Santa Cruz Good Times

Thursday
Apr 24th
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

 

Best of Santa Cruz County 2014

The 2014 Santa Cruz County Readers' Poll Come on in, and have a look around. There’s a lot to see—hundreds of winners selected by thousands of GT readers across Santa Cruz County. So if some of this looks familiar, it’s probably because you helped make it happen. But there are always new things to discover, too—you could go to a different winner or runner-up every day in the Food and Drink category alone, and you’d be booked just about until next year’s Best of Santa Cruz County issue comes out.

 

Something Essential Disappears

Lunar and solar eclipses follow one another. Lunar eclipses occur at full moons, and solar eclipses at new moons. Two weeks ago at the full moon we had the blood red moon—a total lunar eclipse (the next one is Oct. 8). On Monday night, April 28 (new moon), as the Sun, Moon and Earth align, a solar eclipse (Sun obscured) occurs. Eclipses signify something irrevocably is changed in our world. The Sun is our essential life force. Monday’s new moon, 9 degrees Taurus, is also an annular solar eclipse when the Moon moves centrally in front of the Sun, yet does not cover the Sun completely. The Sun's outer edges, still visible, form a “ring of fire” around the Moon.

 

Sugar: The New Tobacco?

Proposed bill would require warning labels on sugary drinks Will soda and other saccharine libations soon come with a health warning? They will if it’s up to our state senator, Bill Monning (D-Carmel). On Feb. 27, Monning proposed first-of-its-kind legislation that would require a consumer warning label be placed on sugar-sweetened beverages sold in California. SB 1000, also known as the Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Safety Warning Act, was proposed to provide vital information to consumers about the harmful effects of consuming sugary drinks, such as sodas, sports drinks, energy drinks, and sweetened teas.

 

Film, Times & Events: Week of April 17

Santa Cruz area movie theaters >
Sign up for Tomorrow's Good Times Today
Upcoming arts & events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Palate-Stretching 101

A wine education with Soif’s experts As a veteran of many weekend wine “seminars” at Soif, I have to confess that I’ve never known less (going in) and learned more (coming out) than I did last week at the Spanish Wine Tasting with ace rep Brian Greenwood. These are classy, casual events and it’s hard to imagine having this much flavor fun anywhere for $20.

 

Martin Ranch Winery

Sauvignon Blanc 2011 One of my favorite wines is Sauvignon Blanc, and this one made by Martin Ranch is particularly lovely. Bright, crisp and refreshing, it’s perfect to pair with fish and shellfish—and good for picnics as it has an easy screw-cap bottle. There’s nothing worse than setting down your blanket, pulling out your sandwiches—and then realizing you don’t have a corkscrew.

 

Foodie File: Red Apple Cafe

Breakfast takes center stage at Gracia Krakauer's Red Apple Cafe Before they moved to Aptos, Gracia and her husband Dan Krakauer would visit friends in Santa Cruz County and eat at the Red Apple Café all the time. Then they moved up here from Santa Monica five years ago, and bought the Aptos location (there’s a separate one in Watsonville) from the family who owned it for two decades.

 

How would you feel about a tech industry boom in Santa Cruz?

I feel like it would ruin the small old-town feeling of Santa Cruz. It wouldn’t be the same Surf City kind of vacation town that it is. Antoinette BennettSanta Cruz | Construction Management