Showing posts with label Smart Meters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Smart Meters. Show all posts

KIUC & the Culture of Fear

SUBHEAD: A correspondence on Smart Meters between a KIUC member and its Executive Administrator.

By Ray Songtree on 31 October 2016 for Lipstick & War Crimes -
(https://lipstick-and-war-crimes.org/kiuc-kauai-island-utility-cooperatives-culture-fear/)


Image above: A typical smart meter installation at multi unit housing intensifies radiation in small area.  From (https://burbankaction.wordpress.com/petition/).

FROM KIUC EXECUTIVE ADMINISISTRATOR
On 10/31/2016 “Kathleen Chin” (kchin@kiuc.coop) wrote the email:
Aloha Ray,

While we are pleased to receive feedback from our members, I ask the email content you send to KIUCBOD@hawaii.rr.com and BoardChair@hawaii.rr.com be specific to our primary business as an electric utility. Please remove our email address from your bulk email blast list otherwise we will have to block your communications.

Respectfully, Pua

Kathleen “Pua” Chin | Executive Administrator | Kauai Island Utility Cooperative | 4463 Pahe`e Street, Suite 1, Lihue, HI 96766-2000

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, copy, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
REPLY FROM RAY SONGTREE
On 10/31/2016 “Ray Songtree (rayupdates@hushmail.com) replied with the email:
Hi Pua,

Respectfully, who has requested this? I do not have KIUC on a blast list and find that categorization insulting. I send technology and corruption issues that board members might find interesting.

Some board members may not, and that would be expected in a diverse and free thinking group. The board is made of different individuals. Some of them may find this information vital as they will not get this info in mainstream news, which includes the Garden Island Star Advertiser. I am an author and researcher. If KIUC was curious about corruption, they would hire me as a consultant.

I often send these emails to Mayor and Council as they have gone along with KIUC lack of research and they need to be informed. The wikileaks story is critical to those who want honest government and honest utilities. This is why I included that, because many Kauai residents are hoping the county, state, federal and UN corruption will be busted. They know this will only happen through whistle blowers.

Perhaps there are people at KIUC who would not like to see this, and resent whistle blowers who throw a wrench in their opaque planning which decides for everyone else, with no ability to challenge their decisions, what the community’s future might look like.

In point, the special ballots are formatted by KIUC which is the entity being challenged. Conflict of interest? There is no check and balance at KIUC. One contestant directs wording of Ballot which predictably leads the thinking of the voters in favor of the one contestant.

Thus there are no real challenges possible to the ensconced thinking and structure of KIUC. Thus KIUC is a co-op only in name, for tax and legal reasons only, where the serfs have no voice.
I am familiar with who initiated smart grid, how it was promulgated, what it really is, and what is not, all which has been foisted on Kauai residents. Smart grid is not for anything green, it was to create the internet of all things, where everything is tracked through smart meters. Smart meters, like cell phones, were never safe and will never be safe.

TEDx Talk: By Jeromy Johnson - Wireless Wake-Up Call at Zellerbach Hall on the UC Berkeley campus. He gave a wonderful TED talk about how WiFi and EMF are affecting our health at (www.emfanalysis.com/tedx-wireless-wake-up-call/). [See video below]


Specifically, I send emails about EMF, Smart Meter, and technocracy issues. I am the person, as you might remember, who led the failed attempt to educate the board about FCC corruption and Smart Meters. The issue will never go away until KIUC is willing to do the research and break with Federal government. FCC is directly linked to KIUC.

If someone asked you to send me this letter, please forward this to them so we can discuss what kinds of FCC / government corruption, and undiscussed technology are NOT of interest to a quasi public utility.

Also please let me know who speaks to censor the communication with 9 other people?

I’m sorry your job description includes attempts to censor whistle blowing and I wonder how it is, that you sent this email without reservations?

Perhaps you would feel comfortable to discuss your honest and personal feelings about KIUC on radio, as I’m sure your job would not be jeopardized.

We could do a skype talk and I could post it to youtube for you. You have nothing to fear from KIUC.

