Enforce the Smart Meter Ban in Sebastopol

[Sieglinde]

This is an excellent question and does argue for compassion. But if jobs are automated and more efficiently done by machines, those workers need to move on. I would not advocate keeping an old method of doing things just to keep jobs. This would not be my argument for or against Smart Meters. Think of the thousands of phone operators who don't do that job anymore.

... Have any of you considered the impact of eliminating meter readers on the people who actually read the meters? ...

[rossmen]

Pge is not bad to work for. Reading meters is low end, sometimes used for punishment when demoted. Disliked because of common and unpredictable unfriendly interactions with dogs and people. As this work has dwindled people are reassigned, no layoffs, just reduced hiring. I have never worked there, though know some who do or have.

...Have any of you considered the impact of eliminating meter readers on the people who actually read the meters? ...

[Sasu]

On Thursday Jan 12, at 7 pm at the Sebastopol Grange we will be showing the smart meter documentary "Take Back Your Power", followed by a panel and Q&A. See this event listed here: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showt...459#post209459

[Sasu]

This weeks news: PG&E to begin SmartMeter installation by Amie Windsor

https://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_we...49ad31fc3.html

[sqb]

We have quite a few things that are more pressing right now than this issue... like

FASICST OLIGARCHS taking over our country's government.

[Barry]

Here's most of an excellent article about the Smart Meter ban coming to an end. Of particular interest is that ban was not "lawful" in the first place, yet PG&E backed off anyway. That's about to change!

The opt out charge is a one -time $75 setup charge and then a monthly $10 charge for 3 years " to offset the costs of operating the older analog meters". CARE customers only pay a $10 initial fee plus $5 monthly.

The CPUC approved this fee as reasonable, and I agree.

So it's time to decide if you want to pay for meter readers to come to your home or take advantage of technology to do efficiently. The choice is yours.

Note there will be a documentary film showing and panel discussion next Thursday, January 12th at 7pm at the Sebastopol Grange. Clearly, this film is made by people who think you have reason to be concerned. While biased, I'm sure it presents some good information, including privacy concerns.

Barry



PG&E to begin SmartMeter installation
By Amie Windsor Staff Writer [email protected]
Wednesday, January 4, 2017

City not enforcing ban

The city’s 3-year-old effort to ban SmartMeters will come to an end this month as PG&E begins to install the self-reading utility meters throughout Sebastopol.

{snip...}

In 2013 during a special city council meeting, the city adopted a moratorium banning SmartMeters. The ordinance made installation a crime punishable by a $500 fine.

According to Sebastopol City Manager/City Attorney Larry McLaughlin, the ban wasn’t going to stop PG&E.
“It wasn’t a lawful ban,” McLaughlin said. From day one, he believed the ban was “unconstitutional and therefore unenforceable” because the CPUC has overarching jurisdiction on electricity and power statewide.
Nevertheless, the ban was enforced for about two or three days, McLaughlin said. The Sebastopol Police Department received one phone call of a breach wherein the caller requested the installer be arrested.
No arrests were made, however the situation catapulted conversations between PG&E, Sebastopol Police Chief Jeff Weaver and McLaughlin.

“Basically the head of PG&E security at the time called Weaver and told him PG&E was going to be quite aggressive,” McLaughlin said. “His initial idea was to let an employee get arrested so that PG&E could use that arrest and fight it in criminal court.”

The plan wasn’t acted upon, McLaughlin said. “A day or so later he came back and said the ban was unconstitutional and that they would go to court over it,” he added.

McLaughlin directed Weaver to cease enforcement of the ban.

The utility company never took the city to court but, in fact, upheld the city’s wishes, withdrawing plans to install meters. “We agreed to a couple of exceptions, including the Barlow and another housing development,” McLaughlin said.

All was quiet for the next 18 months. Then, this November, PG&E contacted McLaughlin with a new plan for meter installation.

“The feel they have to uphold the CPUC’s rulings or they’d be in violation with the commission,” McLaughlin said.

McLaughlin believes the installation plan will be swift. “Basically whenever they are on a property for any reasons, like reading a meter,” the utility will make the switch. “They plan on being fairly aggressive and installing meters in a fairly short period of time,” he said.

PG&E is meeting this week to outline an installation schedule, according to PG&E’s media representative Deanna Contreras.

PG&E plans on engaging in outreach via a letter campaign to inform customers of the upcoming switch, Contreras said. The letter will explain the SmartMeter plan, as well as opt-out options.

