Has Oncor found a new way to lobby Texas state senators? It seems bit odd to me that the Grand Prairie Chamber of Commerce has suddenly grown an interest in the smart meter issue. The interest seems to have been … Continue reading
Monday May 6, CALL YOUR TEXAS SENATOR- IF you WANT A CHANCE TO OPT-OUT of the SMART METERS!! UPDATE–> Calls on Tuesday are still worthwhile, so don’t think it is too late! We can call up until it is being voted on, which, last I heard, it may happpen Wednesday, but that is subject to change!
call your Texas Senator!
Now the bill (SB 241) is headed for a vote on the floor of the Texas Senate, but Dewhurst will not bring to the floor without knowing at least 21 Senators will vote FOR it. So, try to get a committment for them to vote FOR it without amendments. This call will take less than 5 min. and could turn the tide of sentiment…I dare say some Senators were not even aware that a Smart Meter Opt Out bill even existed, and they may not realize there are so many who are opposed to being forced to have one on their house. (If you want any ‘talking points’ to share with them, read below!)
Find your Senator here. http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/Home.aspx
The Spotlight is on the Texas SB 241, introduced by Honorable Senator John Corona, to whom we owe a heartfelt thank you for listening to the many Texans who poured out their hearts in their numerous letters, and during the hearings held in the Senate Business and Commerce Committee. Thanks, also to the Senators who voted in favor of the Bill to get it out of committee in a 2nd vote Thurs (May 2, 2013). Yes votes are as follows: Carona, Taylor, Eltife, Hancock, Lucio (Lucio changed from NO on first vote; also first vote, Taylor, Eltife and Hancock were a No Show). We also want to extend a “Shout Out” to Glen Beck who did a feature on Smart Meters on his Wed. show where he had a guest (anti-smart meter activist, Thelma Taormina of 912 Members USA) who exposed the failure of the Smart Meter SB 241 bill to be successfully voted out of committee. Oh, and one more Thank You- to God, who heard the petitions of many of his children.
No, this Bill does not BAN Smart Meters, but many feel this is a start, and as such, the beginnings of victory. There are some whose health is so fragile, and just getting the meter off of their home will make a significant improvement in their daily lives. (Yes, some are even feeling effects from their neighboring meters, but, the closer the meter, the worse the effects.)
Now the bill is headed for a vote on the floor of the Texas Senate, but Dewhurst will not bring to the floor without knowing at least 21 Senators will vote FOR it.
Find your Senator here. http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/Home.aspx
Some Senators may balk at the bill because of the NO COST for Opt Out – Below are some reasons you might arm your Senator with, or convince them with.
I know this might be a bit long, scan it, pick the best 2 or so, and explain to your Senator.
One I personally feel is strong, is that ALL taxpayers had a part in the PAYING FOR SMART METERS via our 2nd Stimulus in 2009, 3.4 Billion going towards Smart Meters and related items. Not to mention that Texans have been charged approx. $2.21 per mo. for Advanced Metering for many months now, and as I understand we will continue to be charged this amount for a total of 11 years, totalling approx. $293. I believe that amount is even increasing, as the last time i called to get electricity to a home I was quoted $3.? or so as the metering charge! Now, for those opting out, who’s smart meter are we paying for…one that is NON EXISTENT!
NOTE: those reasons below were provided by another anti-smart meter activist. Thanks to her!
First, the deployment was never supposed to be mandatory; therefore, paying to opt-out of a non-mandatory action is irrational and illogical. It is a punitive disincentive to choosing what is best for the individual, whether it relates to health concerns, privacy, or security.
Second, the basis for health concerns is widespread.
There are now over 6,000 peer-reviewed submissions that have been published showing the potentially harmful effects of exposure to RF radiation from wireless digital transmission at levels far below the thermal activity. The so-called standards of safety for the often quoted FCC guidelines date back to 1986 and are ”not protective of public health” according to the Radio Frequency Interagency Working Group (FDA, OSHA, EPA and FCC).
The World Health Organization (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) now lists this RF as a possible human carcinogen.
The American Academy of Environmental Medicine has issued warnings about reducing exposure levels of non-thermal RF transmissions in many individual cases and has said, “Adverse health effects from wireless radio frequency fields, such as learning disabilities, altered immune responses, and headaches, clearly exist and are well documented in the scientific literature. Safer technology, such as use of hard-wiring, is strongly recommended in schools.”