Ray Songtree
378-4152

Image above: Jeromy Johnson TEDx talk of radiation from smart meters and cellphones. From (https://youtu.be/F0NEaPTu9oI).
.

Town Without Wi-Fi

SUBHEAD: Town withot cellphones, smartmeters or wifi, due to a government telescope, becomes a magnet. 

By Michael J. Gaynor on 11 January 2015 for Washingtonian -
(http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/people/the-town-without-wi-fi/)


Image above: Roadside announcing Green Bank, West Virginia. A place of electromagnetic quiet.  From original article. Photographs by Joshua Cogan.

On the third morning in her St. Petersburg apartment, she woke with a harsh thumping in her chest: heart palpitations.

Within hours, it felt as if someone had tied a thick rubber band around her head. Then came nausea, fatigue, ringing in her left ear—an onslaught of maladies, all at once, and she had no idea why. “I was trying to come up with every excuse in the world for what was happening to me,” she says. “Moving is stressful, but the symptoms just kept piling on.”

In 2012, after a decade as the owner of a Connecticut catering company and an office worker in finance and construction, Grimes had gone to Florida to be a speaker for a public-policy group.

A week or two into the job, whatever was afflicting her still wasn’t abating, and before long her speech became so jumbled that she couldn’t form a complete sentence in front of an audience.

She saw an internist, a neurologist, then a psychiatrist, and still had no explanation. “If we can’t test it,” one said, “it doesn’t exist.” Grimes started poking around online and soon remembered reading an article about the potentially deleterious health effects of the new “smart” electricity meters that were rolling out across the country.

The devices send customers’ usage data back to the utility over wireless signals. Did her building have them?

She went outside to inspect the place and found no fewer than 17 of the meters strapped to the side of the building.

Grimes’s sleuthing didn’t end there. She went back online and found herself scrolling through tale after tale of people all over the world getting sick from the devices.

And it wasn’t just smart meters. It turned out there was a whole community of people out there who called themselves “electrosensitives” and said they were suffering due to the electromagnetic frequencies that radiate wirelessly from cell phones, wi-fi networks, radio waves, and virtually every other modern technology that the rest of society now thinks of as indispensable.

The affliction has been dubbed “electromagnetic hypersensitivity,” or EHS, and it involves a textbook’s worth of ailments: headaches, nausea, insomnia, chest pains, disorientation, digestive difficulties, and so on. Mainstream medicine doesn’t recognize the syndrome, but the symptoms described everything Grimes was experiencing.

She went back to her doctors with her newfound evidence of EHS, relieved to have sorted out the mystery. But she got no sympathy. As she puts it, “They look at you like you have three heads.”

Grimes moved to a new building, then another, and six more times, but at each turn a smart-meter rollout wasn’t far behind. “I sat down there in Florida,” she says, “and just prayed to God: ‘Where is my way out?’ ”

That’s when she heard about a little town called Green Bank, West Virginia.

In Green Bank, you can’t make a call on your cell phone, and you can’t text on it, either. Wireless internet is outlawed, as is Bluetooth. It’s a premodern place by design, devoid of the gadgets and technologies that define life today. And thanks to Uncle Sam, it will stay that way: The town is part of a federally mandated zone where a government high-tech facility’s needs come first. Wireless signals are verboten.

In electromagnetic terms, it’s the quietest place on Earth—blanketed by the kind of silence that’s golden to electrosensitives like Monique Grimes.

And as she discovered, it’s become a refuge for them.

Over the last few years, electrosensitives have flocked to the tech-free idyll in West Virginia, taking shelter beside cows and farms and fellow sufferers. Up here, no one would look at them as if they had three heads. Well, except for the locals, that is.

The reason for all the peace and quiet in town is visible the moment you arrive.


Image above: The Robert C. Byrd telescope in Green Bank, West Virginia. rom original article.

It’s the Robert C. Byrd telescope, a gleaming white, 485-foot-tall behemoth of a dish that looms over tiny Green Bank, population 143.

There’s only one road into town, about four hours from DC. The way there snakes through the Allegheny Mountains, each town you pass through smaller than the last as the bars on your cell phone fall like dominoes and the scan function on the radio ceases to work, the dial rotating endlessly in search of signals.