Customers may opt out of the SmartMeter program, for a price. Those customers paying regular rates (non CARE — California Alternate Rates for Energy) are required to pay a $75 initial fee plus a $10 monthly charge for up to three years. CARE customers must pay a $10 initial fee plus $5 monthly, also for up to three years.
The fees are meant to offset the costs of operating the older analog meters. A 2014 CPUC decision allows PG&E to accrue $35.35 million dollars for providing the opt-out program.

“We find the three year period to be reasonable, as it is a sufficient duration for the utility to recover a portion of the utility’s incremental costs in setting up services associated with accommodating the request of the opt out customer,” the decision reads.

In 2014, PG&E estimated roughly 54,000 customers within its service area, which serves approximately 16 million people throughout northern and central California, would opt out of the SmartMeter program. That’s less than one-half of 1 percent of customers.

The ratio of opt-out customers could be significantly higher in Sebastopol. 2014 numbers show 21,000 SmartMeters are to be installed citywide. Approximately 1,100 customers in Sebastopol have already opted out.
Opt out is the only legal option opponents have of fighting the installation.

Nevertheless, McLaughlin said he’s mentioned to PG&E there may be “civil unrest” and attempts to deny PG&E access.

“We’ve heard rumblings around the city,” McLaughlin said. “Something about linking arms and not allowing PG&E in. I did advise PG&E there could be confrontations.”

Maurer said the EMF Safety Network is “organizing” a protest effort. “We’d like PG&E to back off and leave us alone,” she said.

See full article here.

[Sasu]

Fascism is the forced deployment of smart meters (radiation transmitters on every home)--or pay to avoid them, which is (according to our lawyers) coercion by exaction- extortion. Instead of meter readers PG&E is using our homes for their transmitters- this is an outrageous taking of private property rights.

We have quite a few things that are more pressing right now than this issue... like

FASICST OLIGARCHS taking over our country's government.

[Sasu]

Sebastopol's ban on smart meter installation is still a LAW (Sebastopol's ordinance Chapter 8.58), and it's not ending unless the council votes to take it down. How can a law be unlawful, unless it's proven in court to be so?

I adamantly disagree the fees are a reasonable solution. The CPUC is breaking many utility laws, property rights laws, and safety codes on smart meters. Smart meters are harming the environment, they are not in any way possible a "green" solution. Waste upon waste, throwing out perfectly good analog meters, for digital meters that may last ten years and have expensive batteries replaced every five years. "New" isn't always better!

Here's most of an excellent article about the Smart Meter ban coming to an end. Of particular interest is that ban was not "lawful" in the first place, yet PG&E backed off anyway. That's about to change!

Theopt out charge is a one -time $75 setup charge and then a monthly $10 charge for 3 years " to offset the costs of operating the older analog meters". CARE customers only pay a $10 initial fee plus $5 monthly.

The CPUC approved this fee as reasonable, and I agree.

[Sieglinde]

I saw that. I now will understand my electric bill better. I think we should replace our city attourney with one who understands the laws of the State of California better.

This weeks news: PG&E to begin SmartMeter installation by Amie Windsor

https://www.sonomawest.com/sonoma_we...49ad31fc3.html

[Sieglinde]

I think the city should fire their attorney. When I read that the PUC had the say in these sort of things and the city went ahead with the ban, I figured the city council was getting bad advice from their lawyer who obviously did not know state law. Sebastopol needs a new attorney now.

.. Of particular interest is that ban was not "lawful" in the first place, yet PG&E backed off anyway. ...

[Runningbare]

Fascism is the forced deployment of smart meters (radiation transmitters on every home)--or pay to avoid them, which is (according to our lawyers) coercion by exaction- extortion. Instead of meter readers PG&E is using our homes for their transmitters- this is an outrageous taking of private property rights.

Indeed, upside-down "reasonable" fee amounts to bogus extortionate "choice". As for efficiency, the most efficient part of the Smart Grid is the outlaw utility's wholesale confiscation of siting rights from private property. Rightfully speaking, who should be paying whom? In the candid words of Edward Hasbrouck:

"A thorough consideration of opt-out charges must be balanced with a corresponding consideration of costs that should be borne by the utility and paid to customers unable to afford the discriminatory opt-out option and consequently imperiled with wireless transceiver meters. PG&E usage of existing on-premises gas and electric delivery easements as the basis for a claim of entitlement to install digital mesh network antennae and transceivers for third-party data at current meter locations, is illegitimate. If PG&E wants to build out a digital wireless mesh network infrastructure for for-profit use by third parties, it can do so in the same way that every competing digital wireless data network operator has done: by purchasing or leasing property for this purpose, and/or by negotiating and obtaining permission to place equipment on non-PG&E property. The utility company cannot be permitted to effectively take valuable radio transceiver and antenna siting rights on private property without compensation, which property owners would otherwise be entitled to reserve, to exercise for themselves, or to sell or rent to parties and on terms of their choosing."