And finally, in a June 2012 letter, 54 MD’s and PhDs made a compelling case for concern regarding the health risks and effects. Increasingly, it is only the studies funded by the wireless companies that find the effects relatively benign, much as was the case with cigarettes for many years. Yet in the case of cigarettes and with far less data than is available today on RF, no one suggested people should have to pay a fee for NOT smoking. It is ridiculous for a government to assert people should pay extra to avoid a health hazard with this much evidence behind it.
Third, the cost of the deployment is socialized, which means I’m paying for others to have the privilege of using a smart meter. Therefore, the cost of opting out of this deployment must be socialized. Either we all share the cost of using or not using OR we each pay individually for using or not using. We shouldn’t have one standard for one group and a different standard for another group!
No basis can be found to justify paying for a consumer’s right to not participate in a regulated monopoly’s technological deployment where no statutory mandate exists. The socialized cost of the deployment, the discriminatory and punitive nature of the charge, and the hindrances to free market competition leave no doubt that an opt out charge is indefensible.
Fourth, Electric transmission and distribution utilities (TDUs such as Oncor, CenterPoint, AEP, TNMP) have a regulated monopoly, with no options or flexibility as one would have in a free market exchange; therefore, opt out fees are incompatible with this business model. Contrast this business model and forceful deployment of smart meters to the cell phone industry’s business model. Cell phones were developed and deployed in a free market exchange, to which only the wealthy or tech-savvy had initial access. As new technology led to improved user-friendliness and better service plans, and as the costs decreased over time, more consumers freely bought into this technology. No one was forced to buy cell phones, nor were they penalized for not buying them.
Fifth, an opt out fee is discriminatory because only the wealthy have the option of separating themselves from the smart grid network, albeit, only partially*. Those who would be challenged to pay the opt out penalty include the elderly, the disabled, those on a limited or fixed income. Worse yet, many of these classes of people are the ones who are potentially most vulnerable to RF related issues.
Sixth, opt out costs negate the competitive nature of the free market when property owners, who prefer not to take on the liability of personal injury or intellectual property vandalism, have to increase their rates. These property owners would be forced to pass on the cost of opting out to their tenants (apartments, hotels, retail centers, or other high density living spaces), thereby, making their pricing structures artificially higher than their competitors who don’t opt out.
Seventh, opting out does not require a meter reader, and need not be a financial burden. As has been done in many other cases, the TDUs could transmit electric consumption over existing phone lines or power lines, which would also be much more secure than wireless transmissions and much safer by eliminating RF exposure. In fact, in many cases this landline technology is what was removed from a house when the Smart Meter was installed. Additionally, many remote or rural customers are self reporting. This method could be offered to those who choose to opt out, as well as potentially an option to go online and input one’s meter readings onto a webpage would be easy to set up and run.
BUT, “What if this smart meter deployment saves the taxpayer money? Then we should charge you for opting out,” challenged one attorney. Not so fast my learned intellectual. You cannot charge an opt out fee on the basis of a speculation. The cost/benefit must be proven first.
And last, is it possible that an opt out charge is discriminatory against minorities? The Executive Director of the PUC called us “discreet, small number of people.” Discrimination against minorities is as taboo as it gets. What politician wants to claim that moniker as his own?
We would like to add
*An Opt Out is only a partial remedy to the forceful smart meter deployment. Having one’s own smart meter removed while others remain in place, doesn’t protect the individual from the matrix of radio frequencies emanating from the larger smart meter mesh network. Nor does it alleviate the bigger problem of a central bureaucratic unelected agency or commission controlling the entire value chain of generation, transmission, distribution, storage, and end-use of electricity. The current version of opt out is only one option (no others have been offered by the utilities or the PUC) and is so inconsequential that is does not justify charging the consumer any amount.
Take Back your Power Screening
Take Back Your Power: The “Smart” Meter Agenda Unveiled
Special Pre-Release Screening
Friday, May 3, 2013, 7:00 – 9:30 pm
Fellowship Bible Church Dallas
9330 North Central Expressway, Dallas, TX 75231
http://fellowshipdallas.org/contact/
The 90 minute film will be followed by a Panel Discussion!
Admission is free but donations are requested to help cover the room rental and support the worldwide release of the film.