Where the forest ends, the town begins. The valley opens to cattle farms and old wooden barns, a post office and a library, a bank and Henry’s Quick Stop, a combination gas station/convenience store/rustic interior-decor shop that houses Green Bank’s nearest approximation to a sit-down restaurant.

Across the street, the Dollar General was a lifesaver when it opened five years ago—before that, the closest grocery store was in Marlinton, 26 miles down the road.

At the northern end of town is the other visible curiosity in Green Bank besides the telescope: a rusted pay phone. If you’re not from there, it’s ostensibly the only way to reach the rest of the world. “Sometimes you get people passing through who get aggravated they can’t get a signal,” says Bob Earvine, owner of Trents General Store. “But just about anybody will let you use their phone.”

Rising above it all is the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope, a.k.a. the GBT. It’s the largest of its kind in the world and one of nine in Green Bank, all of them government-owned and operated by the National Radio Astronomy Observatory.

The telescopes aren’t “ocular” ones, the kind you’re probably thinking of. They’re radio telescopes. So instead of putting your eye to the apparatus and looking for distant stars, you listen for them.

The patterns of electromagnetic radiation coming off a planet or other celestial bodies apparently reveal entirely different things than what’s visible to the eye, and even allow scientists to study regions of space where light can’t reach.

In recent years, the telescopes have been used to track NASA’s Cassini probe to Saturn’s moon and to examine Mercury’s molten core.

Obscure as the work may sound, there’s a long line of astronomers all over the world who want to use the GBT, a telescope known to be so sensitive that it can pick up the energy equivalent of a single snowflake hitting the ground. These scientists swamp the NRAO with their research proposals—the observatory is four times oversubscribed.

So why does such a sensitive listening tool need total technological silence to operate? A little history—starting with telephones, in fact—helps explain.

In 1932, when Bell Labs was installing phone systems across the US, its technicians kept hearing static over the transmissions. The company hired an electrical engineer to find the source, and he discovered that all the noise was “the Milky Way galaxy itself,” says Mike Holstine, the telescope’s business manager, with a hint of awe in his voice.

Two decades later, the federal government decided the country should invest in listening to the far reaches of the galaxy and needed its own radio telescope to do so. The question was where to put it. Because even a basic AM radio transmission is enough to overpower faint readings from outer space, the only place for such a listening post was the hinterlands.

Enter Green Bank. Surrounded by the Alleghenies, and thus buffered from outside frequencies, the rural town had little established industry—or potential for one. That meant the telescope wouldn’t have to deal with a population influx later. Plus, Green Bank sat on the 38th Parallel, with an ideal view of the Milky Way.

In 1958, the Federal Communications Commission established the 13,000-square-mile National Radio Quiet Zone, a one-of-a-kind area encompassing Green Bank where, to this day, electromagnetic silence is enforced every hour of every day.

The strictest rules are found within the ten square miles immediately surrounding Green Bank, where most forms of modern communication—i.e., cell phones and wi-fi—are banned under state law. Residents are allowed to use land-line phones and wired internet, “but it is sloooow,” in the words of one Green Banker.

The Quiet Zone is a vast place, much of it made up of national parks and empty space, the whole thing roughly the size of Maryland. But lately, because of how much its way of life has diverged from the rest of America’s and whom that’s attracted to the place, the little town of Green Bank has come to feel smaller than ever.

In 2007, Diane Schou became one of the first electrosensitives to move to Green Bank.

Before that, she had been a PhD working on an Iowa research farm she owned with her husband, Bert, also an electrosensitive. After the Schous, there was Jennifer Wood, once an architect working for the University of Hawaii. And Monique Grimes, the former catering-company owner. One after another, the electrosensitives rolled into Green Bank, until there were roughly two dozen—no small number for a 143-person town.

For many, the journey there was long and frustrating. Schou, for instance, had identified the cell-phone tower near her home in Iowa as the culprit of her woes back in 2003, but when she complained to company and government officials, she couldn’t get any traction. She spent months living in a Faraday cage, a wood-framed box with metal meshing that blocked out cell signals (more typically used by scientists conducting experiments in labs). She even briefly considered buying a repurposed space suit so she could get out of the house without pain. “I was told it would be $24,000,” she says. “I don’t have that kind of money. And what if it gets a hole in it?”