[Barry]

Sebastopol's ban on smart meter installation is still a LAW (Sebastopol's ordinance Chapter 8.58), and it's not ending unless the council votes to take it down. How can a law be unlawful, unless it's proven in court to be so?

Agreed. I think that the Sebastopol City Council should revisit the ban and either affirm it or rescind it.

I adamantly disagree the fees are a reasonable solution. The CPUC is breaking many utility laws, property rights laws, and safety codes on smart meters. Smart meters are harming the environment, they are not in any way possible a "green" solution. Waste upon waste, throwing out perfectly good analog meters, for digital meters that may last ten years and have expensive batteries replaced every five years. "New" isn't always better!

Perhaps a better approach would have been for PG&E to offer discounts to people who accepted smart meters.

[Runningbare]

Perhaps a better approach would have been for PG&E to offer discounts to people who accepted smart meters.

The utility has from the beginning been overzealous to the point of breaching the law in order to implement their program. The choice whether to enroll in the program was clearly intended to be left to the customer, not the utility. Coercion was not to play a part.

Energy Policy Act of 2005, Title Xll, Subtitle E, Section 1252, (a), (14), (C) states:

"Each electric utility subject to subparagraph (A) shall provide each customer requesting a time-based rate with a time-based meter capable of enabling the utility and customer to offer and receive such rate, respectively."

This scenario in fact sets the stage for opting in, not out.

[rossmen]

Your opinion is late since the city hired its attorney to be city manager. Think what you will, and inform yourself with fact.

I think the city should fire their attorney. ...

[Sieglinde]

This quote about "It is a law" does not mean it actually is. Sebastopol can pass laws all day long. They could require all of us to wear tie-dye but if state or federal law is contradictiory to this, it is not a real law.

Sebastopol's ban on smart meter installation is still a LAW (Sebastopol's ordinance Chapter 8.58), and it's not ending unless the council votes to take it down. ...

[Sasu]

It is a law, and what you are talking about is the question of jurisdiction, not law.

According the the city council minutes, the City attorney/manager said nothing about the ban being unlawful. He "presented the staff report recommending the city council provide direction on adopting measures establishing a temporary moratorium on the installation of smart meters and related equipment..." The council voted unanimously to adopt it. The police chief recommended the $500 fine.

According to the minutes, the City attorney/manager said the ordinance will be in effect until the council takes further action. It was the city attorney/manager who directed the police chief to not enforce it, but the city council has not revisited the ordinance, so therefore it stands, whether or not the fine is enforced.

I am wondering, since it is a law, can residents cite it to make citizen's arrests? And, I also support the council reviewing the ordinance.

Minutes of Sebastopol City Council Meeting: https://web.archive.org/web/20151107...ng_minutes.pdf

This quote about "It is a law" does not mean it actually is. Sebastopol can pass laws all day long. They could require all of us to wear tie-dye but if state or federal law is contradictiory to this, it is not a real law.

[Sasu]

According to this PD article a citizens arrest can be made if it's a misdemeanor. You would have to state something like, “You are under arrest for violating Sebastopol Ordinance Chapter 8.58”.
The ordinance says : "2. Violations of this moratorium may be charged as infractions or misdemeanors …"

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/5...itizens-arrest

I am wondering, since it is a law, can residents cite it to make citizen's arrests?

[sqb]

And the installer will just laugh at you, ignore you or come back later.
Good luck. You might need a gun, but that would take it to the next level.

Choose your battles. The national government is being taken over by people that don't care about other people, only money. The dissolution of the EPA, FDA, FTC and other agencies that protect people is a far more important issue right now.

According to this PD article a citizens arrest can be made if it's a misdemeanor. ...

[Sasu]

A camera will do. They run away from cameras.

And the installer will just laugh at you, ignore you or come back later.
Good luck. You might need a gun, but that would take it to the next level.

[Sieglinde]

Interesting. I never knew how a citizens arrest is done. Just remember, the individual involved is a blue collar worker, most likely a contractor with PG&E (an innocent) . The Sebastopol PD may not back you up. (I don't think there would be violence, more likely a verbal argument with the worker calling his boss to have it sorted out.)