This eye-opening documentary feature film investigates the “smart” meter program currently being implemented worldwide by most of the major utility companies. These devices are being installed often without the consent – and sometimes against the protests – of property owners. The film uncovers alarming issues about health, privacy, property rights, corporate fraud, and the unprecedented vulnerability of the “smart” grid. Hear from such experts as Bill Vander Zalm (former Premier of British Columbia, CA), Dr. David O. Carpenter (Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at University at Albany), B. Blake Levitt (an award-winning science journalist), and many others. You will gain a deeper understanding of the political and economic forces behind the “smart meter” agenda, as well as resources and proven solutions for how you can protect yourself, your family, your home, and your rights.
Find out more about the Movie Project here: http://takebackyourpower.net/
Hosted by:
Grassroots Texans Network
Park Cities/Preston Hollow Tea Party
Carrollton Tea Party
(For information, contact Beth Biesel at ncriver@me.com, 214.691.4180)
NO-FEE Conventional Meters FOR ALL!
Well, we are finally getting an actual Hearing on the issue of Advanced (aka “Smart”) Meters in Texas from the PUC. Sadly, it is not on “our terms”, but on theirs. They (the PUC) in all their wisdom, have already concluded that the dangers to human health are negligible, unproven, and much more likely to have been caused by the consumer ‘fretting’ over the possibility of health effects, rather than the smart meters themselves. Basically the PUC of Texas has declared that everyone who has personally experienced symptoms they connect to the introduction of a Smart Meter on their home- the sypmtoms are merely psychosomatic! *(Definition of psychosomatic: “of or pertaining to a physical disorder that is caused by or notably influenced by emotional factors.”) Here’s an excerpt of the conclusion portion of the PUC of Tx ‘Staff Report on Health and RF EMF from Advanced Meters’ p.63:
Some opponents of smart meters have raised the idea of electromagnetic hypersensitivity and cite anecdotes
of having witnessed or experienced various afflictions. After reviewing a substantial body of evidence, the
WHO concluded that there was no scientific basis to link EHS symptoms to EMF exposure. It has suggested
that symptoms experienced by some individuals described as EHS might arise from environmental factors
unrelated to EMF or that the symptoms may be due to pre-existing psychiatric conditions or stress reactions
resulting from worrying about EMF health effects, rather than the EMF exposure itself. Further, scientific
studies show that people who are ill are highly receptive to negative suggestion and may demonstrate a
“nocebo response” as a result of these suggestions.
I don’t know about you, but for anyone who has experienced the negative health effects since the introduction of a smart meter on your home or place of residence, I would think that might be a bit insulting!
All this being said, I hope everyone who reads this will make their voice heard prior to, or at the PUC Hearing to be held on April 19th, 2013. (Comments not in person can be directed to the PUC Project 41111 details below)
FOR THOSE WHO CAN APPEAR IN PERSON, here’s the location and time details below. For carpool info, please contact Beth at 214-794-1592 ASAP.
| Travis Building Commissioners Hearing Room (001) Room: 7-100 |
For full details you can review the PUC document here.
CAN’T ATTEND? EMAIL your **comments to Cindy at Cindy@Bantexassmartmeters.com, (please write “PUC SMART METER HEARING” in the Subject Line for easy reference) so we can print them out and take them to submit them into the record for the Hearing. If you have the email address for Beth Beisel with Texas Eagle Forum, you may send directly to her as well.
**Comments need to address the issues that are being addressed in this hearing. For a list of suggested comments, read below.
PUC has written a rule under Project #41111 to allow their idea of an opt-out with a charge to be determined by the utilities. The suggested monthly charge is $20, ongoing, subject to increase as needed. Their definition of opt-out is turning off the wireless transmission of kilowatts and using a meter reader to retrieve KW usage. This rule (nor any ‘OPT OUT’) will not protect us from the dangers of wireless frequencies, nor loss of privacy of our lifestyle data, nor does it prevent a rogue, inaccessible agency from controlling our power consumption. If you agree, feel free to include that in your comments for the record – they need to be told how “We the People” really feel about the problems with this BAND-AID called an OPT-OUT! (all comments need to be done with respect – no name calling, or demeaning comments – this will only harm our position, so, please be respectful!)
The PUC specifically asks for comment regarding the following:
QUESTION: Are there any circumstances, such as premises where an advanced meter has not been deployed, where a customer should not have to pay the one-time fee or should pay a reduced one-time fee under proposed subsection (e)?