She and Bert drove hundreds of thousands of miles across the United States looking for a safe place to stay and spent time with relatives in Sweden, the first country to recognize electromagnetic hypersensitivity as a disability. It was a national-park ranger in North Carolina who ultimately told Schou about Green Bank, and she tried the place out while living in her car behind Henry’s Quick Stop.

The transition wasn’t easy. “Coming to Green Bank was a culture shock,” she says. “If you want to have Starbucks and shopping malls, you won’t survive here.” But the Schous didn’t feel they had a lot of choice, given how much better they felt inside the Quiet Zone. The couple found an unfinished home and sold half of their Iowa farm to buy, finish, and rewire it.

It wasn’t long before Diane Schou became the de facto electrosensitive gatekeeper of Green Bank. Fellow sufferers heard about her and spread the word, and soon she was letting visitors stay in her home when they came to try the place out for themselves. Jennifer Wood, the former architect, who says her own husband didn’t believe her disease was real, remembers what it was like to walk into Schou’s home and be welcomed by a handful of other electrosensitives. “It was just like family,” Wood says.

But not everyone in Green Bank was so keen to meet the new neighbors. “There have been some rough spots in dealing with other members of the community,” says the very diplomatic Sheriff David Jonese, whose Pocahontas County department has been called in several times to mediate disputes between old-timers and newcomers. “They want everybody in the stores and restaurants to change their lighting or turn their lights off when they’re there, which creates some issues.”

Like shoving matches.

Schou says that when she tried to get the local church to uninstall its fluorescent lights, which electrosensitives find excruciating, one local started fuming and pushed her before storming out.

Schou also asked the church not to use its wireless microphones and told people to stop using their cell phones as cameras around her. The senior center, one of the town’s few gathering places, obliged her request to replace the fluorescent lights in one area, but when she asked that her food be delivered to her from the center’s kitchen—so she wouldn’t have to walk under other fluorescents—Green Bankers began to protest.

“Some people started to deliberately expose me just to harm me,” she says.

Residents began approaching Schou and other electrosensitives with pocketfuls of electronics, trying to call their bluff. “It feels like at times you have the scarlet letter,” says Grimes, adding that she knows electrosensitives who conceal their condition.

But the special treatment wasn’t the old-timers’ only gripe with Schou. They were also growing angry at her for ushering people they considered truly scary into the community. A few years ago, one disturbed electrosensitive flew into a rage at the local library, decrying the “dumb hillbillies” who surrounded her, as the story goes. She rampaged from the post office to the bank to the auto shop, belligerently screaming before police finally ticketed her and banned her from a couple of public places around town. (She’s gone now.)

Things got so tense that Schou and her husband decided to hold an “educational session” at the senior center that they hoped would clear the air. Instead, it devolved into a confrontation between the couple and a handful of Green Bankers upset about the demands she’d been making. “I call that my tar-and-feathering,” she says.

Schou doesn’t go to the center anymore, but the tarring-and-feathering goes on. Sometimes, Schou says, she’ll get middle-of-the-night phone calls from voices telling her to leave town and go back where she came from. One day, she went out to get the mail and found a violent surprise. Inside the mailbox was a dead groundhog, shot and rotting.

Rewind a few decades and you see how all this has actually happened before in Green Bank.

Only then, instead of shunning the people who wanted to keep new technology out, the old-timers were shunning the people bringing it in.

After breaking ground on the initial telescope in 1957, the NRAO needed to hire PhDs and engineers, and it began hiring scientists from out of town. But the locals—whose farms and homes had been condemned and displaced to make room for the observatory’s campus—didn’t take so kindly to the influx. In 1965, a group of farmers even complained to their congressman that observatory scientists had caused a crop-killing drought.

“I remember one fella said the observatory would make it rain when they wanted it to and not rain when they didn’t want it to,” says Harold Crist, a 90-year-old Green Bank native who also worked for the telescope at one time.

