Sebastopol City Council rejects moratorium on SmartMeters

https://www.sonomawest.com/art/3smalllogos_popup.gif
Sebastopol City Council rejects moratorium on SmartMeters

https://www.sonomawest.com/articles/...2198400859.txt

Not enough resources to fight

by David Abbott
Sonoma West Editor

Published: Wednesday, October 6, 2010 2:03 PM PDT

SEBASTOPOL — The Sebastopol City Council decided on Oct. 5 not to pursue a moratorium against PG&E’s SmartMeters to the displeasure of more than two dozen members of the community who have been demanding action from the city since March.

The moratorium discussion didn’t begin until after 10 p.m. Tuesday night and comments were limited to two minutes. In the end, the 4-1 vote came amid a vocal outpouring of displeasure from the public at the end of a meeting that lasted more than five hours.

Mayor Sarah Gurney, the lone dissenting vote, expressed empathy with the group, which included Sandi Maurer of the EMF Safety Network, and a handful of others who have regularly attended meetings on the issue.

“I’m in the minority here,” Gurney said, after other councilmembers had spoken. “I think it would be an important statement. It’s disappointing to me that we can only offer one city council member” in favor of the moratorium.

Moments earlier, councilmember Linda Kelley deflated the energy of the crowd when she informed them that she would not be in favor of putting the city what could be considered a “no win” situation.

“Some of you may think I’m going to be the savior,” Kelley said. “I don’t believe the city has the jurisdiction to put in a moratorium we could enforce.”

Kelley went on to encourage the group to continue their individual efforts to try to stop the meters.

The latest chapter in the SmartMeter saga began at the Sept. 21 Council meeting, when Vice-Mayor Guy Wilson put a possible moratorium on the agenda. At the time, city attorney Larry McLaughlin thought there might be enough legal wiggle room to put an ordinance in place.

City staff was then instructed to look into the legalities involved in such a moratorium, but came back Tuesday night with bad news for the anti-EMF residents.

McLaughlin determined that there were two possible approaches, either regulatory or political/legal. He said that a moratorium generally has a set period of time — usually a year — which would be a more likely scenario than an outright ban.

He went back to the city’s original franchise with PG&E, which dates back to the 1930s, and found that the agreement would favor the utility were a moratorium to be litigated.

Further, in McLaughlin’s legal research, he found that there have not been any official legal opinions sought in any of the city’s that have enacted a moratorium including Fairfax, San Anselmo, Watsonville and Santa Cruz County.

The cost of either obtaining a legal opinion or fighting PG&E in court would be prohibitive, McLaughlin said.

“We’d have the burden of proof, and the city doesn’t have the resources,” he said by way of explanation. “The city doesn’t have the resources … to be the vanguard.”

Other options explored were to “do nothing,” and be content with a letter sent to the California Public Utilities Commission and PG&E requesting suspension of further SmartMeter installation, or supplement that request with another.

Another option, which was skirted at the last meeting, would have been to join a petition with the EMF Safety Network, which Wilson was leery to enter into, due to the implications of a city government partnering with a citizen’s action group.

He also thought the impetus for fighting the meters should come from a large body.

“It needs to be done on a national level,” Wilson said. “Enacting a local law without legal belief to send a political message sets a dangerous precedence.”

Councilmember Kathleen Shaffer said that she has received e-mails and other communications from residents who are not afraid of the new technology.

“I don’t feel I can put the city in this position either,” she said. “I have to speak for all citizens not just a few.”

Several passionate speakers took one last opportunity to chime in, citing health issues, overcharging by PG&E, lost jobs to meter readers, and even skirting the possibility that SmartMeters were responsible for the gas line explosion in San Bruno last month.

Sebastopol resident Magick said it was a civil rights issue and called the franchise language “archaic.”

“PG&E has been a bad actor,” she added.

Dave Hubert said it’s important to take a stand, and compared SmartMeters to having a “chain-smoker in the house, 24/7.”

But in the end, council chose not to move forward with the moratorium, much to the chagrin of the Mayor, who chided Shaffer saying that she “hasn’t heard anyone clamoring for SmartMeters.”

“I don’t see any reason not to do a moratorium,” she said. “I don’t see the need for this entire grid to be put on us before testing is done.”

In view of San Bruno experience, Sebastopol should require a monthly walk-by (sniff test) of all gas meters, underground pipes, etc.

While I don't share the wi-fi concerns of the anti-EMF folks, I do think that people should have a choice whether to accept this technology on their property.

Given that the "legal" moratorium went down to a 4-1 defeat, I think it would have been good if the counsel adopted a non-binding request to PG&E to allow people to opt-out of the program, just as they voice their concerns and express their opinions on a variety of non-local issues.