LA County Board of Supervisors is being sued for vastly weakening the Telecom Ordinance which will eliminate public notice, environmental review, setback, and any opportunity to participate in telecom tower placement.
We want to pack the room with supporters who care about the health, property values, and privacy of all residents in LA County.
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:
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.
PO Box 342
Windsor, CA 95492
Smart meters are costing us money, privacy and our health and safety!
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: firstname.lastname@example.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
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.
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:
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/
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.
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)
The following is a timeline of information found in 933+ pages of emails on the smart water process:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 22nd. (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)
Thanks to: Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters.