“I cannot sleep… and I am feeling so fatigued and muddle-brained that I can barely think straight and even have trouble standing up straight. I have literally done nothing since [the Smart meters] have been put in and feel achy all over and disoriented, slightly dizzy.”
———————————–
“I have been feeling sick since they installed 16 smart meters on a panel 6 feet away from my building. I have developed respiratory problems and insomnia and anxiety and pressure in my head… My husband has also developed asthma, coughing, bloody nose, headaches.”
———————————–
“We had a Smart Meter installed on our home. I got sick and two weeks ago had a mini-stroke.”
———————————–
“My family recently moved into a new home which has 4 smart meters, we had wifi also initially. I began feeling ill: symptoms included a sensation of electricity coursing through my body, headaches, my blood pressure soared, the sensation of my brain feeling like it was being squeezed, and a sensation of burning on my skin and eyes. I could not find relief anywhere in my home. The symptoms of my three sons are less than my own and more vague: headache, ‘feeling sick upon waking,’ feeling a jolt type feeling sometimes.”
———————————–
“[After a Smart meter was installed] our children started to exhibit health symptoms and health signs that alarmed myself and my husband [a doctor]. The children began to have fevers out of nowhere, essentially their bodies were boiling and their fevers would go from 101 to 104 and sometimes to 105… Our children also began to have problems with the inability to control their bodily fluids, our five year old began peeing and pooping herself, our four year began to display the same problems, soon many of the smaller children were all displaying these symptoms and concerns.”
———————————–
“We are just miserable here. We can’t sleep at night, are dizzy, have headaches, ear pain, and more.”
———————————–
“I managed to have smart meter installation delayed at my house, but suddenly became sick overnight with palpitations, chest pain, insomnia, dizziness, inability to concentrate and memory loss and fainting spells. AFTER becoming sick I found out that the day I became suddenly sick was the day the smart meter roll-out was completed in my area and the smart meters were remotely turned on from base… I can no longer drive, I can’t work (I’m a doctor).”
———————————–
“Shortly after the smart meter was installed my health took a terrible downturn. I began having heart palpitations, trouble sleeping, unexplained anxiety attacks, dizzy spells, nausea and fatigue. I have been battling anxiety for months and I had no idea why. I’ve never had these types of symptoms plague me like this before. Then I found out that so many others have had the same reactions to smart meters in their homes and neighborhoods.”
———————————–
“I am an engineer. I have used technology my entire adult life – cell phones, smart phones, wi-fi, laptops, you name it. I really enjoyed all of this and had no issues or fears related to technology.
Then, when a bank of smart meters were put next to our apartment, both my wife and I starting experiencing headaches, insomnia, heart palpitations and tinnitus. Within a couple weeks, I could no longer use a cell phone without the same symptoms. Within a month I could feel the microwave radiation from cell towers. I have had to completely change my life because of this.”
———————————–
The statements above are among hundreds posted by the EMF Safety Network. Thousands of reports like this can be found online from people whose health was damaged following the installation of a wireless Smart meter. The last quote is from engineer-turned-EMF-educator Jeromy Johnson, who we featured in our article, Smart Meters Coming to a Neighborhood Near You!
As reported in that article, having one of these meters installed at your home or workplace raises multiple concerns. While we provided an overview of many of those concerns, this article focuses specifically on the health issues that can be caused by the high-intensity pulsed microwave radiation from what the utility industry calls Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), or Smart meters.
Common symptoms attributed to Smart meter exposure include:
Sleep problems (insomnia, difficulty falling asleep, night waking, nightmares)
Stress, agitation, anxiety, irritability
Headaches, sharp pain or pressure in the head
Ringing in the ears, ear pain, high pitched ringing
Concentration, memory or learning problems
Fatigue, muscle or physical weakness
Disorientation, dizziness, or balance problems
Eye problems, including eye pain, pressure in the eyes,
It is because of health impacts like these that when Smart meters began rolling out in the U.S., utility companies were forced to provide customers with a safer meter option. Requesting a non-transmitting meter is commonly known as an Opt-Out (more on that below).
It is well-established that we are bioelectrical beings and that exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and radio frequencies (RFs) can have profound impacts on our biology. It is estimated that 3% to 10% of the population are so vulnerable to these fields — electrosensitive — that they struggle to live in the electromagnetic soup of our modern world.
Following publication of our last article, a reader challenged the assertion that electrosensitivity (aka electromagnetic hypersensitivity) is a valid medical disability. She asserted that EMFs and RFs — like the microwave radiation from Smart meters — do not impact a person’s health, that reports like those cited above stem from mental illness or are psychosomatic. The problem, she said, could be summed up in four words: “These people are crackpots.”
An obvious argument disproving that these health impacts are “all in their heads” is that when their symptoms first manifest people are often unaware that a Smart meter had been installed. Silicon Valley engineer and tech enthusiast Jeromy Johnson describes his unexpected “Wireless Wake-Up Call” in this TED Talk:
“If anyone had told me that wireless technology could have health effects, I would have thought they were crazy. But this all changed for me over the period of about one week. I started experiencing headaches, ringing in my ears, insomnia, fatigue, and a brain fog that I’d never experienced before. And I shared this with a colleague at work, and she said, you know the exact same thing happened to her husband when a wireless Smart meter was installed in their home. So I went home that evening and I checked downstairs, and sure enough we’d had a bank of wireless Smart meters installed right below our bedroom in San Francisco.”
Bank of Smart meters shown in Jeromy Johnson’s TED Talk.
Stories like these are common, following this typical pattern: “I — or my husband/wife, child, friend, co-worker — started having terrible headaches, feeling dizzy, couldn’t sleep, lost cognitive function… and then days or weeks later discovered that a Smart meter had been installed the day the problems began.”
But beyond the anecdotal evidence, there are now literally thousands of studies and scientific papers demonstrating the negative impacts of EMFs/RFs on people’s health.
The Science
A decade ago, an international consortium of 29 doctors and scientists produced the 650+-page BioInitiative Report 2012. They explain:
“Human beings are bioelectrical systems. Our hearts and brains are regulated by internal bioelectrical signals. Environmental exposures to artificial EMFs can interact with fundamental biological processes in the human body. In some cases, this may cause discomfort, or sleep disruption, or loss of wellbeing (impaired mental functioning and impaired metabolism) or sometimes, maybe it is a dread disease like cancer or Alzheimer’s disease.
It may be interfering with ones’ ability to become pregnant, or carry a child to full term, or result in brain development changes that are bad for the child. It may be these exposures play a role in causing long-term impairments to normal growth and development of children, tipping the scales away from becoming productive adults.
We have good evidence these exposures can damage our health, or that of children of the future who will be born to parents now immersed in wireless exposures.”
Their report presents evidence of genetic damage, immune impairment, neurological injury, effects on the blood-brain barrier, childhood leukemia, breast and other cancers, fetal effects, brain tumors, fertility damage and much more. Updates to the report just this year include coverage of RF and EMF studies from the genetic and neurological literature, studies of free radicals (oxidative damage), and electrohypersensitivity.
In 2015, 220 EMF scientists from 41 nations who had published in peer-reviewed journals signed the International EMF Scientists Appeal. Their warnings included cell phones, Wi-Fi, and ‘smart’ meter/grid technology.
“It is our opinion that adverse health consequences of chronic and involuntary exposure of people to non-ionizing electromagnetic field sources are being ignored by national and international health organizations despite our repeated inquiries as well as inquiries made by many other concerned scientists, medical doctors and advocates.”
According to these experts, public safety limits for electromagnetic and radiofrequency fields are thousands of times higher than exposure levels shown to be associated with serious health impacts.
As with so many of our public agencies, we cannot trust the FCC or any other “official” guidelines. The authors of the BioInitiative Report counter these corrupt regulators:
“The great strength of the BioInitiative Report is that it has been done independent of governments, existing bodies and industry professional societies that have clung to old standards. Precisely because of this, the BioInitiative Report presents a solid scientific and public health policy assessment that is evidence-based.”
Will a Smart Meter Harm YOU?
As noted earlier, we are swimming in invisible frequencies in today’s world, commonly called electrosmog. Chances are you already have Wi-Fi in your home, carry a cell phone, use a computer wirelessly, maybe even have a cell tower in proximity. All of this wireless technology creates oxidative stress, opens your blood-brain barrier allowing toxins to enter your brain, causes DNA damage, and alters your cellular function.
