recommendations. Only exact wording is quoted and italicized. See their final report for exact wording for all their recommendations.

Engage the US government to require the FCC to do an independent review of the RF standards and RF health risks;
Require NH state agencies to include links on their website(s) about RF-radiation from all sources, including 5G, and showing how to minimize exposure, as well as public service announcements warning of RF health risks especially to pregnant women and children.
Require eye-level signage for every 5G antenna in the public rights- of-way.
“Schools and public libraries should migrate from RF wireless connections for computers, laptops, pads, and other devices, to hard- wired or optical connections within a five-year period starting when funding becomes available.” [please note, we support hard-wired connections, but as far as we know optical connections, such as Lifi, have not been proven safe. It is unfortunate that it’s included in this recommendation.]
Collect signal strength measurements including worst-case conditions for all wireless facilities, including when changes are made, and make that information public. If measurements exceed radiation thresholds, the municipality can take the facility offline. Measurements taken by an independent contractor and the cost paid by the installer.
Establish new protocols for measuring RF to better evaluate signal characteristics, taking into account the high-data-rate radiation known to be harmful to human health. Enable the summative effects of multiple radiation sources to be measured.
Require that any new wireless antennae be set back from residences, businesses, and schools.
Upgrade the educational offerings by the NH Office of Professional Licensure and Certification (OPLC) to include RF measurements.
The State of New Hampshire should develope a continually updated map of RF exposure levels across the state.
“Strongly recommend all new cell phones and all other wireless devices sold come equipped with updated software that can stop the phone from radiating when positioned against the body.”
“Promote and adopt a statewide position that would strongly encourage moving forward with the deployment of fiber optic cable connectivity, internal wired connections, and optical wireless to serve all commercial and public properties statewide.”
“Further basic science studies are needed in conjunction with the medical community outlining the characteristics of expressed clinical symptoms related to radio frequency radiation exposure.”
“Recommend the use of exposure warning signs to be posted in commercial and public buildings. In addition, encourage commercial and public buildings, especially healthcare facilities, to establish RF-radiation free zones where employees and visitors can seek refuge from the effects of wireless RF emissions.”
“The State of New Hampshire should engage agencies with appropriate scientific expertise, including ecological knowledge, to develop RF-radiation safety limits that will protect the trees, plants, birds, insects, and pollinators.”
“The State of New Hampshire should engage our Federal Delegation to legislate that under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) the FCC do an environmental impact statement as to the effect on New Hampshire and the country as a whole from the expansion of RF wireless technologies.”

This is a model of exemplary action by a state government. Please consider reading and sharing this landmark report with decision makers in your community and state in order to begin the reductions needed to protect people and nature from increasing exposure to RF radiation.

A minority report written by Senator James Gray, David Juvet (Business and Industry rep) and Bethanne Cooley (telecommunications rep) is included since they did not agree with the majority opinion. This minority report parrots the language of the telecommunications industry and exposes their agenda to ignore science and continue to confuse the public.

Special thanks to Cece Doucette, Theodora Scarato, the Environmental Health Trust, and the Senators, experts and committee members who collaborated on this important effort.