Californians want a path forward—not left or right—but one
right step after another. California Forward and Supervisor
Susan L. Adams invite you to join Sunne Wright McPeak in an
important dialog about our state and its future and how we can
help move California in the right direction—closer to its people.

We need your help in finding ideas to fix our state.

Tuesday, March 1, 2011
6:30 p.m.—8:30 p.m.

Board of Supervisors
Chambers, Room 330

California Forward is a nonpartisan, nonprofit working
to fix state government and restore the California
dream. We are working to create a “smart” government that’s small enough to
listen, big enough to tackle real problems, smart enough to spend our money
wisely in good times and bad, and honest enough to be held accountable for
results.

Sunne McPeak is the CEO of California Emerging Technology Fund

RSVP to: http://www.cafwd.org/page/event/detail/cafwdcivicdialogue/jts.

Contact Stacy Danielson with questions: (916) 491-0022.

If you are a person with a disability and require this document in an alternate format (example: Braille, Large Print, Audiotape, CD-ROM), you may request an alternate format document by using the contact information below.

If you require an accommodation (example: ASL Interpreter, reader, note taker) to participate in any county program, service or activity, you may request an accommodation by calling Susannah Clark, (415) 499-7342, TTY number 473-4381 or by e-mail at sclark@co.marin.ca.us not less than four work days in advance of the event.

February 24, 2011 at 7 p.m.
TAM to Discuss Land Use and Housing via SB 375 Sustainable
Communities Strategy

As part of the next TAM Board of Commissioners meeting agenda, representatives from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments will discuss the SB375 Sustainable Communities Strategy which endeavors to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, align planning for transportation and housing, and create specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies.

Please visit the TAM website (http://www.tam.ca.gov) on Monday, February 21 to view the agenda and available supporting documentation for this and all agenda items and then plan to attend this meeting and join in the discussion on Thursday, February 24, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors Chambers at the Marin County Civic Center.

We welcome and encourage your participation in this discussion.

Excerpted from The Bay Citizen
By Annette Fuentes, February 9, 2011

Charges were dropped today against two West Marin County women who were arrested for protesting the installation of PG&E’s SmartMeters in Inverness late last year. But controversy over the wireless meters shows no signs of abating . . .

Katharina Sandizell, of Pt. Reyes Station, and June DiMorente of Inverness, were among residents who blocked utility trucks as they were deployed in the town on Dec. 30 to install the meters in homes. The two were arrested on charges of obstructing traffic and failure to obey an officer.

But at a hearing this morning, county District Attorney Edward Berberian decided not to file criminal charges . . . the DA said that the SmartMeter controversy had nothing to do with the decision not to prosecute her.

Sandizell, who practices homeopathy, is also the co-founder with her husband, Barry Smith, of the Environmental Health Coalition of West Marin, a nonprofit advocacy and policy group. The SmartMeter has galvanized activists in Marin who oppose the use of the devices for health and privacy reasons. The meters, which transmit data on energy use back to PG&E in frequent pulses, emit low-levels of radiation, much like cell phones. While the utility has argued that there is no health risk from the meters, opponents like Sandizell and her husband say there is no definitive research on safe exposures.

“PG&E has conducted a campaign of partial and misleading information,” said Barry Smith. “They say, ‘You use a cell phone.’ Can anyone tell me if you put a SmartMeter on a wall outside a bedroom with a new-born infant what the impact is? There is no study.”

On Jan. 4, Marin County’s Board of Supervisors, reacting to resident concerns, passed a moratorium on installation of SmartMeters. Their action followed a similar ordinance passed in the town of Fairfax in August. The county ordinance applies to all unincorporated areas of Marin. But neither Sheriff Robert Doyle or the DA will enforce the new ordinance by stopping utility workers as they attempt to install the meters and issuing citations.

“It’s not an enforceable ordinance,” said Doyle. “PG&E derives its authority to install the meters from the CPUC [California Public Utilities Commission]. I conferred with a number of attorneys, and the DA has publicly stated that if any law enforcement issued citations, he would not prosecute them.”

