The City of Battle Creek's Response To My Questions

Because the City Commissioners are the "gatekeepers" of the city, at the last Battle Creek City Commission meeting I submitted two questions in regards to my concerns of the safety of the new utility meters the City Commissioners are welcoming into the city:

What evidence do you have of the safety of the new utility meters, all of them, water, gas and electric, other than what comes from the manufacturer?

And do you have any independent third-party testing showing, or proving that the new utility meters are indeed perfectly safe?

Though I did not submit a Freedom of Information Request, the Clerk's office submitted one on my behalf, and was then kind enough to waive the fee, "this one time."

The City Clerk, Victoria Houser, wrote in her letter dated Monday, September 21, 2015:

"The Water Department has indicated they have no documents from independent parties related to the meters."

She also sent a "DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORD," which stated:

Your request is being denied in part for the following reason(s):

Is not in the possession of the City.  No independent 3rd party testing.  No information on gas and electric meters.

They admitted outright that they have no proof that the new utility meters are safe.  They admitted outright that they have not seen documentation of safety from independent third parties, and they have no information about the safety of the new gas and electric meters they are allowing to be installed also.  

Ms. Houser also provided a memorandum that the Water Department received from the City of Grand Haven, Department of Public Works.  The memorandum was written by William Hunter, Director of Public Works, explaining his understanding of RF and Smart Meters.  The memorandum came with two Radio Frequency comparison charts and a propaganda sheet from a "Utility Cooperative" in Hawaii.

Perhaps they don't know that 

the RF comparison charts 

have been proven wrong...

"The problem is, they've compared apples and oranges.  They looked at whole-body exposure from a Smart Meter, and compared it to the dose to the ear from a cell phone, instead of looking at the whole-body dose from the cell phone and comparing it to the whole-body dose from the smart meter." 

"Secondly, they assumed 100% duty cycle for the smart meter, and a 1% duty cycle for the cell phone; you're only using the cell phone probably an hour a day on average.  But they didn't correct for that.  So they didn't look at the cumulative exposure.  Ninety-nine percent of the time the cell phone wasn't producing radiation, but they assumed that 100% of the time the smart meter would.  In the smart meter figure they'd exaggerated a little bit, 50% would probably be a reasonable number.  But in any case, when you correct for these two factors, the whole-body and the cumulative part of it, rather than a cell phone being 100 times more exposure than a smart meter, the smart meter turns out to be roughly 100 times more cumulative exposure than the cell phone."

"...the cumulative whole body exposure from a Smart Meter at 3 feet appears to be approximately two orders of magnitude higher than that of a cell phone, rather than two orders of magnitude lower."

Quotes from Daniel Hirsch, Senior Lecturer on Nuclear Policy at UCSC.  YouTube video link here, another article with the video here, and his Draft Report, "Health Impacts of Radio Frequency from Smart Meters," here.  

In my humble opinion, the information about radiation exposure from Daniel Hirsch, Senior Lecturer on Nuclear Policy at the University of California Santa Cruz, holds more weight than the information from William Hunter, Director of Public Works in Grand Haven, Michigan.  

Is this not serious carelessness on the part of the City Commissioners, allowing these unproven to be safe devices to be installed all throughout the city, exposing the citizens to questionable amounts of radiation?

Bless Us All!

For more information:

• EMFScientists.org
• The BioInitiative Report
• Take Back Your Power
• Smart Grid Awareness
• Smart Meter Education Network in Michigan, USA

Battle Creek City Commission Meeting

It was a long City Commission meeting last night, with lots of drama.  I gave my comment about smart meters at about 46:48 minutes in, which can be viewed here.  The audio is somewhat off sync with the video, but still very understandable.

Towards the end of the meeting, one of the Commissioners asked the City Manger if there was an opt-out program that I could become a part of.  She replied that they were working on an opt-out program.    

And it just occurred to me that the idea of an "opt-out" program is backwards, because we never opted-IN to the City's wireless program in the first place.  We were tricked into having the wireless devices installed, without our knowledge or consent.  

Analogue Water Meter

The "old-fashioned" ANALOGUE meters have a 100-year history of safety, and last an average of 30 to 50 years.  The new, so-called smart meters (wireless/radio/electronic/upgraded/digital meters), do not have a history of safety.  Actually quite the opposite.  Here and here are some links about that.  Plus, the new smart meters that were installed only a few years ago are already failing. 

After the meeting, I met another resident who has been adversely affected by a smart meter.  She and her husband were actually forced into taking a smart meter by the City of Battle Creek Water Department, with the threat of water shut-off if they did not comply.

So not only have they been sneaking these wireless devices onto private property without the knowledge or consent of the property owners, but they've been threatening property owners with water shut-off if they don't agree to having one of these radio devices installed.

And the line from an old Gene Pitney song comes to mind, "What a town without pity can do."

As I was leaving, a uniformed police officer turned to me and said that he really likes what I say at the end of my speeches, blessing everyone, and that he could really feel that I mean it, and that "we could use more people like you."  

I smiled and said, 

"We start with one."

He smiled and agreed.

Here is a transcript of what I said: 

Regarding Vice Mayor Gray's comment to me at the last City Commission meeting, which was in response to my deep concern about the safety of the smart meters the Water Department, and all of our utility companies, have been installing, neither Ms. Gray nor any of you, have been able to provide actual studies, documenting the safety of smart meters, while more and more evidence that smart meters cause harm continues to surface. 

There are 57 jurisdictions opposed to the installation of smart meters in California, a state known to be a forerunner when it comes to the health and safety of their citizens, and 15 have passed ordinances making smart meter installations illegal.  Now Nevada City, NV, is proposing a ban on smart meters.
Hundreds of medical doctors and other health professionals are requesting moratoriums on the installations of smart meters because they are seeing the effects these meters are having on their patients. 

Ms. Gray's email mentioned the FCC in reference to the smart meter manufacturer's documents.  The fact is that the FCC refuses to regulate low frequency radiation.  The new FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler, has been active in the over-a-trillion-dollar-a-year wireless industry since the mid-1970's.  And now he's in a position to regulate the very industry that has been his bread and butter.  That is what's called a fox guarding the hen-house, and could explain the lack of regulation by the FCC.

Ms. Gray's email mentioned the World Health Organization in reference to the smart meter manufacturer's documents.  The fact is that there is an appeal in front of the World Health Organization, signed by over 200 doctors, scientists, engineers, and PhD's, requesting that the World Health Organization's  guidelines and regulatory standards be strengthened in regards to radio frequency radiation, based upon over 2,000 scientific studies that mostly demonstrate neurological and physiological damage from prolonged exposure to the kind of low frequency radiation generated by smart meters. 

Those who are more quickly adversely affected by smart meters, the proverbial canaries in the coal mine, are currently approximately 5% of the population, and we have a right to be safe from harm from utility company's equipment.
Just as Battle Creek was the first in the nation to honor the needs of the disabled by making curb cuts, there is still time for Battle Creek to be the first, at least in the mid-west, to recognize the difficult truth about smart meters and the harm they cause, by imposing a ban or moratorium on the installation of smart meters within the City of Battle Creek. 

Thank you for listening.  May you all be blessed!

*