How much of these pervasive EMFs and RFs our bodies can withstand varies. Some people may be so electrosensitive that their ability to function is compromised by the slightest exposure to these frequencies.
Sebastian (Seb) Eggert, nearing completion of his ElectroMagnetic Radiation Specialist (EMRS) certification with the Building Biology Institute, says, “I have personally interacted with over fifty people who are greatly or severely affected by the various forms of electromagnetic radiation, and at least a dozen of them live here in Jefferson County.” That was before the rollout of Smart meters.
Eggert expands on some of the people he has seen challenged by wireless technologies:
“One client was unable to have deep and restful sleep in her home until she turned off her computer, wifi, printer, portable phone and cellular phone. Another client is so sensitive she can sense when someone enters the room with a cell phone in their pocket or when a ship with a strong radar signal passes by. The only place she can escape from her splitting headaches is deep in the Olympics where the radiation is extremely low, or in rural Alaska.
Another who is a medical professional has removed all the EMFs from his office for the comfort of his patients. A naturopathic physician thought she had eliminated all RF devices from her office and treatment areas until a survey revealed that her computer was still sending a contact signal to the hard-wired modem.”
Then there are individuals like Jeromy Johnson, immersed for years in wireless tech, who don’t notice a problem until a Smart meter is installed.
Broadcasting RF frequencies every few seconds or even faster all day and night, these devices emit up to 190,000 bursts of pulsed microwave radiation in a 24-hour period. Reports show that adding that stress to an already-toxic wireless environment often causes a tipping point, pushing people over the edge to electrosensitivity. And once that threshold is breached, as Johnson learned, tech that once seemed harmless is suddenly no longer bearable.
Additional factors come into play. Eggert explains:
“Often the signs of EMF sensitivity are masked by other influences, such as multiple chemical sensitivities, mold and fungus exposure, medical interventions and deep trauma. All these things together contribute to poor health.”
Proximity to the meter(s) and levels of exposure are also significant factors in whether you will be harmed by a Smart meter.
How close is the meter to your living environment? Smart meters near bedrooms are especially dangerous. Since they operate 24/7, one of the most ubiquitous symptoms following their installation is loss of sleep. The critical downtime for the body’s rest and repair is interfered with by the constant pulsing of the RF.
Multiple Smart meters transmitting RFs multiply the danger. That’s especially true where there are banks of meters. Meter utility rooms for apartments, condos and commercial complexes massively increase the radiation levels, as Jeromy Johnson learned. Even though the room of meters for his apartment building was on a lower story, that ground-level bank of Smart meters proved to be too much for him and his wife. In that type of scenario, even those who opt out can still suffer health issues because the vast majority of other meters in their building are all broadcasting high-intensity microwave radiation.
Opting Out in Jefferson County is Easy
Jefferson PUD’s Opt-Out Program offers non-transmitting analog and digital meters that are read on-site monthly by a meter reader. We recommend the analog meter as the safest option since digital meters generate some high frequency voltage transients, also known as ‘dirty electricity’, which can also have negative health impacts.
While those of us against our PUD’s adoption of Smart meter technology argued for no-cost opt-outs as established in both New Hampshire and Vermont, there is a $5 monthly fee added to your bill here. That is lower than many utilities charge. Some utilities set punitive fees to intentionally discourage opt-outs, with a significant one-time charge for initial installation and exorbitant recurring monthly charges.
According to a 2019 article from the National Conference of State Legislatures:
“The fees can vary considerably. A utility in Rhode Island charges a one-time fee of $27, while a Texas utility’s one-time fee is $171. The monthly fees range from around $9 to $32.”
California’s state policy established a one-time fee of $75 and a monthly fee of $10, however for income-qualified customers the one-time fee drops to $10, with a $5 monthly fee.
Jefferson PUD has clearly avoided punitive charges. With all meters needing replacement in the county, our utility has waived the one-time installation fee, adding only a $5 monthly surcharge to offset the cost of a meter reader coming to your property every month to manually read your power usage. In addition to providing you with a safe meter, your $5 is supporting local jobs that are being eliminated by wireless tech.
This RF Transmitting Meter Opt-Out Application is on the last page of the PUD packet here. For more information on the Smart meter rollout in progress in Jefferson County and for additional details on our PUD’s Opt-Out Program, see Smart Meters Coming to a Neighborhood Near You!
Unlawful arrest, malicious prosecution, making false statements, misleading the prosecutor.
A California Federal District Court jury ruled that Art Frank and another Glendale, California police officer unlawfully arrested and caused the malicious prosecution of Edmond Ovasapyan. The case arose out of a 2005 home invasion in which a teenage son was murdered in front of his mother. The federal jury in 2009 found that the officers lacked probable cause to arrest Ovasapyan, misled the prosecutor and withheld exculpatory evidence from her.
The case has surfaced in Jefferson County as Frank campaigns to unseat his boss and incumbent Sheriff Joe Nole. Frank serves under Nole as a detective and previously held the number two position in the Sheriff’s Office under Nole’s predecessor, Dave Stanko, another former Califiornia police officer relocated to Jefferson County. Stanko hired Frank and made him Deputy Sheriff, ousting Nole from the position he had held under Stanko’s predecessor, Sheriff Tony Hernandez. During Stanko’s years in office Nole served under Frank. When Nole defeated Stanko’s bid for re-election and was elected Sheriff, he moved Frank over to a detective position and made Andy Pernsteiner Deputy Sheriff and his #2.
Word of the case against Frank has been quietly circulating for months. On September 16, 2022, Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney James Kennedy issued a letter to criminal defense lawyers notifying them of a judicial ruling of misconduct by a law enforcement officer that could impeach the officer’s testimony. Kennedy restated the jury’s findings, but also said he believes the jury ruled incorrectly. Nonetheless, the jury verdict poses a headache for Frank’s effort to persuade voters to put him in charge of the Sheriff’s office, as well as possibly giving defense lawyers ammunition in any case where Frank is a witness for the prosecution.
Edmond Ovasapyan versus Art Frank, et al.
Jefferson County Detective Art Frank
Frank has addressed some of the facts in the case when asked at election forums what his biggest regret is in his 43 years in law enforcement. Frank has served with distinction through those decades in many positions, from patrol officer, to working on a SWAT team, to training other officers, to accomplished detective work. He has saved lives and taken killers off the street. He saw his partner die next to him. He has seen the worst side of humanity in his years in Los Angeles County, and, let’s be honest, also here in Jefferson County. Though he is opposed in his bid for office by local first responders and all the men and women he serves with in the Sheriff’s Office, I am told by some of those same people that he is respected for his skills as a detective. But they do not think he should be Sheriff and do not want to work for him if he is elected to that position. Those feelings are strong, and account for the unprecedented support among first responders and law enforcement for the re-election of Sheriff Nole.
The Ovasapyan case was as bad as anything he had encountered. Frank has in campaign forums related how five men invaded a home and how the teenage son was shot in the chest in front of his mother. He says he regrets that Ovasapyan spent months in jail for something he didn’t do and says it was he who eventually exonerated Ovasayan.
Frank has left out of those accounts the fact that a jury found he had engaged in very serious misconduct, so serious that the trial judge deprived him of law enforcement officer “qualified immunity.” That means Frank was held personally liable for the judgment because, as the court found, no reasonable law enforcement would not have known that the conduct in which Frank engaged was illegal. This is an uncommon finding by a trial court judge.
Ovasapyan was awarded $1.16 million in compensatory damages. The jury also awarded him $75,000 in punitive damages against Frank and $75,000 against the other officer. The trial court awarded the plaintiff $271,495.57 in attorney fees and $5,543.85 in costs. Frank was ruled jointly and severally liable, meaning personally responsible, for all but the punitive damages against the other officer. The City of Glendale paid the judgment, attorney fees, and costs though it was not legally required to do so. It paid approximately $1.7 million after unsuccessful appeals.
The trial court denied Frank’s motion for judgment as a matter of law, meaning that the court found there was enough evidence to support the jury’s verdict. The judgment was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which specifically ruled that the District Court was justified in finding enough evidence to support the jury’s verdict.