Not that the big-city transplants instantly warmed to the tractor-driving locals. “The truth is each group privately thinks the other is barbaric,” a telescope engineer said in a 1965 Science article. “It’s the difference between cocktail parties and moonshine orgies.”

But with time came acceptance. Today many Green Bankers work various jobs at the telescope. The campus’s cafeteria is a favorite lunch spot for locals. And more than a few scientists moonlight as painters with work hanging in the small local art center.

The main “town/gown” wrinkle, if there is one, now involves staying on top of every last piece of technology that comes down the pike. When the Quiet Zone was established in the middle of the 20th century, the observatory only had to regulate things like AM radio. Next it was pagers and cell phones, too. Today there’s wi-fi, Bluetooth, and much more. “We’ve noticed an increase in general noise,” says Karen O’Neil, the observatory’s director. “Modern society and its gizmos has brought a need to have so much more stuff.”

To picture how an iPhone can block a radio signal from outer space, telescope business manager Mike Holstine says to imagine a candle in the dark: “They say the human eye can see that candle flickering from one mile away. But what if someone turns on a spotlight all of a sudden? The candle disappears.” The radio signals are so weak after traveling so many light-years that a mere wireless modem nearby overwhelms them and they’re gone.

For that reason, the observatory’s campus is careful to protect itself. Only diesel vehicles are allowed on-site, because a gasoline-powered engine’s spark plugs give off interfering radiation. Pine trees on the outskirts buffer passing cars. Even the cafeteria’s microwave—which, like all microwaves, emits radiation—is kept in a shielded cage.

It seems every tiny step forward for the rest of America brings unforeseen consequences to Green Bank. In 2007, a government mandate for tire-pressure sensors in all new cars went into effect. “Well, those give off a radio signal that interferes with our telescope,” says Holstine. “The technology around us changes all the time, and even the smallest thing has repercussions.”

To combat this, the NRAO formed the Interference Protection Group to hunt down rogue signals. “It’s as much art as it is science,” says technician Chuck Niday as he points out the machinery he uses to track interference in the Quiet Zone. There are spectrum analyzers, global positioning systems, bundles of wires, and a box with a circle of small bulbs that light up in the direction of the radiation.

It’s a tricky job—the signals bounce off buildings and mountains, change direction, hide themselves in the most unexpected places. A few years back, the protection group traced one to a dog pen in a couple’s back yard. The animal had chewed through his electric blanket, causing tiny jolts of electricity to arc across the frayed wires and send out radio interference. Although the NRAO has the ability to seek criminal charges against violators, in this case it took the kinder approach: It bought the unwitting couple a new blanket.

With the increasingly swift pace of products and apps flowing out of Silicon Valley, it seems the NRAO’s work may only get tougher. The more enticing the technology to hit the market, the more residents may find themselves questioning the opportunity cost associated with living in Green Bank. Already, there are Green Bankers who are hungry for shiny new toys and aren’t above flouting the rules.

At Green Bank Elementary-Middle School, right next door to the telescope, you’d expect to find teenagers bemoaning the unavailability of the cool gadgets they see on TV. But that’s not the case. According to one seventh-grader, plenty of kids in Green Bank have smartphones, and although they can’t get a signal, they’ve found a work-around. By connecting to a home wi-fi network (that the telescope interference protectors apparently haven’t picked up on), kids don’t need a cell network to talk to their friends—they can just use the new texting functions in apps like Facebook and Snapchat. Teenagers and technology, it seems, will always find a way.

It would be easy to dismiss the Green Bankers who don’t like their new electrosensitive neighbors as xenophobes.

But that wouldn’t be fair. Well beyond the town’s borders, there’s a spirited debate over whether EHS is real.

The true believers generally cite a Louisiana State University study conducted in 2011. Researchers there randomly exposed one electrosensitive to an electromagnetic field and concluded that “EMF hypersensitivity can occur as a bona fide environmentally inducible neurological syndrome.”