OUR RESPONSE:
Yes, there are circumstances when the customer should NOT be charged:
1. Every circumstance – customer choice was written into the original legislation, and this intention must not continue to be violated!
2. The charge is in essence a penalty (and double taxation, see comments below).
3. Furthermore, each customer has already been PAYING a monthly fee for an AMS meter that they will NOT BE USING! Not to mention the customer has already paid for the deployment of such meters via their TAX MONIES. Therefore the customer is charged for the AMS unit (which even though the consumer paid for it – it is owned by the TDU- how does that make sense?), the installation, deployment etc., PLUS charged to NOT PARTICIPATE, thus a form of DOUBLE TAXATION!
In addition you might consider the following for your testimony:
-OPT-OUT = REMOVE THE SMART METER, USE ANALOG ONLY
-LOW COST OPTIONS FOR READING THE METER INCLUDE: TRANSMIT KW THROUGH
a. EXISTING TELEPHONE OR POWER LINE
b. POSTCARDS – Self Reporting (adjust by manual reading Qtrly/ Bi-annually)
c. ESTIMATES – monthly billing based on historical records. (adjust by manual reading Quarterly or Bi-annually)
d. SELF REPORTING THROUGH WEB PORTAL. (adjust by manual reading Qtrly or Bi-annually)
-NO CHARGE EVER (email request for our “NO COST OPT-OUT DOC”)
-ASK the PUC to PROTECT TEXAS’ GRID INDEPENDENCE
If you plan to come, please email cindy@bantexassmartmeters.com so we can get an idea of a head count.
Thanks to all who are participating in any way whatsoever! Special thanks (we all owe it!) to Beth Beisel for getting the tough work of communicating with and continuing to personally ‘lobby’ directly with the decision makers and lawmakers involved in this issue, and NOT LETTING IT DIE!
Below – subscribe to the blog so you can get updates when they are posted!
Time to trek off to Austin (again!) for those who are able to do so…
Take it to the Texas State Capitol!
Where you will be testifying in the Hearing on April 9th. If you cannot make the trip, you can still contact Chairman John Corona, and/or the members of the Senate Business and Commerce Committee (link to contact each member) and let them know why we need to support the SB 241, along with amendments that will do the following, especially the first 4 items below, prior to the April 9 hearing. (However, all are very important for consumer choice and freedom and we wish to have them all included!)
Carpool requests and/or additional detail inquiries can be directed to Cindy@bantexassmartmeters.com – use ‘Austin Trip’ in the subject line.
What YOU can ASK the 83rd Legislature to Do
Contact YOUR Texas Senators and Representatives and/or attend the April 9 Senate Committe Hearing – You’ll have 2-3 minutes, plus you should be able to enter supporting documentation into the record, ASK THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS to Support Smart Meter OPT-OUT Legislation, and to consider submitting and/or supporting suggested amendments layed out in bullet points 1-6 below.
1. NO COST opt out and retroactive-removal. The cost of providing alternative reading methods is greatly overstated by the TDU’s. Several low-cost ways can be implemented, from ‘self-reporting’ to Landline delivery of KW transmission using lines that already exist at virtually every customer’s place of delivery. (Oh, and since they (the TDU’s and PUC) state that there are very few opposed to Smart Meters, then the cost to offer the Opt-Out should be miniscule in relation to the number of customers who will choose to keep their Smart Meters.)
2. Requirements for Data Collection and Transmissions:
For Opt Outs: NO data collected by the TDUs or the Retail Electric Providers except kilowatts per hour, transmitted once per month.
For Smart Meter customers: NO data collected by the TDUs or the Retail Electric Providers except kilowatts per hour unless otherwise explicitly agreed to by the customer.
3. Landline delivery for transmission of KW for opt out customers. (This reduces/eliminates the high EMF/RF frequency emissions.)
4. Keep Texas grid independent of national grid and FERC, DOE, EPA regulations. (This keeps Texas Independent and maintains our Sovereignty over our own Electricity! Very Important!)
5. Mass consumer education provided to be provided by the TDU (such as Oncor or Centerpointe) or ESP’s [Electric Service Providers. TXU, Reliant, etc.], about privacy issues/concerns, potential safety hazards and suspected health risks of smart meters and their networks via electric bill inserts, utility website entry additions or other low cost media such as press releases, etc. without additional expense to the customers. (They can take it from their massive profits…such as the huge bonuses paid to the CEO’s of their companies!)