Prosecuting Attorney Kennedy Says the California Jury Got it Wrong
JeffCo Prosecuting Attorney James Kennedy
In his letter to defense attorneys, Kennedy wrote that “it has recently been brought to my attention” that Frank was found liable for misconduct in a civil case. Kennedy stated that he conducted a public records request of the City of Glendale, spoke with a Los Angeles County Assistant District Attorney familiar with the case and obtained and reviewed the entire trial transcript.
Kennedy told defense lawyers he had concluded that the jury was wrong. He concluded that Frank had been blamed for actions taken by others. He concluded that the evidence Frank allegedly withheld was, contrary to the jury’s ruling, already in the possession of defense counsel and not of any material exculpatory value. Frank allegedly failed to investigate alibi evidence; but Kennedy concluded that alibi evidence, even if true, would not have ruled the plaintiff out as a participant in the crime. Lastly, Kennedy credited Frank with ultimately exonerating the plaintiff when DNA evidence pointed to another individual whom Frank tracked down. Frank learned from that individual that Ovasapyan did not participate in the crime and relayed this information to the DA who then dropped charges. By then, Ovasapyan had been in jail for about eight months.
“In conclusion,” Kennedy wrote, “it does not appear that Det. Frank personally authored any reports or directly engaged in any aspect of the investigation that lead [sic] to the false arrest or malicious prosecution of the Plaintiff. Contrary to the findings made by the jury… it appears that Det. Frank’s actions are what actually lead [sic] to the charges being dismissed against the Plaintiff.”
Res Judicata
The matter has been decided. Res judicata is a legal principle that “a decision by a competent court in a case fully and fairly litigated is final and conclusive as to the claims and issues of the parties and cannot be relitigated.” Prosecuting Attorney Kennedy may be absolutely correct that Frank got a raw deal from a California jury. The verdict against Frank may have been as great an injustice as the wrongful imprisonment of Ovasapyan. Justice is sometimes ill-served in our judicial system. Maybe Frank’s lawyers were incompetent. Mr. Kennedy said in an e-mail that the city of Glendale chose to use its in-house lawyers instead of contracting with more skilled and experienced outside counsel, and those lawyers did “a pretty poor job.”
However wrong the Ovasapyanjury may have been, its decision was upheld by a United States Federal District Court judge and later by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The argument that there was insufficient evidence to find that Frank did the things he was accused of doing was rejected by both courts.
Kennedy’s independent review of the records may blunt the impact of the Ovasapyan verdict outside of court. The reputation Frank has built since moving here may remain intact, though bruised. Frank can point to Kennedy’s conclusions in defending himself on the campaign trail. But when Frank testifies in court, and the defense seeks to impeach him with the Ovasapyan verdict and findings, the trial judge will likely not entertain arguments that the Ovasapyan jurors and several federal judges messed up or that Frank was screwed over by his lousy lawyers. Relitigation of the facts of that case will in all likelihood not be permitted, and Mr. Kennedy’s conclusions–regardless of how well they may be reasoned–will not be allowed in a court of law.
Frank Responds
Good morning Jim,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Ovasapyan case. The civil verdict is just one part of the story and has to be viewed in the context of the original investigation in order to be properly understood.
Though it is one small event in my 43-year career and history in law enforcement it is something voters should consider. I have always been transparent about it. I have spoken about it openly and publicly during the campaign, including at the Democratic Party forum and the League of Women Voters forum, both of which were recorded and are available online. I have answered questions about it from voters and community leaders. Both the fact of the verdict and the underlying investigation were fully known and understood by my opponent prior to my hiring in 2016 as he was the person who hired me. He has never raised it as an issue in the campaign because he understands the facts.
Like any career or life experience the case investigation itself did have an impact on my leadership to the extent that it reinforced that it is always important to follow the evidence no matter where it leads and that as police officers, with power comes responsibility. In this case I had the responsibility to see the investigation through to exonerating and freeing Mr. Ovasapyan, which I did. This is a value and ethic that I live and work by and I would instill and expect from all of my staff if elected.
I did not pay any part of the judgment or costs because the investigation was part of my official responsibilities as an employee of the City of Glendale.
Regarding how the fact of the verdict reflects on credibility, the elected Prosecutor has reviewed both the civil trial as well as the facts of the underlying investigation and concluded that the allegations regarding any wrongdoing on my part are not supported. I expect his letter re same will be released next week. The fact that I saw the investigation through to exonerating and freeing Mr. Ovasapyan proves my commitment to transparency and justice and should reassure voters that I will always do the right thing.
In my experience you have been fair and given me a full opportunity to respond. In this case I would appreciate it if you would wait to run any story on the case until I can provide the letter from the Prosecuting Attorney. You have a powerful voice and it is important that you have all of the information before running a story.
I will send the letter from the prosecutor as well as a more full response as soon as I have the letter, which should be early next week.
As always, thank you for your interest in the campaign and in the truth.
Art
———————————-
Mr. Frank subsequently sent a longer statement and other materials when notified we had obtained Mr. Kennedy’s letter to defense lawyers.
———————————-
Mr. Scarantino,
To best understand what happened in this case it is necessary to know some of the facts related to the crime and original investigation itself, which I have outlined below.
There were at least six individual suspects involved.
The initial victim, a mother of two adult men, was home alone. She heard a knock at the door and looked out to see a man who she recognized as a construction worker and associate of her older son who had done tile setting work for her at her business.
She opened the door and a group of men – including the man who knocked at the door – forced their way into the house and tied her up. They then demanded money indicating they had some familiarity with her older son, using his name.
Minutes later, her younger son walked into the house from the rear driveway access door and confronted the home invaders. He fought with the invaders to save his mother and one of the men – though not the one who knocked on the door who she recognized as her son’s acquaintance and tile setter – shot her son in the chest. He died at the scene.
All the invaders fled the house. Typical of a case of this seriousness, several detectives were assigned to work various aspects of the case. Some of the evidence they gathered: Mr. Ovasapyan had done tile work at the mother’s business in the past. Mr. Ovasapyan had a dispute with one of her sons over a construction project. Witnesses identified at least two vehicles outside, including a dark colored Honda sedan. Mr. Ovasapyan was known to drive a Black Honda. The mother was shown a photographic lineup by a detective which included Mr. Ovasapyan’s photo. She told him it looks just like him, but younger, but maintained it was the tile setter. While running from the scene one of the suspects (not the man who knocked at the door) dropped an item of clothing. DNA analysis of this item of clothing provided a lead that identified the possible shooter. There was no DNA evidence left by the suspect the victim believed to be Ovasapyan.
I was assigned to gather all of the various reports from the group of detectives who worked the case and to present the case to the prosecutor’s office. The prosecutor’s decision to file charges in the case was based on an evaluation of the totality of the evidence and not solely the photo identification of Ovasapyan. As the case moved through the court system Mr. Ovasapyan maintained his innocence. I did not rest and I continued to investigate the case, and when the DNA results returned they provided the lead that helped me to exonerate Mr. Ovasapyan prior to any trial or conviction.
I am including a letter from Steve Dickman, a prosecutor intimately familiar with the original case as well as the civil trial that followed. His letter is in the form of an endorsement written earlier this year in which he touches on the case and from which this case can be seen in the continuum of my entire career.
I am also including a motion written by Mr. Dickman which discusses the case in detail and explains why the result of the civil trial has no impact or bearing on my credibility as an investigator or witness. Every court that heard this motion did not allow evidence of the verdict or my role in the investigation to be presented to any jury on the issue of my credibility because there was no evidence of wrongdoing.
Art Frank
———————————-
The letter from Mr. Dickman is available on Mr. Frank’s campaign website. The motion Mr. Frank mentions is a 27-page legal brief from one party in a criminal case, not a judicial ruling. We have not been provided the motion to which this brief was filed as a response, the reply to this brief nor the ultimate ruling by a court. We print in full all written responses to questions we pose, but publishing this full brief — without knowing anything about the surrounding case and the court’s ruling — is beyond the scope of our policy.
Sheriff Joe Nole has not responded to a request for comment on the statements made by Mr. Frank. I specifically asked Sheriff Nole about Frank’s claim that Nole hired him and was aware of the Ovasapyan verdict at the time. Frank’s account would mean that Nole, not then Sheriff Stanko, hired Frank as Stanko’s second-in-command and demoted himself from the position he had held under Sheriff Hernandez and put himself under Frank’s supervision. Nole, as Frank states, has not used the case against him in debates.