Doyle said he feared the legal liability his office and the county would face if his deputies detained utility workers for installing the meters. “I have suggested to all the people who send me e-mails opposing the SmartMeters that they should get a lawyer and sue PG&E,” Doyle said. “I don’t know why they want the government to make this a criminal matter.”

Susan Adams, president of the Board of Supervisors, acknowledged that the moratorium may have more symbolic than legal clout. “While we did go into this understanding it would be difficult to enforce, because the CPUC has ultimate authority, the hope was if enough jurisdictions made enough of these public statements, the government would pay attention and put people on the CPUC who represent the public’s concerns,” Adams said. “It doesn’t mean our options are exhausted. I have a meeting coming up soon with PG&E and I’m hoping we can have some constructive conversations about what alternatives there are for people who don’t want the meters installed” . . .

Excerpted from PublicCEO.com by Dan Oney, February 9, 2011

. . . The overly meticulous nature of California’s regulatory structure is designed to ensure the safety of both its natural resources and its residents . . .

Over the protests of individuals, cities, counties, and soon-to-be-unemployed workers, PG&E and its supporters have ignored requests for diligence and responsibility in the process to place wireless SmartMeters across the state.

Some of the latest, and most formal, requests have come from the Marin County Board of Supervisors. On behalf of the County, Board President Susan Adams sent letters to various officials in January.

Supervisor Adams wrote California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Peevey. She implored his Commission to “consider adopting policies that would allow those with personal health concerns to have alternative metering options without wireless frequency components available to them . . . ”

She wrote to Governor Brown and urged him to “appoint new PUC commissioners that will be more responsive.”

An additional letter from the Board of Supervisors went to the Federal Communications Commission, Senators Boxer and Feinstein, and Congresswoman Woolsey, asking them to re-evaluate the effects of the meters, and offer information about any current or planned studies into the matter.

The concern that Supervisor Adams mentions in her letters is the yet-to-be-determined impact of constant, and direct, exposure to the SmartMeters’ wireless frequencies and electromagnetic fields (EMF).

The state’s Division of Ratepayer Advocates has seen inconclusive studies into the effects of the SmartMeters. In a memo issued by their Acting Director, Joseph Como, the DRA has not taken a position on whether or not the SmartMeters have any health impacts, but notes that additional factors that can impact [Radio Frequency] exposure from SmartMeters [are] not addressed… and should be examined more closely.”

One of the issues that hasn’t fully been investigated is the effect that multiple, co-located units could have. Citing a Sage Associates report, a bank of eight SmartMeters could exceed FCC Guidelines for EMF. Additionally, some of the tested meters operate at power levels four times lower than the ones installed by PG&E.

Understandably, PG&E does not immediately gain the trust of a public who has had its systematically disregarded in the past. Those breaches of public confidence have cost Californians their lives.

While the effect of the RF and EMF technologies in the SmartMeters may only be questionable, people now instinctively react with caution, rather than haste.

Marin County is part of a growing coalition that has objected to PG&E’s SmartMeters. They passed a one-year moratorium on the installation of the devices. The towns of Fairfax and Watsonville, along with the County of Santa Cruz all have laws prohibiting PG&E from installing SmartMeters.

But PG&E claims only the California Public Utility Commission has the authority to stop them, and has not only continued retrofitting their connections with the devices, it appears they’ve accelerated the process.

San Louis Obispo, which according to one PG&E employee, wasn’t supposed to receive the SmartMeters for up to two years, had more than 113,000 meters scheduled for installation at the end of last year.

As the process moves forward, meter readers are finding themselves facing termination. For one employee whose territory was encroached upon by the new meters, the transfer to San Louis Obispo was supposed to help him keep his job for two more years. But PG&E’s accelerated installation schedule has him facing the end of his career.

During the worst recession in generations, PG&E’s hurry to install the SmartMeters is hurrying job losses in an already hurting California . . .

It’s time that PG&E works with Californians, and reassures us all that they don’t disregard our safety. Especially in the wake of the San Bruno tradgedy.

Answer Marin County’s questions about how environmental or collocation factors can impact the EMF levels of SmartMeters. Answer questions about what long-term effects exposure may have. Offer a choice of meters to residents.