6. Liability assigned to TDU for personal injury and property damage, including intellectual property.
7. Amend HB1600, Sub-chapter D: Do NOT give PUC “cease and desist” authority.
It must be stated emphatically that an Opt-Out is really a band-aid which does not fully address the festering issues at hand. Why?
call your Texas Rep and Senator!
We have the opportunity to host a Smart Meter Briefing for all Tx. Legislators, Gov. Perry and Lt. Gov. Dewhurst
on
This Briefing is Sponsored by TEXAS EAGLE FORUM. Invitations are going out to all Tx Rep/Senators, however, your Representative and Senator needs to know that this is an issue that freedom loving, knowledgeable Texans are concerned about. You must call and encourage/ask them to attend!
Topics to be covered are:
Privacy, Security, Costs, Energy, Health, Grid Independence
We need TEXANS to get on the phone, followed up with an email to their Office, [if available, District office should be less busy, better chance it gets attention there rather than in Austin!], of their own State Rep and Senator – (find their contact info here) ASK them to PLEASE take One Hour out of their schedules to come and hear some Expert Testimony on the subject of Smart Meters. (If they say they are double booked, or too busy, ask that they send one of their assistants to attend and take copious notes!)
This meeting is primarily intended to educate our Representatives, but we want a healthy number of citizens to attend, so they know that we care about this issue. Not to mention, this testimony should be VERY EYE OPENING, and refreshing as well, compared to the normal ‘party line’ that the Utilities put out for public consumption. So, attend if you can!
If you can go, RSVP at ncriver@me.com (There’s no guarantee that the meeting will be recorded!)
Whenever we talk with many of the State Representatives or Senators, they say they aren’t hearing from their Constituents-and now is as good a time as ever – and even if you have called before, call NOW and urge them to attend the briefing.
CALL SCRIPT/BULLET POINTS to use when you call are below.
Feel free to give your own reasons, or no reason other than the fact that you are concerned, and you want them to become educated on the issue so they can vote properly (of course, we want them to vote YES) when Rep. David Simpson’s bill (HB 1171) comes up for a vote.
“Talking Points” for your call/emails/fax etc.
BRIEF PHONE SUMMARY
(optional, Texas Eagle Forum) and myself, _____________ would like to Alert you to the statewide opposition to the Smart Meter Network, and a Briefing to be held next week on Mar. 4.
Here are some reasons we are against the Smart Meters: (site any or all as time permits)
Mr or Mrs. Representative, or Senator – here are TWO THINGS WE ARE ASKING OF YOU
Details on the Smart Meter Briefing – please share with them:
Rather then me trying to come up with a unique post on this effort, I am linking to the instructions from Josh Del Sol, creator of the upcoming film “Take Back Your Power”.
The only reason I heard about this opportunity, was because I am on Josh’s “Take Back Your Power” email list. So, when you go to his site, you will probably see a “POP-UP” asking you to sign up for his email list – PLEASE SIGN UP so you will also be made aware of future ACTION ALERTS that they may send out.
Since time is extremely short on this one (I’m getting the email late evening) Feb. 3rd, the quickest thing for me to do to get out the word fast is to provide you with the link to the instructions for writing your letters (above).
- This is a BREAKTHROUGH OPPORTUNITY -
Please take the time to get this done and spread the word to all others who would be interested in helping the cause of reducing the RF exposure we are all being involuntarily exposed to in our homes, schools, hospitals, public spaces (i.e. places that offer Wi-Fi) etc.
Officials in Texas, and throughout the US tout that the Smart Meters fall within the FCC guidelines…but the problem is, FCC guidelines are insufficient.