According to this PD article a citizens arrest can be made if it's a misdemeanor. You would have to state something like, “You are under arrest for violating Sebastopol Ordinance Chapter 8.58”.
The ordinance says : "2. Violations of this moratorium may be charged as infractions or misdemeanors …"

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/5...itizens-arrest

[Sieglinde]

Yep, we have bigger fish to fry the next four years. If Smart Meters are the worst thing, just express graditude and move on.

...Choose your battles. The national government is being taken over ...

[Sieglinde]

Interesting. It is true, that since they are in a public place there is no expectation of privacy but consider who you are photographing. This person will be a blue collar worker, who is either and employee of PG&E or a contractor for PG&E. Be sensitive that he or she has nothing to do with policy, management or poltics.

A camera will do. They run away from cameras.

[Sasu]

Here is an article from today's Press Democrat.

https://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/6...smartmeters-in


PG&E to install SmartMeters in Sebastopol again
MARY CALLAHAN
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT | January 18, 2017, 6:49PM

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. is ending a four-year moratorium on the installation of residential SmartMeters in Sebastopol, where strong community opposition resulted in a 2013 ordinance banning new placements of the wireless devices, though the law was suspended before it was ever enforced.

The utility company will start next month on what could be 5,300 installations in the city by introducing a handful of the controversial meters in homes where customers specifically have requested them, spokeswoman Deanna Contreras said. Installations also will resume in the Marin County town of Fairfax, which opposed the meters, as well.

Contreras said the company will roll out its program carefully and deliberately, ensuring residents understand not only how SmartMeters work but that they also have a right to opt out — for a price.

No SmartMeters will be installed where customers have not been notified in advance, she said. Those choosing to stick with conventional meters must pay a $75 fee, plus $10 a month for three years.

But the plan already has aroused the ire of a Sebastopol-based group that has spent years fighting a regionwide plan to replace analog gas and electricity meters with digital ones critics claim pose a threat to human health, safety and privacy.

The group, EMF Safety Network is planning its next steps, Sebastopol resident and Network director Sandi Maurer said, including door-to-door distribution of literature about the perceived dangers of SmartMeters.

The devices emit electromagnetic radio waves similar to a cellphone or Wi-Fi router to communicate with centralized computers that keep real-time tabs on customers’ power use. Some consumers and health practitioners claim these repeated pulses cause symptoms including headaches, insomnia, imbalance, tinnitus and heart problems, though major health institutions have not validated these complaints.

But health concerns were among the problems cited in the urgency ordinance adopted in February 2013 by the Sebastopol City Council forbidding installation of new SmartMeters.

“We’re actively resisting PG&E’s deployment here in Sebastopol,” Maurer said, “and we will be going back to the city council to ask them to enforce the ban again, too.”

PG&E, like energy companies around the world, has been working for the past decade to upgrade old-fashioned meters with SmartMeters. The latter allow for two-way communication enabling faster detection of power outages, remote servicing and real-time access to power consumption that can guide customers’ conservation efforts. Nearly 10 million have been installed in PG&E’s service area, which runs from Bakersfield to Eureka, with an opt-out rate of about 2 percent, company representatives said.

Sonoma County’s opt-out rate is also 2 percent but that jumps to about 6 percent in Sebastopol, PG&E spokeswoman Ari Vanrenen said.

The company has installed about 2,600 SmartMeters in the city. The conversion of the 5,300 analog meters over the next two years represents about 3,000 customers, Vanrenen said.

Longtime council member Sara Glade Gurney said the company risks a public relations problem, if it moves forward.

“We’re expecting citizen action if they come here to install meters,” she said.

But the council’s previous move to ban deployment in 2013 was suspended almost immediately after it began because authority to regulate utility companies resides with the California Public Utility Commission, City Attorney/City Manager Larry McLaughlin said.

The state commission’s general counsel told the city the ban was an “illegal unenforceable ordinance, in violation of federal law,” McLaughlin said.

At the same time, PG&E said it would not honor the ordinance and threatened to sue if any of its employees was cited and charged the $500 fine the law allowed, McLaughlin said.

Sebastopol, PG&E face off over SmartMeters again
Current Mayor Una Glass said Wednesday she doesn’t “see that the council has a lot of options, no matter how much I think it’s kind of an imposition on our residents.

“We’re this tiny little city, and it’s kind of this David and Goliath thing again,” she said.