———————————-
[Update to original story] It appears that the Ovasapyanveridict was known at the time of hiring, and the information was passed along to Sheriff Dave Stanko, who made the decision to hire Mr. Frank. Sheriff Nole provided the following answers to the questions we posed last week. He just got back to us after publication of the story. We can also now provide Mr. Kennedy’s full letter to defense counsel.
Q & A with Sheriff Nole:
Q: Was the judicial ruling against Mr. Frank known at the time of his hiring?
A: Yes. Mr. Frank’s pre-hire background investigation developed information on the ruling and that information was discussed with Mr. Frank.
Q: How could he have been hired with this matter so recently in his background? (He was hired a few years after the 9th Circuit upheld the verdict).
A: The information developed in the background investigation and discussed with Mr. Frank regarding the judicial ruling was presented to then Sheriff Dave Stanko, who made the hiring decision.
Q: How does the case impact his ability to do his job?
A: At this point it does not impact his ability to do his job.
Q: Does it detract from his credibility as a witness when he must testify?
A: It could, depending on the circumstances presented at trial and a judge’s interpretation.
Q: How could this detract from his ability to lead the Sheriff’s Office and defend against charges of misconduct?
A: How it could detract would be dependent on the particular situation occurring at the time.
The Port Townsend City Council heard my policing concerns in this Public Comment at their September 6 meeting:
In past public comments, I regularly asked about police staffing. My underlying concern was ensuring sufficient police if ever Antifa-like gangs threatened to trash and terrorize our town. I hadn’t realized until August 15 that the real question was not “Could the police protect us?” but “Would they protect us?”
Chief Olson’s response afterwards was to downplay the criminal gang activity and blame the victims. After admitting to the Peninsula Daily News that multiple blackclad thugs were “carrying police batons” and “suspected to have a concealed firearm” and chiding women that their “agenda was put ahead of safety”, he changed his story for the Leader, insinuating that victims who “suffered multiple physical and sexual assaults” from assailants “armed with pepper spray, batons, and firearms” were making things up.
Olson gaslighted that “there was no property damage” (not counting the victims’ property) and “no visual injuries” (discounting bruises, a sprained ankle, and emotional trauma) and that assaulted women may “feel like they were victims”, but in reality their experience was “similar to being in a mosh pit.” Here Olson pretends that consensual concert activity is the same thing as women being targeted and attacked by a violent street gang while his police did nothing but watch.
Who gave this directive to police? Who decided that, according to Olson, “all of our officers were primarily focused on an orderly council meeting”, so none could stop nearby violent crimes under their watch? Why did police allow the gang to block folks from entering the council building to sign up for comment, so only gang sympathizers could make public comments? Was Olson just following orders or involved in writing those orders?
Given how council glad-handed with gang sympathizers at their August 15 meeting, given councilor Wennstrom’s involvement along with her Facebook campaign threatening women to leave town, given how the city and its police clearly picked a side and let it beat up the other side, the question has to be asked: Were city officials actively complicit with gang organizers or just negligent in allowing this violent gang to assault female elders and violate their peaceable assembly rights?
The city — and at this point, the nation — needs answers to these questions. If the responsible individuals are not willing to fess up and accept the consequences for their actions, then an independent investigation or truth & reconciliation commission may be needed.
In any case, I’m grateful some lessons were learned and proper policing held the violent elements at bay on September 3. But the council and its police still need to be accountable for what happened on August 15, take responsibility for their mistakes, be honest, and stop blaming the victims.
Staff and Council Response
City Manger John Mauro responded that some of my policing concerns would be addressed in his later city manager report, pointing out the city’s August 11 Mountain View Pool Q&A explaining how the city’s decision-making is based on state law (but not mentioning any policing issues as it preceded the August 15 assaults).
[Police Chief] Tom deserves a lot of kudos, but so do the agencies we work with, East Jefferson County, Sequim, Port Angeles, state agencies like the Washington State Patrol, Federal agencies, specifically working with a lot of jurisdictions and Public Works team … minimizing violence. …
This isn’t a decision to permit or not permit an event … When someone wants to hold a free-speech first-amendment-right rally in any location, they can do so, and there’s nothing the city can do to prevent that.
The event’s permit is a process by which we can glean information about what to expect, how we can resource up, how to prepare, and even ask: do you request police presence? In the instance of 15th, that answer was ‘No’ on that event permit, so we with two-and-a-half working days adjusted accordingly based on a request.
Now we could, of course, deny resourcing, traffic closures, as we see fit. That’s where we have yes/no decision making authority, but we can’t keep someone from assembling to exercise free speech …
That’s something we need to prepare for. There was no injury, property damage, and I would say part of the reflection talking with state and federal agencies was the appropriate but not over-the-top presence of multiple agencies is likely what prevented problems from happening in the first place.
And some of the rules literally according to the organizer killed the turnout, because we were saying here is what you can and cannot bring into a public space for this event.
Not a whole lot has happened over the last couple weeks. No, actually, I had trouble coming up with my list because so much of my mental space has been occupied by other things than what I would normally want to talk about here. …
This last Saturday, the protests … I’m very glad the police coordination there resulted in, as far as I’ve been able to understand, no violence, and I’m glad that it ended up being a peaceful event. Thanks for staff and team for making sure it went off without a hitch.
Councilor Ben Thomas was the only one to touch on concerns about the August 15 assaults, closing off the meeting with these heartfelt words:
I don’t know if this is the time or place, but I don’t know when the time or place is, so I just wanted to acknowledge: We’ve got a lot of emails, in person as well, comments on the event on 8/15.
I wish we could talk more openly and frankly about this stuff and realize it’s not an easy thing to do; it’s complicated. But there are a lot of hurt feelings, possibly worse, for people on how it went down.
And I read every word, and I’m sure other people do too, of everything that gets sent in. It’s not being ignored, there’s just not much we can do about it, going back in the past.
I’m sorry that people went through that. I did see it first hand, and I was disturbed by it. I didn’t think they were treated very well.
Even though, do I agree with everything they were saying? That’s not the point. So that did bum me out.
But also we’re getting a lot of stuff, hearing a lot about chromosomes and stuff, and this is not the body to figure out state law or how chromosomes work and gender. People are leaning on us about this, but I just don’t see it as our role.
I just wanted to say that out loud. Thank you.
Councilor Wennstrom Opens Up After the Meeting
Speaking personally, after delivering my Public Comment, I felt itchy about having singled out Councilor Libby Wennstrom by name. After the meeting broke up, I noticed her walking away alone down the sidewalk, and felt moved to call her name to connect and try to understand where she was coming from.
I started by confessing that I felt bad about singling her out in my comment, I’d found myself respecting her perspicacity and attention to detail during council discussions, so wondered what was going on with her Facebook TERF posting.
Wennstrom expressed feeling that trans people were being threatened, had noticed the TERF image someone else had made (adapted from tsunami warnings), and reposted it on her private Facebook page that was only shared with a few friends.
Unfortunately one of those friends liked or shared her post in a way that made it public for all to see. Wennstrom never intended it to go public, but in retrospect as a public official doesn’t think she should have posted it.
Wennstrom graciously continued talking with me, and we covered a lot of ground:
She related that various councilors and she personally have been flooded with a glut of emails, death threats, obscene images, etc., etc. Tonight was the first time she’d felt safe enough not to be accompanied by someone else for protection to a city meeting. (When shesaid that, realizing I stood alone about 6 feet away from her on the night-time city sidewalk, I took a step back, but she waved it away and said she didn’t feel threatened by me.)
Internally the city has been overloaded by these messages and surrounding issues.
Wennstrom said that a large number of dangerous armed Proud Boys were intending to come to the September 3 event, but were deterred when they heard there would be enforcement of a no-visible-weapons ban.
The reason police were focused on protecting councilors and the council building on August 15 was because of the threats they were getting after all the media attention.
Wennstrom said Amy Sousa hadn’t checked on the permit that organizers wanted police protection for her 8/15 event; I countered that the Peninsula Daily News quoted Sousa that Chief Olson had been repeatedly asked for separation from the counter-protesters.
I told Wennstrom about specific assaults and harms to attendees, mostly from a dozen violent bad actors; she had been under the impression that women were exaggerating, citing a case she had been shown of a woman pointing to bruises on her arm that were weeks old.