To my understanding, there are two types of RF radiation. Thermal/Ionizing or Non-thermal/Non-Ionizing. The FCC only regulates the Thermal/Ionizing RF, the kind that will heat tissue, as in a ‘microwave oven’. However, for years, the FCC has decided not to require any regulation of non-thermal, non-ionizing RF radiation. Basically, they have decided, if it doesn’t ‘heat’, it doesn’t harm. This goes against the findings of many studies that have been done all over the world. Studies that the FCC has turned a blind eye to! Even though some studies are not 100% conclusive to say that these RF waves absolutely cause cancer or other ilnesses, etc., evidence shows that at the minimum, a potential link exists between NEGATIVE Biological Symptoms and exposure to Non-thermal RF. Currently there is no limit on Non-Thermal RF! We need to demand that the FCC take seriously the research already done, and/or commission additional research to be conducted immediately so that if harm to humans (and animals, even plantlife!) is being done, we will know sooner rather than later. Consider also asking them to put a moratorium on further Smart Meter deployment (as well as limit cell towers near homes and businesses, and restrict and BPL, [Broadband over Powerlines] until proven safe) throughout the US until such studies can show that the RF emitted by smart meters and the like is perfectly safe for children, adults, the unborn as well as animals, plants.
If you have not already done so, once you send your letter to the FCC, please also forward it to your STATE SENATOR and REPRESENTATIVE. They need to hear from their constituents!! We have been contacting many of them, and sadly, many say this has not been brought to their attention…or not many seem to be concerned. This has to change if we hope to make any headway on this issue!
If you write the FCC, we would like to hear about your efforts.
You can contact me at Cindy@BanTexasSmartMeters.com It would be especially helpful if you could forward us your statement to the FCC, as we are collecting as many ‘testimonies’ as possible, especially of those who are feeling the negative health effects of the Smart Meters or other wireless devices. We hope to have a large collection so that in the future if we see an opportunity to participate in a Class Action suit, we will already have a large number of ‘potential claimants’.
Sign up below the comments section under this post to receive email notification of New Posts, many of which give you ACTION ITEMS that we need all Anti-Smart Meter concerned citizens to participate in!
Cindy
We want NO FEE to get our Analog Meters back!
S.B. (Senate Bill) No. 241 (click the bill name to view the wording of the bill-it is relatively short and to the point), was introduced recently to the record to be considered for the Texas 83rd Legislative Session. You can follow changes and progress by going to the Texas Legislature Online and signing up for alerts. {to do so, go to this page and click on “follow the status of a bill” (which is #5 when you are on the right page).
This is progress, yes indeed. But, even though a bill is introduced, it has to be PUSHED through by committed Legislators who feel the BURN from THEIR CONSTITUENTS!!! This is why we need to continue to compel our Senators and Representatives (primarily on the state level -but also at the Federal level as well) to create and/or support strong consumer protection against the Advanced Meters’ (aka smart meters) harmful EMF effects as well as the invasive Data Collection which is an assault on our 4th Amendment Right to Privacy.
Alternatively, most ‘anti-smart meter’ activists desire and are pursuing for a moratorium, as well as a BAN on these terrible and dangerous devices. Opt-Outs are a ‘band aid’…but while we continue to push for a ban and/or moratorium, it could be a small victory, giving relief to some citizens. We are still fighting for the BAN and MORATORIUM to be enacted for our final goal! When contacting your Representatives and Senators, make it clear to them that the Opt-Out is inadequate for the following reasons:
“But could such a banal technology [the advanced meters] in fact be fraught with danger? In July 2009 — five months before the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) announced the initiative — security firm IOActive demonstrated a worm that could rapidly spread through a smart-grid network, disabling meters as it went. The experiment proved what many cybersecurity experts already knew: hackers distributing the right malware could shut down the network. Britain would go dark.
‘Before,to destroy a meter, you had to take a sledgehammer to it,” explains John Bumgarner, research director for security technology at think tank the US Cyber Consequences Unit. “That worm could destroy 300,000 [smart meters] in one go. The smart grid is going to be a major target for hackers.’ Marc Maiffret, a former hacker and now chief technology officer at computer-security consultancy eEye Digital Security, says: ‘If there was a war tomorrow between major powers, the first stages would include cyber-attacks with the aim of completely disrupting critical infrastructure. If you have the right combination of factors — power running at full blast and interference that means you cannot redistribute it properly — sabotage can have very serious consequences.’ “
When you write, send to each your State Rep and Senators, (add by CC), Gov. Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the PUC, even US Senators and Reps as well. Below is a copy of one possible letter you can edit to make your own. All you need to do is perform a ‘copy/paste’ to put it into a ‘Word Document’ (if you have a PC instead of Mac). Then you can edit and personalize as you like. I suggest using some of the above reasons regarding WHY an OPT-OUT is not a true or complete solution. (You can also copy/paste the bullet points I mentioned in points 1-4 above.)