But Timothy J. Jorgensen, a Georgetown professor who researches the health effects of environmental radiation, says the LSU study was too small to prove anything and that more comprehensive research has failed to show a correlation between symptoms and electromagnetic radiation. He doesn’t categorically deny the possibility of EHS, but in the absence of evidence, he says, just because something is plausible doesn’t make it true. “There’s no evidence that ghosts exist, but I can’t prove to you there are no ghosts,” as Jorgensen puts it.

“I feel for these people because they do have health problems,” he adds. “What the cause is, I have no idea, but it’s not wi-fi.”

The debate has clearly spilled over into the dinner-table chitchat of Green Bankers.

Pat Wilfong, a cell-phone-owning native, says she once told an electrosensitive that she was afraid her aging mother’s car might break down in the mountains and she’d have no way to call for help—only to have the EHS sufferer flippantly suggest she use a primitive walkie-talkie instead. “That made me feel like she didn’t care about my mother, or my feelings,” Wilfong says.

She’s friendly with some electrosensitives but still skeptical that EHS exists. “I agree that something makes them sick,” she says. “I’m not sure that it’s always what someone thinks it is, or what someone else tells them it is.”

Arnie Stewart, on the other hand, became convinced the disease was real after doing a little detective work himself. Stewart—who grew up visiting a family farm outside Green Bank and moved there as a retiree seven years ago—knew that a few of his buddies in his (sanctioned) ham-radio club thought the whole thing was a sham. So he asked an electrosensitive to come to a club meeting earlier this year to explain her disease.

“She was presenting her case, and about ten minutes later she came up to me and says, ‘Arnie, someone has a cell phone on in here,’ ” Stewart recalls, noting that he saw the electrosensitive woman’s hands redden and her wrists swell. He asked the room if anyone had a phone powered up. “And this one guy very sheepishly said, ‘Oh, I do have one, and it’s on.’ That was his test, and she passed it. When that happened, everyone snapped to and listened.”

Green Bank’s electrosensitives have different ways of coping, it seems. A good number are press-shy and keep to themselves—they don’t want to draw more attention to themselves than they already have. “There are people who have come in and managed to assimilate into the community, get jobs, but they still have to be very careful,” says Monique Grimes.

The ones who speak out know how “outlandish” EHS sounds to the uninitiated, as Jennifer Wood puts it, and do so in hopes of rallying people to their side. They know there’s some mending to be done in the community. “To be fair, we’ve had a few difficult people come in,” Wood says. “We’ve had some who are lovely and good communicators, but others who are distraught and very prickly or rude.”

The clash may ultimately be settled by a force outside Green Bankers’ control: the fate of the thing that started all the trouble in the first place—the telescope.

It’s funded entirely by the National Science Foundation, and two years ago, in a wave of belt-tightening across the federal government, a committee recommended shutting down the campus. NSF hasn’t said whether it will accept the proposal, but a decision is expected this year. If Washington chooses to divest, and the observatory can’t find outside funding, it could close by 2017.

Which might effectively spell the end of Green Bank’s quaint little tech-free life.

Some say that in the long run, that may be best for the town. “We’ll be so far out of the loop one of these days that we won’t be able to catch up,” says Harold Crist, who raised six children in the Quiet Zone and watched some of them move away. “I think it’s gonna turn us into a bunch of dinosaurs. People come back home and think we’re living in the dark ages.”

As it is, Green Bankers such as Pat Wilfong are already traveling south to Marlinton, the nearest town with a cell tower, to use their phones. (A few towns in the Quiet Zone can have towers because they face away from the telescope.) They’re doing it so often that the owners of a patch of ground with particularly good service in Marlinton once posted a sign warding off message-checking loiterers.

But a shuttered telescope would obviously be a nightmare for the electrosensitives—just as some of them are making inroads with the locals.

Monique Grimes, for instance. In the fall of 2013, she married Tom Grimes, a native Green Banker who owns a spacious hundred acres where lamb and sheep roam. Tom says his wife has been helping out lately around the farm, even sanding a new roof on the shed. “She’s fit in better than a lot of country girls do.”

Tom makes sure theirs is an equal partnership. “He introduces me to a lot of people—they get to know me first as Mo, not as an electrosensitive,” Monique says. “Now friends of ours have gone so far as to replace the light bulbs in their house because they want me to come and visit.”