Wennstrom strongly objected to the idea that council had “directed” police not to help women being assaulted under their watch, saying neither council nor mayor has that authority and the city manager provides the police chief general policy. I reiterated that witnesses and video heard a police officer refuse to go into the crowd to help women, saying he’d been directed not to, so the question is who directed him. (That made me wonder whether Olson and/or Mauro might have been so concerned over threats council was receiving that they felt no officer could be spared from protecting council and its property.)
Wennstrom felt that legally there was nothing council could have done about the pool issues, since it is on property leased from the school district, controlled by the School Board, and managed by the YMCA.
She wished that Julie Jaman had gone through channels instead of escalating with an outside demonstration, council, Tucker Carlson, etc. resulting in doxxing of council and Y staffers, lives messed up, city disruption, the pool still being closed, budgets being drained that provide protection at events, etc. (I neglected in the time available to go into how Jaman did try to talk to YMCA management first, did try to get the Leader to publish her letter, etc. but was completely stonewalled.)
Wennstrom courteously heard out my opinion that mistakes might have been made on both sides, particularly that the YMCA messed up banning Jaman lifetime on the spot without due process, and city council messed up on August 1 by dismissing folks as bigots for expressing their honest narrow concerns about women and kids feeling safe in public bathrooms. Wennstrom said she heard someone say “trans people are pedophiles” at council and that set her off; I replied that I don’t think I heard anyone say that, but even if one person did, that’s not what other public commentators were saying, but they were all getting smeared with the same brush.
We’d been talking for a little while and it was getting cold, but as we were winding down three of her friends joined her, so we parted on pleasant terms. I appreciated her taking the time to talk with me and being open to respectful and factual feedback.
On my side, I hadn’t realized the extent to which city personnel were feeling terrorized and overburdened by all the negative feedback, doxxing, and publicity they’d been receiving.I also felt a little impressed how they continued trying to keep a stiff upper lip and take care of city business in a professional way, as seen by generally exemplary disposition of their straightforward council agenda on September 6.
Jefferson County Commissioners raised a host of disturbing issues by paying $14,999 for 20 county employees to attend an “Anti-Racist Literacy Workshop”. The contract between USAWA Consulting LLC and Jefferson County specifies the training will be customized “to highlight COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and public health messaging … in reaching a goal of increasing vaccine-uptake among marginalized populations in Jefferson County.”
The course outline submitted by USAWA indicates that the training is designed to “dismantle White supremacy” from within participants “and the culture around them.” Workshop “objectives” include:
understanding the impact of systemic oppression on maintaining white, male, heterosexual privilege;
developing an understanding how such oppression inhibits diversity, equity and inclusion; and
promoting an understanding of racial inequality and an anti-oppressive identity in Jefferson County.
Furthering these objectives will purportedly increase vaccine uptake among marginalized populations.
The revised grant application, dated May 9, 2022, reveals the lack of documentation supporting the existence of vaccine hesitancy among marginalized communities. Documentation is also lacking which establishes the anti-racist training will promote the County’s goal of increasing vaccine-uptake in certain communities. Moreover, if there is no measurable data to identify the problem, it is not possible to measure whether the County’s anti-racist workshops accomplish the stated goal of increasing vaccinations.
The following statements in the County’s grant application reveal the lack of data to support a “need” for anti-racist literacy training:
• “[W]e estimate 4,700 people in our county are unvaccinated. We do not have much data [about] how many of those unvaccinated are part of a marginalized demographic.”
• “Anecdotal evidence also indicated most of our unvaccinated…residents were firm in their decision not to vaccinate. They are no longer open to hearing information from public health …because they do not believe we are a trusted source of information, largely due to the parallel pandemic of mis and disinformation.”
Anecdotal evidence does not constitute verifiable data documenting justification for a grant totaling thousands of tax dollars. Moreover, the County itself states that unvaccinated groups do not trust public health and are no longer open to hearing more information. Furthermore, the County provides no support for the apparent position that the anti-racist literacy program will effectively change “firm” anti-vaccine beliefs or promote increased trust in the public health department personnel.
Increase in funding is requested due to the need for more consultation hours than initially budgeted for in order to customize the training. In addition, “make up” sessions will be scheduled for those who miss sessions of the training. Lastly, there was a greater demand for registrations than originally anticipated.
As usual, the item appeared on a Consent Agenda and was passed without discussion. However, JCC 3.55.070(5) provides that: “No contract or purchase shall be subdivided to avoid the requirements of this chapter.”
In this case, there is effectively one contract for services and the advertisement and bidding requirements were by-passed by having two contracts for less than $10,000 each. The creation of two separate contracts under $10,000 is arguably contrary to JCC 3.55.070(5).
Even when it is not legally required, the submission of municipal purchases and contracts to competitive bidding is generally favored in order to secure the best bargain for the public and to discourage favoritism, collusion, and fraud. Edwards v. Renton, 67 Wn.2d 598, 602, 409 P.2d 153 (1965). Accordingly, requirements in statutes, charter provisions, and ordinances to that effect are liberally construed in favor of bidding, and exceptions are narrowly construed. See Gostovich v. West Richland, 75 Wn.2d 583, 587, 452 P.2d 737 (1969).
Notably, County Commissioners also awarded an 18-month contract totaling $18,000 to USAWA for the development and execution “of a Communications Action Plan (CAP) to support Harm Reduction in Jefferson County as part of the Behavioral Health Consortium’s effort to end overdose deaths in Jefferson County.” Again, the bidding process was avoided by a citation to JCC 3.55.170 which permitted awarding a contract without competitive bidding when there is “only one source of the required… service.”
The current county regulation adopted in 2020, JCC 3.55.020, references the state statute which requires that a “clearly and legitimately” single source may avoid the bidding process. A letter from the Directors of Jefferson County Public Health (JCPH) and Behavioral Health Consortium (BHC) to the County Administrator and Chief Deputy Prosecutor, dated May 25, 2022, states the bid process exception applies because USAWA “has already worked with BHC’s key stakeholders to cement critical relationships in many pockets of the” county and is familiar with the county’s substance abuse and mental health issues.
This familiarity came from awarding USAWA a prior $2,455 contract in early 2022 to support BHC’s goal of ending overdose deaths in Jefferson County. Hence, the familiarity with the issues cited by the County to justify a “single source” exemption to the bidding requirements for the current contract appears to have resulted (at least in part) from another contract that was also exempt from the bidding process for being under $10,000.
It does not appear County Commissioners bothered to consider other local, politically neutral organizations devoted to eliminating or reducing suicides and substance abuse for this grant, nor that alternative organizations do exist.
Jefferson County is one of the poorer counties in the State of Washington with serious needs in the areas of housing, education, jobs and food. The 2021 Healthy Youth Survey also documents significant issues faced by our school-aged children following COVID restrictions.
Is it fiscally responsible for Jefferson County Commisioners to side step the bidding process and spend thousands of dollars on “Anti-Racist Literacy Training” when they have provided no data nor documentation nor measurable outcomes to support a community need for that?
Covering its tracks, lawyering up. Olympic Pride got a lawyer to demand that Port Townsend Free Press remove photos showing its interactions with children. The lawyer said it was about copyright. But the same images have also been removed from Olympic Pride’s own website and social media. What was in those photos they don’t want you to see?
Ana Wolpin’s The Dark Underbelly of the Trans Movement: What is Olympic Pride Promoting? prompted the scrubbing and lawyering up. Wolpin’s article took a close look at how Olympic Pride is sexualizing children and promoting transgenderism to kids. That means moving children towards macabre mutilations and a lifetime of taking hormones that can harm their brain development, cause abnormally low bone density and induce severe depression and suicidal ideation. The FDA recently issued a warning that puberty blockers in minors can cause brain swelling and loss of vision. The damage caused to minors by puberty blockers is no longer considered reversible — bad news arriving too late for many young and middle-aged adults.
The mutilations may involve a greedy surgeon cutting flesh from a young girl’s arm or elsewhere to make a fake penis that will be sewn onto the pubic area where her vagina and uterus once were (they’ve been scooped out and sliced away). Many more surgeries and follow-up treatments may be required. Synthetic sex identity is big business. Surgeries can cost $300,000 and up. Just 100 minors on Lupron (a testosterone suppression drug also used to chemically castrate sex offenders) produces $27 million in sales in just seven years, and a lifetime will be required to make the “transition” stick.