LETTER: Send “as is” or add your desired wording.
To Whom It May Concern: (you can specify the recipient)
Smart Meters are not what they appear to be.
The utility companies, sanctioned by the Public Utilities Commission of Texas (PUCT), claim that the Tariff for Retail Delivery Service gives them the right to install and force Texans to pay for Smart Meters, even if they don’t want them. Besides disregarding our Constitutional rights to property rights and privacy, the Smart Meter Network opens the door to Cap and Trade policies while totally bypassing the United States Congress and our own State Legislators. This network allows complete monitoring, controlling, and rationing of our energy consumption.
The utility companies openly state that we “must change our behavior and learn to turn off our electricity” to reduce energy consumption. We are also told that this the man-made power shortage “occurs only 100 hours per year” spread out over 60 million people. Why are we spending so much money for only a four day supply shortfall?
Furthermore, no cost/benefit analysis has been shown nor has anyone seen how much taxpayer money has already been spent on this project. The Smart Meter Network was sold to our legislators under the guise of saving the consumer money, but it has failed to do that. Smart Meters are not about cutting the cost of electricity, they are about government control of our personal lives and taking more of our hard earned money.
While the PUCT says the meters are completely safe, no independent, long-term health studies have been conducted. On the contrary, more and more studies continue to surface suggesting significant health hazards related to these electromagnetic frequencies. The utility companies continue to charge full steam ahead with little input from the Texas Legislature and even less from “We The People.”
Worst of all, this Smart Meter Network benefits everyone EXCEPT the citizen, yet we are the ones paying big money for it. Please place an immediate moratorium on this project until we can get full disclosure of the real price we will ultimately pay if this project goes forward.
Sincerely,
On Dec. 13, the PUC Commissioners all three voted to have an Opt-Out for concerned citizens who are not in favor of having the new Smart Meter technology on their homes. The truth is, many of us who don’t want them on our homes, don’t want them in our neighborhood either. Are we just spoil sports or psychotic? Absolutely not. Many who have been subjected to their neighbor’s meter (even when they have been able to avoid getting one of their own) have come down with symptoms in their bodies that appeared simultaneous to their neighbors’ having a Smart Meter placed on their home.
But what will the Opt-Out look like? We do not know- we can only speculate and provide educated guesses based on comments from the Commissioners and their past history. However, for more possible insight to what the PUC will be considering when they create the parameters for an Opt-Out you might consider reading this document named ’Staff update for discussion” prepared for consideration at the Nov. 16th Open Meeting. Here’s a link to the document which was made part of the public record for the PUC Project 40190 looking at the feasibility of an Opt-Out Program.
The Commissioners directed the PUC Staffers to come up with a written plan for the Opt-Out. (No timetable was given to my knowledge.) There are many variables that could come in to play with this Opt-Out. Will consumers be expected to pay to Opt-Out? Very Likely! How will the Opt-Out be done? What does the consumer do in order to Opt-Out? What if they already have a smart meter? If the consumer doesn’t already have one, will they be forced to take one (under threat of power being cut off, as they have threatened?) until the details are worked out?
Once the staffers come up with a documented plan, it will be posted on the PUC website in order for the public to view. They will also allow a period for public comments as well. (We will try to inform you when this happens- so perhaps subscribe to our posts on this website for alerts whenever posts are made!) I am not sure, but the document may be posted as part of the Project 40190 [link to read all posted comments in Proj. 40190]. Once the Public Comment period is over, they will choose to proceed with or without changes, I assume. This process could easily run into the Spring of 2013, maybe later knowing the previous time-frames of the PUCT. (Public Utility Commission of Texas) They have proven they don’t get in a hurry about anything!
In my humble opinion, we still need to ask our Representatives to introduce legislation into the 83rd Legislative Session, to cover the items that the PUC may avoid to address, or worse, where they may make an Opt-Out that only a ‘mother could love’…if you get my drift. They could make the Opt-Out so watered down, that it is virtually useless, or so costly, that no-one can afford to do it! We need to impress upon our Representatives that we need TEXAS to keep its GRID SEPARATE! There is a push to combine all grids around the world – to basically allow a ‘cap-n-trade’ type scheme to become a reality. If Texas remains unto itself, we can maintain our sovereignty. We can’t let the Federal Gov. and others tell us that we NEED to become connected to become modernized and strong – that just isn’t true!