Whatever happens to the telescope, Monique is pretty convinced that her version of the science will prevail and that future generations will see the folly of iPhones and laptops just like past ones did asbestos and cigarettes. As one sympathetic doctor told her, “You were just born a hundred years before your time.”

“Or after,” Tom quips, knowing there’s a pretty decent chance they’re sitting in the last quiet place on Earth.

.

Vote for Adam, Jimmy & Jonathan

SUBHEAD: Please vote for Adam Asquith, Jimmy Trujillo, and Jonathon Jay for the Board of the KIUC.

By Michael Shooltz on 18 February 2014 for Kauai Rising -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2014/02/vote-for-adam-jimmy-jonathan.html)


Image above: Illustration from Monopoly game of Fat Cat being arrested. From (http://thelibertycaucus.com/vero-beachs-electric-utility-just-happy-get/#.UwQmt1689IY).

We are currently in the midst of an election for three of the nine KIUC Board Members. Like so many of the issues we face in our world today this feels like a critical time.  Many of us have experience from the current board and staff of KIUC as an attitude of disdain toward we the members of the KIUC Cooperative. It comes across in many ways, even beyond the fact that we pay the highest electric rates in the country.

When I organized the members of my neighborhood to opt out of Smart Meters, Jim Kelly, KIUC's Public Relations man, came to my home to speak with me and some of my neighbors. We had not only opted out of Smart Meters but also insisted that we all have analog meters on our homes. When Mr. Kelly came to speak with us he said that our opt out request would be granted but he asked that we accept another model of digital meter that he said would be a better choice in terms of maintenance.  He had brought one of the meters with him to show us.

I asked Mr. Kelly if that meter put out radiation. He said, "No, this meter doesn't put out any radiation."  I then showed him a copy that I had of a part of the operating manual for that meter, and I read to him from it the part that described the amount of radiation that was put out by the meter that he was recommending. His response was, "Well that's not what they told me in the shop!".

The reason that I had that information on hand was that a friend had had the same conversation with Mr. Kelly three weeks earlier and was told the same thing. So, Mr. Kelly knew that he was lying to us. We were provided with analog meters.

At the orientation meeting held for the candidates who are now running for this election they were briefed by Mr. Walter Barnes who has given the orientation to candidates since the beginning of KIUC.  At this orientation the candidates were informed about the Non-Disclosure Agreement that would be required to sign promising, under severe legal and financial penalties if violated, to not disclose anything that happens behind closed doors at KIUC.

When asked when KIUC chooses to request input from the membership about matters to be decided upon affecting the Coop members, Mr. Barnes replied, "Never!".

When asked why membership input is never requested Mr. Barnes replied, "Because they don't have a f---ing clue!"

This is a pretty stunning attitude and clearly the residue of the crumbling plantation style paradigm which served the few at the serious expense of the many.

Furthermore, when discussing the role of Board Members it was made clear by Mr. Barnes that their outside research was not welcome and that their role was to support management decisions.  Furthermore when decisions were made and presented to the public, those decisions would ALWAYS be presented to the public as unanimous decisions but the Board irregardless of any differences of opinion.

So, we have a culture at KIUC where those who we supposedly elect to represent us must agree to not share with us the workings of our Co-op under severe penalties if they do. Clearly, especially in these challenging times, a change is not only needed, but required.

With that in mind I offer my heartfelt endorsement to the slate of three candidates who have chosen to run on a platform of change, a respect for, and open  collaboration with, the membership, and who are willing to explore the health and privacy issues created by Smart Meters.
The ballots have already gone out and must be in by March 8th.

This will be a close election. Your vote really matters.

Please vote for Adam Asquith, Jimmy Trujillo, and Jonathon Jay for the Board of the Kauai Island Utility Cooperative.



Letter to the TGI Editor (unpublished)



In his February 17th letter to the editor I couldn't help but notice Mr. David Proudfoot's reference to the responsibilities of the KIUC Board of Directors and his defense our coops blatant promotions of it new fees for the installation and monthly charges for those who opt out of Smart Meters.
Mr Proudfoot proclaims that, "Once elected, however, those representatives have a fiduciary duty to govern in the electorate's best interests, and a corresponding duty to explain to the electorate the reasons for their challenged decisions." It would be refreshing if that standard actually became a reality.