Joey Maiz is a woman who at age 27 underwent sex change surgery and took hormones to try to make her man. Here she weeps for the children being sucked into the same literal meat grinder that ruined her life. [This video is still mostly available off the Gays Against Groomers Facebook page. Try this link.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfDLS0xLU6A
Pressure from Olympic Pride’s Attorneys:
Mayor Faber’s Law Firm
On September 13, 2022, the small company that hosts the Port Townsend Free Press website received a demand letter from attorney Sam Feinson, of Faber & Feinson. That is the two-man law firm of Port Townsend Mayor David Faber. He demanded that six images be removed from Wolpin’s article for alleged violation of copyright laws.
Most of the images showed Olympic Pride’s engagement with children, some appearing to be of kindergarten age. These images disappeared from their website after Wolpin’s article. One of the photos was screen-grabbed from a Facebook post of a person not represented by Feinson. Images posted on Facebook are not protected by copyright, particularly when they are posted to allow sharing.
But making these arguments would require engaging an attorney and exposing the web-hosting company to the costs and disruption of legal process. They would be caught in the crossfire. Wolpin took down most of the images, and will be replacing them with others to give readers an idea of what it is Olympic Pride does not want seen by an audience wider and more diverse than the one that hangs around its website.
Grooming 101 and Gays Against Groomers
What exactly is in those images that Olympic Pride does not want seen? Did they show Olympic Pride and its supporters engaged in grooming? Grooming, according to a Wikipedia definition, is “befriending and establishing an emotional connection with a minor, and sometimes the child’s family, to lower the child’s inhibitions with the objective of sexual abuse. Child grooming is also regularly used to lure minors into various illicit businesses such as child trafficking, child prostitution, cybersex trafficking, or the production of child pornography.”
Before the photos were removed you, the reader, could have judged for yourself whether the photos were evidence of grooming. Apparently, that is a judgment Olympic Pride does not want you making.
Gays Against Groomers opposes indoctrinating and sexualizing children under the guise of “LBGTQA+.” They state, “our community that once preached love and acceptance of others has been hijacked by radical activists who are now pushing extreme concepts onto society, specifically targeting children in recent years.” The featured image at the top, from a gay pride parade, is an example. Olympic Pride is the local sponsor of transgender promotion to children, and the sponsor of Jefferson County Transgender Support. Photos of transgender promotion and celebration with young children were among the photos Olympic Pride demanded The Free Press take down.
From Gays Against Groomers FB page
According to Gays Against Groomers, “The overwhelming majority of gay people are against what the community has transformed into, and we do not accept the political movement pushing their agenda in our name. [T]hese radicals aim to restructure it entirely in order to accommodate a fringe minority, as well as seek to indoctrinate children into their ideology.”
They are talking about groups like Olympic Pride.
“There are millions of gays within the community.” Gays Against Groomers continues, “that want nothing to do with this Alphabet religion and join the fight with parents and concerned people everywhere to protect children. We also aim to return sanity and reclaim the community we once called our own. The gay community is not a monolith. Those pushing this agenda do not represent or speak for us all, nor do we want to be associated with them in any way. What we are witnessing is mass scale child abuse being perpetrated on an entire generation, and we will no longer sit by and watch it happen.”
Gays Against Groomers recently helped defeat trans ideology indoctrination in Florida schools. Their truck was photographed in Miami outside a critical school board hearing. They recognize evil and speak out against it. Raising concerns about the life-long damage done to children by the promotion of trans ideology and what it physically entails cannot be dismissed as homophobia.
Olympic Pride aggressively seeks contact and interaction with children. It sponsored the recent “Queer/Trans Pool Party,” where it occupied the entire Mountain View pool and locker rooms. It was an “all ages” event. Olympic Pride sponsors the Rainshadow Youth Collective, which specifically targets those under 19 years of age. The “Collective” (an interesting choice of a Marxist term) promoted the “Queer/Trans” all ages pool party to kids and holds a variety of ostensibly innocent events for children.
Remember Joe Camel?
Marketing experts know how to get kids’ attention. The makers of Camel cigarettes once employed the character of Joe Camel to entice children to try its carcinogenic product. He was one cool, fun dude and everyone liked him. Food marketers use cartoons to entice kids to eat junk food. Toy companies have long used cartoons to sell their products to kids (or parents, pressured by kids). The USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism states, “Many different organizations, ranging from governmental health agencies to cigarette companies, develop specific campaigns that are designed to appeal to children. These advertisements may target youths’ interests and attention in many ways, such as through the use of cartoon figures or the promise of maturity.”
Among the images Olympic Pride demanded be taken down were the cartoons it uses to promote transgenderism to children. Their lawyer’s demand letter stated that these images were “illustrations and graphics created to advertise Olympic Pride events.” They are more than that. They are Olympic Pride’s advertising tools to reach children.
Fair Use and Facebook
Use of the images objected to by Olympic Pride’s lawyer is arguably “fair use” and not a copyright infringement. As Facebook explains, copyright “laws allow people to use, under certain circumstances, someone else’s copyrighted work [for] criticism, commentary, parody, satire, news reporting, teaching, education and research.”
That’s what Wolpin did. The images she used were already out there, and she used them for the purpose of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching and education about what Olympic Pride is up to. But being right does not end a fight with lawyers. Vindication comes through sometimes expensive and burdensome litigation. The Free Press did not want to get its hosting company or its contributors and editors consumed in legal wrangling that would distract from its mission of reporting and commenting on what is happening in our community. We think that by demanding that the images be hidden from the public Olympic Pride is telling on itself. Their attempt to erase the evidence gave us an opportunity to draw more attention to what they are up to.
Olympic Pride also demanded that photos from someone else’s Facebook page and website be taken down. Those photos depicted Beau Ohlgren, who runs Olympic Pride’s Jefferson County Transgender Support Network. Ohlgren is also director of Family Ministry at the Quimper Unitarian Universalist Church (QUUF). The photos Olympic Pride demanded be removed were Ohlgren’s head shot from the QUUF website and a photo of Ohlgren in a leotard with waist-length hair from another person’s Facebook page (which had enabled sharing). Wolpin declined to take down these photos.
Why Mayor Faber’s Law Firm?
David Faber’s selfie on Twitter, in a toilet stall
Mayor David Faber has written on his social media that, “As mayor, I am legally required to be a pervert and deviant,” and also “absolutely filthy.” He has described himself as a person who has sex with dead chickens and discussed having sex with a dog. He has written that Pee Wee Herman, who was convicted of possession of child pornography and public masturbation, “did nothing wrong.” He has embraced Vaush, a YouTuber who argues for the decriminalization of child pornography and lowering the age of consent. New York magazine contributor and former Washington Post reporter Mandy Stadtmiller,Andy Ngo and other journalists have recently dug into Faber’s troubling, creepier alter-ego.
Faber’s selfie, published on his Twitter account for the world to see, shows him wearing eye liner in a bathroom stall. What is that about? Ugh.
Feinson, Faber’s partner, is well aware of Faber’s social media revelations and has engaged with him on the same Twitter account Faber used to issue these abhorrent declarations. This has been established by Substack researcher and commentator Mattie Watkins. Her two articles are here and here.
This is the law firm Olympic Pride chose to use to demand that the Port Townsend Free Press remove photographs that may show evidence of grooming and aggressive marketing of transgenderism, and all that entails, to children. Faber has even encouraged the teenager at the center of the Julie Jaman/YMCA controversy to cut off his genitals by giving him $200 through his GoFundMe page towards what is euphemistically called “bottom surgery.”
Tweet from David Faber
Olympic Pride has helped organize and lead the protests against Julie Jaman and women who have called for safe, dignified spaces where they change, shower and go to the bathroom. Olympic Pride, as did Faber, had a large hand in whipping up the crowd (mob) that bullied and roughed up mostly older women at the August 15, 2022 press conference. Rape survivors and a Black woman pleading for the same consideration trans people claim faced a crowd screaming that they were “c*nts” and TERFS, a sexist slur used to justify violence.
Faber fanned the flames — indeed, the press conference had been organized in response to his taunting rape survivors and women’s rights activists. Faber wrote on his Twitter feed, where he makes official statements in his capacity as Mayor (including his perceived job requirements about being a pervert and deviant), that what happened to the older women, whom he has also called TERFS — was “beautiful.” Council member Libby Wennstrom subsequently called for the expulsion from Port Townsend of all women who did not agree with her that men can become actual women and belong in women’s showers and bathrooms.
