Santa Cruz Good Times

Thursday
Oct 23rd
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Meter Moratorium Continues

news smartmeterBoard of Supervisors votes to continue opposition of SmartMeter installations

Late last year, the already loud local outcry over SmartMeters rang out even louder, as some residents took matters into their own hands and removed meters from their homes. The action led to Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) shutting off several of these residents’ power. Following a flood of public concern at its Dec. 13 meeting, the County Board of Supervisors directed the county’s public health officer, Poki Stewart Namkung, to return on Jan. 24 with an analysis of one month’s research on the health effects of the wireless meters.

The health officer’s report played a large part in the Board of Supervisor’s adoption of an ordinance to extend the temporary moratorium on the installation of SmartMeters at their Tuesday, Jan. 24 meeting.

While some supervisors had expressed concern in December over whether to continue what they called an unenforceable moratorium, the four board members present on Jan. 24 voted unanimously to continue the ban.

Supervisor Ellen Pirie says the health officer’s report, entitled “Health Risks Associated With SmartMeters,” which details the risks and potential public safety hazards of SmartMeters, solidified her vote to reinstate the moratorium.

“I think it’s the right decision by the Board of Supervisors,” she says. “And with the report from the public health officer saying that there could be health impacts from sustained exposure to SmartMeters, the board really needs to take this seriously.”

In her 37-page report, Namkung details both long and short-term health effects of the electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) that SmartMeters emit. Long-term effects include cancer and brain damage, and short-term effects include EMF hypersensitivity.

While Namkung’s report notes that there is no scientific literature on the health risks of SmartMeters in particular, as they are a new technology, she cites a large body of research on the health risks of EMFs in general.

The report’s conclusion poses the following: “The question for governmental agencies is that given the uncertainty of safety, the evidence of existing and potential harm, should we err on the side of safety and take the precautionary avoidance measures?”

While the report cites the ways in which SmartMeter exposure is similar to other forms of wireless radiation, such as cell phones and wireless Internet connections, her report’s conclusion also summarizes two unique features of SmartMeter exposure:

“[One] Universal exposure thus far because of mandatory installation ensuring that virtually every household is exposed; [Two] Involuntary exposure whether one has a SmartMeter on their home or not due to the already ubiquitous saturation of installation in Santa Cruz County.”

Jeff Nordahl, a concerned Santa Cruz resident and member of the organization StopSmartMeters!, finds Namkung’s report encouraging.

“It completely confirms every single health risk and potential health risk that all of us concerned citizens have been talking about for well over a year,” he says. “Now we have our top health official in Santa Cruz confirming these exact same health concerns after a month’s research on this topic.”

Nordahl thinks if people read the Santa Cruz health report, as well as a few of the scientific studies the report references, they will reach the same conclusion as the health officer.  

“Installing wireless SmartMeters on our homes, which saturate our neighborhoods with 24/7 pulsed radiation, is a very bad idea, which could lead to serious health repercussions for our community,” he says. “The SmartMeter program needs to be halted in our community immediately, and customers need to be able to opt out [of SmartMeter installations] for free.”

At their recent meeting, the Board of Supervisors also signed a petition addressed to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) asking them to delay consideration of PG&E president Michael Peevey’s preliminary decision to charge a fee to customers who elect to opt out of the SmartMeter program.

The petition urges the CPUC to wait “until further public hearings are completed to ensure the due process rights of all stakeholders.”

Unlike previous Board of Supervisors meetings on the topic, no one spoke out directly against reinstating the moratorium against SmartMeter installations. Instead, the tone of both supervisors and attendees was supportive.

“There was lots of discussion, and lots of people talking and we’ll see where we go,” says Pirie. She adds that the next step is for the Board of Supervisors to put pressure on the CPUC.

“[The Board of Supervisors should] ask the CPUC, which is really the entity that gets to make most of these decisions, to take another look at this and consider that there may be either people who are unusually sensitive to electromagnetic radiation or people getting an unusual amount of exposure,” she says.

Photo: Jesse Clark

Comments (3)Add Comment
...
written by Drew InThe [DeadOak] Woods , February 19, 2012
the Board's Fake protection via moratorium isn't required AFTER every home has a smartmeter. I wonder how many of the sup's have smartmeters. the board's Going along with the request to reduce the Opt Out fees causes acceptance of a fraud - why don't they reject the fee entirely? Politicians and corporations are harmful.
...
written by Packet Guy, February 11, 2012
Where's the report? I can't find it on any city web site..
...
written by Bill Smallman, February 06, 2012
My position on this is to include with the "pressure" on the CPUC is to insist PGE to design a meter, and meter system which uses existing land lines to send meter read signals. It would eliminate this issue and be win-win. I'm not an electronic engineer or builder, but I think they would actually be work better and be more reliable. You don't need to go wireless when you have wires.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

Share this on your social networks

Bookmark and Share

Share this

Bookmark and Share

 

Santa Cruz Restaurant Week

A huge part of Santa Cruz Restaurant Week has always been about offering a great dining experience for an affordable price. For some locals, the $25 flat-rate cost has provided the opportunity (or the excuse!) to try new spots, and indulge in Santa Cruz fine dining in a way they might have thought too pricey before.

 

Scorpio Sun, New Moon Eclipse, Mercury Direct

The Sun enters Scorpio’s mysteries Thursday under a new moon and partial solar eclipse (something essential has come to an end, its purpose completed). In Scorpio we harbor secrets, are devoted to something deep, dark and hidden. Sometimes it’s ourselves. We can bring great suspect to our assessment of others. Scorpio is the scorpion, the serpent and the eagle—three levels of development. As the serpent we take shelter in our beliefs. Sometimes we bite (or sting). The eagle vanquishes old beliefs through its sharp intellect, soaring high in the air, seeking to understand through perspective. Understanding releases us from the bondage of fear. The eagle is like the mother soothing feelings of mistrust, offering protection. Knowledge does this, too.

 

The New Tech Nexus

Community leaders in science and technology unite to form web-based networking program

 

Light Humor

College comedy questions a post-racial America in ‘Dear White People’
Sign up for Good Times weekly newsletter
Get the latest news, events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Back Porch

Austin Kaye on backyard dinners and why it’s his favorite time of year to be a chef

 

What’s the most outrageous situation you ever saw at a restaurant?

Damani Thomas, Santa Cruz, Chef/Owner

 

Wine Lust

The Spanish Godello grape, plus arancinis, tender butter lettuce and pork schnitzel at Soif

 

What artist or artists participating in the encore weekend of Open Studios should not be missed?

Santa Cruz | Teacher