TAKE ACTION!
To help with the effort to rid Texas of these Smart Meters all together, (this may be an incremental process that starts with obtaining a “strong Opt-Out” policy), please email me at Cindy@BanTexasSmartMeters.com.
We have ways you can help. If we work together we will be able to accomplish so much more!
UPDATE: Article from Associated Press gives additional insight – read below or link to it. Our website even got an ‘honorable mention’! Pretty cool!
Associated Press
Posted on December 15, 2012 at 11:34 AM
“EL PASO, Texas (AP) — The Public Utility Commission has decided to develop a set of rules so consumers can opt out of the smart meters installed in millions of Texas homes and businesses.
Consumers have opposed the new meters, citing possible health hazards and privacy concerns. Some have installed steel cages around their analog meters to prevent utility workers from replacing them with the new digital units and one Houston woman held a gun to impede a utility worker from replacing her meter.
PUC spokesman Terry Hadley said Friday that an opt-out would leave already-installed smart meters in place but disable the devices’ radio frequency capabilities.
A draft of the new rules will be written and submitted for public comment, Hadley said. After that, the PUC will vote again on whether to adopt them, which means there’s still a chance the opt-out will fail. But, he said, “at this point the Commission is leaning toward an opt-out.”
It will take several months until the new proposal is drafted and voted, Hadley said.
Smart meters allow for remote metering via radio frequency and are make the billing process cheaper since there is no need to send utility workers to read them. The meters also provide real-time information on energy consumption and help utilities prevent grid overloads during peak times. They also report to the utility when there is a power outage, making reconnection faster.
In websites and meetings organized by PUC, those against smart meters have spoken of possible government snooping and violations of the Fourth Amendment —unreasonable search and seizure — as well as the chance that hackers could access people’s information from the meters.
On a petition template that’s posted on www.bantexassmartmeters.com , meters are called “surveillance devices” because they record the household occupants’ activities and can be used to “gain a highly invasive and detailed view” of their lives. Smart meters record consumption in 15-minute intervals.
Health hazards from the radio frequencies emitted by the meters have also been cited. The Public Utilities Commission says the meters have a lower impact than cellphones and microwave ovens and are well within Federal Communications Commission’s standards for radio frequency devices.
It’s likely that consumers who opt out will have to pay to have their meters read. As part of the rule-writing process, the Commission will gather information on how much it costs to send employees to read the meters and what disabling the radio frequency device would cost.
Users in California and Nevada pay between $75 and $107 to have the devices replaced along with monthly fees ranging from $8 to $10 to have the meters read. Meanwhile, Vermont legislators decided in May that utilities cannot charge users that opt out.
About 93 percent of the nearly 7 million smart meters in Texas’ competitive markets for electricity, mainly in Houston and the Dallas-Fort Worth area, have been deployed, Hadley said.”
END OF AP Article
Write Your Letter!
Preparation for Class Action Lawsuit In Texas Against Smart Meters
If you or your family have suffered in any way because a Smart Meter was forced upon you against your will, please clearly define your grievances and emphasize any illness acquired after installation of a Smart Meter. Please include your electric provider, (TXU, Reliant, etc), your Transmission Distribution Company, (i.e. CenterPoint, Oncor, TNM Power, AEP), your e-mail address, and contact information with your home address as we are trying to identify clusters of illness as they are developing. Please also include any property damage, assault, or any forced entry onto your property to include photographs if possible. Please include your signature and a date on the letter, this is very important!
Attn: Rachel/Smart Info
101C North Greenville Ave #83C
Allen, Texas 75002
Here’s some good info for you!
It is scientifically unacceptable to deny the mass of evidence regarding the increases in cancer and other adverse health effects in people exposed to pulsed radio frequency/microwave radiation such as that emitted by smart meters. Website www.bioinitiative.org documents more than 2,000 pieces of research showing the negative health effects of radio frequency/microwave and electromagnetic radiation.
The Maui News, October 6, 2012
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
More good info at the website link below. When on the page, it has several articles (in fact, that is where I got the great article above!), so to find the various articles, just scroll down the page to find what interests you! ALSO, for those who need to get information in Espanol, this website also has some of the articles in Spanish!
Go here: www.unitedamericanos.com