Olympic Pride was asked if it condemned such hate speech. It has remained silent despite its self-proclaimed welcoming “inclusive” mantra.
Olympic Pride Doesn’t Want You Knowing Their “Pride Partners”
Wolpin’s article copied a collage of logos of the local businesses Olympic Pride says are its “Pride Partners.” Their lawyer demanded that image be removed. One would have thought Olympic Pride would want people to know about the businesses supporting their indoctrination and grooming of children so they might choose genital and other bodily mutilation and a lifetime of hormone treatments. Or maybe not. Maybe those businesses have been hearing from customers following publication of Wolpin’s article, and they’ve passed that ire along to Olympic Pride.
It’s said a picture is worth a thousand words. Olympic Pride doesn’t want us using pictures, so we’ll use words. And we won’t need anywhere near a thousand to wrap this up. Here is a full list of Olympic Pride’s “Pride Partners,” who wittingly or unwittingly are endorsing its marketing of transgender ideology to children, which includes surgical and chemical “transitioning”:
“By anyone’s assessment, traditional electromechanical [analog] meters are an amazing piece of engineering work. Refined over a hundred years, the design of a standard residential electricity meter became an impressive combination of economy, accuracy, durability and simplicity.” – Electric Power Research Institute
——————————-
A program is now underway in Jefferson County to replace existing utility meters with two-way communicating Smart meters.
You have a choice, though. Because of an Opt-Out Policy created several years ago, PUD customers can reject a Smart meter and opt for a non-transmitting analog meter instead.
According to the “Grid Modernization – Meter Replacement Process” page on JeffPUD’s website:
Utility-wide replacement of aging meters with new advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) [Smart meters] will begin on September 19th in Kala Point. Meter replacement will be done in zones over time, with full replacement projected by early-2024.
General Manager Kevin Streett reported at the PUD regular meeting on Sept. 6th that the ‘Gateways’ — a system-critical piece of hardware used for data relay between the consumer and the utility — are in short supply, thus are being rationed by the manufacturers. The speed of the county-wide rollout to 20,000 customer/owners will depend upon that supply chain, and that of the so-called Smart meters themselves.
If you know you do not want a Smart meter, you don’t have to wait until you are notified of the rollout reaching you. You can request an analog meter at any time using the PUD’s “RF Transmitting Meter Opt-Out Application” (see below).
——————————-
How We Got Here
In 2017, AMI technology, more commonly known as Smart meters, was rejected by more than a thousand county utility customers on a petition titled “We Want Analogs. No Smart Meters.” Over the course of two years, a group called SMOG — Smart Meter Objectors Group — challenged the PUD’s intended Smart meter rollout.
In response to concerns put forward by SMOG, in 2018 the meter replacement plan was put on pause. In November of 2019 and 1,000 signatures later, PUD commissioners granted utility customers the choice of opting for a non-transmitting analog meter, then or at any time in the future. Since that time about 175 customer-owners have requested that their existing one-way transmitting meters known as AMR — Automatic Meter Reading, not AMI/Smart meters — be replaced with analogs.
Now that the commissioners have decided to move forward with the AMI “Grid Modernization”, unless you opt out, your one-way transmitting AMR meter will be replaced with what many critics consider a far-more problematic two-way transmitting Smart meter.
One of approximately 40 Smart meters installed to date by Jefferson County PUD. The county-wide rollout begins Sept. 19th.
The authors are two of SMOG’s co-founders (Annette continues to monitor and participate in PUD meetings), and are among the early opt-outs. This article will describe the concerns around Smart meters and why you might want to opt for an analog when the meter replacement program comes to your neighborhood.
——————————-
Utility companies love Smart meters,
but are they better for the customers?
2017 SMOG information sheet
There are multiple issues with Smart meter technology that SMOG initially addressed:
High costs for new infrastructure to support this technology that generally leads to utility rate hikes;
Short meter lifespan, with frequent meter replacement adding to utility costs;
Safety issues – the meters’ lack of grounding potentially causing house fires and the shorting out of household appliances;
Questions about smart meter accuracy, affecting utility bills;
The potential surveillance by Smart technology, gathering information on household habits;
Health concerns resulting from the electromagnetic radiation emitted by Smart meters.
We won’t dwell on the first four concerns for the following reasons:
1) JeffPUD has already decided to go down this road, with a workplan budget of $4,060,000 for this 2+ year project. Cost overruns can be in the millions with these rollouts, particularly additional infrastructure expenses where there are terrain issues like we have in Jefferson County. Time will tell how this affects our rates.
2) If the Smart meter obsolescence figure of 5-7 years given in Congressional testimony in 2015 holds true, with costs shared among the PUD’s customer base, even those who opt out will see rate increases if their Smart-metered neighbors require more frequent replacements.
3) The incidence of fires following smart meter installations was alarming in the early rollout years, but not much news has surfaced the past few years. It remains one reason to choose an analog, though, if you want the safest possible tech on your property.
4) A 2017 study showed that Smart meters gave false readings from 30% too low to 582% too high. That could mean you pay more or less than your actual usage. We just don’t know. We do know that analog meters have stood the test of time, holding their accuracy within industry standards for decades.
The issues we can clearly address by opting out of a Smart meter at this point include:
Invasion of Privacy,
Surveillance and Data Collecting
A major difference between two-way Smart meter technology and our current one-way-transmitting meters is in their ability to communicate detailed data wirelessly to our utility.
An analog meter does not broadcast any frequencies at all, it is read manually on-site by a meter reader.
Our current one-way meters broadcast infrequently, sending overall energy usage to a collector, recorded by a meter reader in the field.
A Smart meter broadcasts RF frequencies 24/7, every few seconds or even faster, up to 190,000 bursts of pulsed radiation per day.
While our PUD has not added this feature to the AMI meters being purchased, one of the promises of Smart technology is its potential to not only broadcast our usage remotely to the utility, but to communicate with any Smart gadget or device — appliances, heating and cooling systems, lights, video doorbells, security cameras, door locks, an ever-expanding array of Smart tech — and send detailed information to our utility about how and when we use energy.
That is seen as a benefit by some, potentially offering the customer more specific data on their power consumption to encourage better energy habits. But that doesn’t play out in real life. As studies like this one from Keele University show, Smart Meters Have Little Impact on People’s Energy Usage Habits.
What detailed data collection does achieve is in-home surveillance, sending personal information to the “Cloud” that potentially allows your utility — or a hacker — to monitor your household’s private habits in real time. It can reveal when you are home or not, when and how much you use specific appliances, in some cases even your TV viewing habits. It’s been dubbed “the household device that spies on you 24/7.”
The data collected can be sold to third parties. Miles Keogh, Director of Research at the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, warns, “I think the [smart meter] data is going to be worth a lot more than the [electricity] commodity that’s being consumed to collect the data.”
As previously stated, this information will not be available with these new Smart meters — the PUD has assured us that it is not their intent to carry out this kind of data-mining on us, or to sell it for profit. It will require an upgrade for that capability.
It is, however, a slippery slope. We take the PUD’s current management at their word, but once this technology is in place, it opens a Pandora’s box for future abuse.
Remote Disconnects, Control and
Rationing of Your Energy Use
One of the upsides for the utility in switching over to a Smart meter network is the remote disconnect feature. If the PUD needs or wants to turn off your power, no one has to physically come to your property; your service can be disconnected remotely by the utility.
This feature is prominently displayed on the new Vision Smart meters.
And with additional hardware installed, there is also the potential for the PUD to control your power use in other ways. For example, as 22,000 utility customers in Colorado were recently shocked to discover, thermostat settings can be overridden remotely. During a heat wave just weeks ago, we saw the headline Power Company Seizes Control Of Thermostats In Colorado During Heatwave.
“After temperatures soared past 90 degrees, residents were left confused when they tried to adjust their air conditioning and found locked controls displaying a message that said ‘energy emergency’.” Utility customers discovered that their thermostats were locked in at 78 or 79 degrees. Those with heat-related health issues were unable to adjust for their comfort level; temperature regulation was completely out of their control.
Again, this is not something that will be possible with the initial Smart meter rollout in Jefferson County. But the infrastructure will be in place for increasing control and energy rationing by our utility in the future.