You can reach Staff Writer Mary Callahan at 707-521-5249 or [email protected]. On Twitter @MaryCallahanB.

[sqb]

I can't wait to get mine. It will help me keep track of power usage and waste. Gas too.

looking forward to get new tech here.

[Jude Iam]

yup, handy.

increased incidence of cancer and other ailments, house fires, major bill increases and corporate snooping and control notwithstanding.

I can't wait to get mine. It will help me keep track of power usage and waste. Gas too.

looking forward to get new tech here.

[Sieglinde]

I wish I had heard about being able to request one months ago. I requested mine yesterday using the PG&E website.

[Sasu]

I can't wait to get mine. It will help me keep track of power usage and waste. Gas too.

Expand

Here's an article from a man who had similar aspirations as you, thinking the smart meter would help him track power and reduce waste. Here's his conclusion,

"7. My Smart Meter is Irrelevant! The surprising lesson in all of this is that my smart meter has almost nothing to do with any of these lessons. The data I rely upon was available before my smart meter was installed and the monthly summaries are still the most useful data available for my purposes. So where is the consumer benefit from smart meters? As far as I can tell all the benefits are flowing to PG&E, but my rates are still going up."

https://garylhunt.wordpress.com/2010...fter-one-year/

He also claims the smart meter is not to blame for rising bills. However, emails between PG&E and the CPUC prove smart meters were overcharging in hot weather. PG&E gave out scanty refunds to customers. https://emfsafetynetwork.org/structu...-and-cover-up/

But don't worry, Sebastopol doesn't get hot like Bakersfield does.

[Sasu]

Dr. Ronald M Powell, PhD in applied physics from Harvard writes, “Smart Meters are a community concern, not just an individual concern.”-

"A Single Smart Meter on a Neighbor’s Home Can Produce RF Power Density Levels Shown to Cause Biological Effects

For some locations in a given home, the distance to a neighbor’s Smart Meter may be less than the distance to the resident’s own Smart Meter. Thus, a neighbor’s Smart Meter may be the principal source of radiation for some locations in the given home. The Biological Effects Chart shows that a single Smart Meter can produce RF power densities found to cause biological effects even at distances greater than 20 meters, and certainly up to 100 meters. And the number of neighbors within that range can be large. A given single-*‐family home in a residential community may have one to eight nearest neighbors, and even more next nearest neighbors, all within 100 meters (328 feet) of a given home, and each with a Smart Meter.

The problem of exposure from the neighbors’ Smart Meters becomes more serious as the distances between adjacent homes, and thus the distances between adjacent Smart Meters, get smaller. So, generally speaking, residents of townhouses will receive more radiation from their neighbors’ Smart Meters than residents of single-*‐family homes. And residents of apartments will receive even more radiation from their neighbors’ Smart Meters, depending on the location of the Smart Meters in the apartment buildings.

So Smart Meters are a community concern, not just an individual concern. To resolve the problems of RF exposure for a given home, it will be necessary to address all of the Smart Meters near that home. Smart Appliances, too, contribute to this concern. While, individually, they have a lower RF power output than a Smart Meter, the Smart Appliances of neighbors can also increase the RF exposure in the given home.

Fortunately, some states have offered an individual OPT OUT from the installation of a Smart Meter. While such an OPT OUT is very helpful, and is definitely the vital first step, the data on biological effects discussed here suggest the limitations of such an OPT OUT in resolving the problem of excess radiation from Smart Meters.

There is no substitute for a roll back of all Smart Meters at the community level, or higher.”
-Ronald Powell, PhD Applied Physics

from "Biological Effects from RF Radiation at Low5Intensity Exposure, based on the BioInitiative 2012 Report, and the Implications for Smart Meters and Smart Appliances" June 11, 2013

[Sieglinde]

My Netgear router is probably producing more and trust me if I went into the neighbors with a Wifi enabled device, I could see my wifi. Are you going to ban routers?

[Sasu]

Wi-fi routers can be turned off, and normally their strength and range are less than smart meters. Smart meters cannot be turned off. In apartments there are often multiple meters on one building wall.

Sebastopol banned smart meters because of their effects on the community. We believe the city should be advising residents to use hardwired routers, and wired connections to protect children, communities and nature.

I have spent seven years in proceedings on smart meters at the California Public Utilities Commission. I researched 65,000 emails between PG&E and the CPUC on smart meters. From this experience, I firmly believe surveillance is the main reason smart meters are deployed.