Current Billing Structure
and Proposed Time-of-Use Rates
At present, we are charged a flat fee (base rate) for the privilege of connection to the electric grid, and a kilowatt-per-hour usage fee (you’ll easily find these on your power bill).
It’s elementary that there are typical peak times in most households when far more energy is consumed — most commonly between 4pm and 9pm — when families get home from work and school and prepare dinner, turn on lights, televisions, computers, EV chargers, appliances etc. Power generators charge more to utilities when these peaks stress their systems.
Time-of-use billing aims to pass most of those cost increases directly on to the consumer in order to nudge them to modify their usage behavior by shifting much of their consumption to the shoulder lower-peak hours, or better yet, midnight-to-6am off-peak hours. (Some of us have been doing this voluntarily for years or even decades.)
Sounds reasonable enough, but there are caveats. What about people who are disabled, at home all day with elderly parents or small children, or underemployed and constantly juggling jobs?
A study published in Nature Energy in December 2019, titled “Varied Health and Financial Impacts of Time-of-Use Energy Rates Across Sociodemographic Groups Raise Equity Concerns,” summarized their findings in this way:
“The elderly and those with disabilities face greater increases in electricity bills and worse health outcomes under some time-of-use electricity rates. This suggests that vulnerable groups should be considered separately in time-of-use rate design, and future rate designs should be tested to ensure that they do not increase hardship.”
The paper pointed to typical hardships in lower income, rural counties like ours — inefficient appliances, leaky homes and the prevalence of rentals rather than home-ownership — which effectively prohibit the consumer from improving their comfort through increased energy efficiency. This can contribute to negative health outcomes for those who are forced to suffer through cold winters, hot summers and higher overall bills.
What I can’t see can’t hurt me.
Right?
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of this technology relates to the health impacts from the high-intensity pulsed radiation (RF transmissions) that Smart meters emit. Many decades of research have established that electromagnetic fields (EMFs) can cause profound health issues.
When Smart meters first began rolling out in the U.S., the incidence of people reporting new health challenges spiked dramatically. Former Silicon Valley engineer Jeromy Johnson is one who experienced a decline so debilitating after a Smart meter was installed that he turned EMF educator. Within a week of its installation, the meter’s impacts changed him from an early-adopter tech enthusiast to someone unable to function in his normal work and home environments.
As described in Johnson’s acclaimed 16-minute TED Talk (with thousands of corroborating comments), the most common adverse health effects linked to EMF exposures from these meters include:
Headaches
Insomnia
Fatigue
Tinnitus
Heart arrhythmia/palpitations
Decreased immune function
Irritability
Decreased cognitive function
Estimates of those who suffer from electrosensitivity range from 3 to 10 percent of the population. This concern was a major reason our PUD commissioners agreed to create an Opt-Out Policy. A future article will explore this issue in more depth.
——————————-
Why Choose an Analog Meter?
Two styles of analog meters our PUD is using for opt-outs — the original “clock face” style that records usage on small dials and a later style with a numerical display.
Local craftsman and contractor, Sebastian (Seb) Eggert, is nearing completion of his ElectroMagnetic Radiation Specialist (EMRS) certification with the Building Biology Institute and was a founding member of SMOG. He is the host of a semi-monthly Zoom call with other working EMRS professionals in which they discuss their cases and host guests, among them many of the most well known leaders in the field. He is hired by business and home owners to ‘survey’ offices and domiciles for the unseen presence of electrical, magnetic and radio frequency radiation (RF) as well as high frequency voltage transients emitted by wiring, known as dirty electricity (DE). He shares this primer, beginning with the beauty of analog technology:
“Electromechanical (analog) meters were the mainstay of the national electrical system for more than a hundred years. The amount of electricity used is indicated on a series of small dials or a digital display. The electrical current moving through the device constantly turns the mechanism in proportion to the amount of electricity consumed. A miniscule amount of friction in the system is the only loss of energy in the device.
If calibrated properly they are highly accurate and have been known to run reliably for as many as fifty years. They produce no other nuisance radiation of any kind, other than that created by the electricity in and moving through the wires.”
Traditional analog meters are safer, less expensive, more reliable, longer lasting and more secure than wireless Smart meters. With an analog meter there is zero chance for Smart surveillance, no possibility of the utility remotely disconnecting or controlling your energy use, no way to impose Time-of-Use rate structures, and no harmful radiation or dirty electricity is ever generated.
Unfortunately, manufacturing of new analog meters came to an end as industry’s push for ‘smart grid’ technology was prioritized. However, even according to Randy Austin, CEO of Vision Meters (our new supplier), refurbished analogs operate reliably and within industry standards for 25-35 years.
Non-transmitting Analog
or Non-transmitting Digital?
Our PUD also offers a second type of non-radiating meter as part of its opt-out program: digital non-transmitting meters. Eggert explains:
“These meters look like the new two-way transmitting [Smart] meters but do not have radio transmitters or receivers, thus — like analog meters — have to be read monthly by a meter reader. The switch mode power supply that measures the electricity used and displays it on the meter does generate some high frequency voltage transients, also known as ‘dirty electricity’, or ‘DE’. This is considered objectionable current by the building biology community and some electrically sensitive people are negatively affected by this form of radio frequency radiation.
The digital non-transmitting meters average the current used by sampling the amperage moving through the device over time and taking an average of those readings. Some engineers suggest that spikes from power surges (such as when a refrigerator starts up) can skew the average to be higher than what the usage is, resulting in higher electricity bills.”
Analog meters do not use this kind of averaging which can inflate your utility bills, nor do they generate dirty electricity — more reasons they are the superior meter choice.
Analog advocate Jeromy Johnson says, “I encourage you to do everything possible to opt-out of your Smart meter.” And with our hard-won Opt-Out Policy in place, we have that choice in Jefferson County.
Sign Up for Your Analog
Opt-Out Meter
If you want an analog meter for any or all of the above reasons, we are happy to report that our PUD has made it an easy process with a simple one-page opt-out form.
Opt-Out Application is on the last page of the packet here.
Our utility is offering non-transmitting analog meters for no initial installation charge and only a $5.00 monthly fee added to the power bill. The $5 surcharge goes towards the cost of a meter reader coming to your property every month to manually read your power usage.
Some caveats apply. From the PUD’s website:
Net metering (solar power) customers are limited to the [non-transmitting] digital meter, and must pay a $75 installation fee.
PUD customers who rent their homes will need to have their Opt-Out applications signed by the property owner in order for the application to be processed.
You’ll find the AMI/Smart meter opt-out form here. It cannot be filled out online, rather must be downloaded and printed out, or picked up at the customer service counter at 310 Four Corners Road.
Except for a point of confusion over whether to choose the non-transmitting analog or non-transmitting digital, we’ve not heard of any snags from others who have already opted out. We strongly suggest the analog option as the safest, most robust meter available.
Analog meters are available for most customers, but our PUD states that only the non-transmitting digital option will work with solar systems.
We will be happy to answer questions in the comments below.
Why haven’t our regulatory agencies and government protected us? Industry capture of the FCC and other agencies puts industry profit over public safety. “Just Don’t Bring Up Health” is one of the opening chapters of Harvard University Center for Ethics’ exposé, “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission Is Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates.“
![$1.5 Million Judgment Against Art Frank for MisconductWeighs on Campaign, Prosecutor [Updated with comment from Sheriff Nole]](https://i0.wp.com/www.porttownsendfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/ovas2blue2.jpg?resize=835%2C488&ssl=1)
ys Against Groomers recently helped defeat trans ideology indoctrination in Florida schools. Their truck was photographed in Miami outside a critical school board hearing. They recognize evil and speak out against it. Raising concerns about the life-long damage done to children by the promotion of trans ideology and what it physically entails cannot be dismissed as homophobia.
Olympic Pride also demanded that photos from someone else’s Facebook page and website be taken down. Those photos depicted Beau Ohlgren, who runs Olympic Pride’s Jefferson County Transgender Support Network. Ohlgren is also director of Family Ministry at the Quimper Unitarian Universalist Church (QUUF). The photos Olympic Pride demanded be removed were Ohlgren’s head shot from the QUUF website and a photo of Ohlgren in a leotard with waist-length hair from another person’s Facebook page (which had enabled sharing). Wolpin declined to take down these photos.