However, it was quite interesting that no one at KIUC ever clearly explained how it is possible for the cost of meter reading to go up. Originally KIUC was reading 30,000 meters with the cost included in members monthly bills.
After installing approximately 27,000 Smart Meters, KIUC now only reads 3,000 meters. If, as Mr. Proudfoot states, it is truly "the elected representative's fiduciary duty to govern the electorates best interests", could one of those Board Members please explain how it can possibly cost $340,000 MORE to read 27,000 LESS meters.

Rather than actually explaining where these fantom fees came from, KIUC instead used all of their promotional efforts to divide the members and distract the conversation towards who should pay these fantom fees.
In fact, KIUC distorted the language on the recent ballot so that the new installation fees, a significant portion of the new fees, which are directed at the 27,000 customers that have not yet opted out of Smart Meters, weren't even mentioned on the ballot question.
Of course these installation fees were also never mentioned in KIUC's promotions urging the members to vote "YES".

Mr. Proudfoot did a nice job of explaining the KIUC Board Members responsibilities.
However, when KIUC members already pay the highest utility bills in the country, another fantom $340,000 might not actually be considered something in "the electorate's best interests."
Michael Shooltz



.

KIUC wins SmartMeter referendum

SUBHEAD: KIUC wins battle for no-SmartMeter surcharge and loses the war for hearts and minds.

By Doug Wilmore on 25 January 2014 in Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2014/01/kuic-wins-smartmeter-referendum.html)


Image above: Waking up from the Matrix (the Grid) and detaching. From (http://riverbankoftruth.com/2013/11/29/dont-fake-it-by-greg-calise/).

If you look at the stock market news and results concerning publicly held electrical companies you will see that the smart money is moving away from this sector --- not involving just the coal generating plants but the entire sector.

Solar and other renewables are the competition, and no matter what the PUC does to attempt to prop up the electric companies in Hawaii, people are voting with their feet and moving to solar.

The utilities will counter by changing their rate structure (with the blessing of the PUC) or possibly limiting rooftop solar, but those move will be countered by changes in technology.

At present, used batteries from hybrid cars are being refurbrished to 80% capacity and installed in homes in Japan. Home generating units installed on lease will follow.

New housing developments will likely install their own power units and undercut centrally located older power sources.

The military will come of the grid because of its vulnerability to hackers and shut down, a national security problem.

While the PUC in Hawaii will continue to support the utilities over the people the evolution of electric power generation will do much more than passive government regulation to change the land scape.

Smart CEOs on the mainland are embracing these changes and altering their business model. To plan for the future the PUC needs to support smart and creative business managers, not smart meters. The change it is a coming.



KIUC board decision stands
SUBHEAD: Members of Kauai Island Utility Cooperative voted to keep a fee structure in place that charges only members who opt out of using a smart meter.

By Tom Hasslinger on 26 January 2014 for the Garden Island -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/local/smart-meter-fees-stand/article_e97db2d0-8654-11e3-9b2b-0019bb2963f4.html)

Of the 10,901 ballots received, 8,010 voted in favor of the fees while 2,797 opposed.

The nearly 11,000 ballots amounted to a record turnout for a co-op election, with 43 percent of the 25,205 members casting a vote, according to a KIUC press release Saturday.

“The record voter turnout along with the big margin for ‘yes’ votes suggests that the vast majority of members were engaged, understood what was at stake and wanted to send a clear message that they supported the board’s decision to charge the fees,” said Allan Smith, chairman of the KIUC board of directors, in a press release. “We’re grateful for that support and we thank the members on both sides of the issue who took the time to vote.”

Since November 2013, KIUC has charged $10.27 a month to customers who choose not to use a wireless smart meter.

The charge, which was approved by the Public Utilities Commission, covers the cost of manually reading the meters. KIUC also charges one-time fees to customers who ask to have their meter switched to anything other than a smart meter.

The deadline to vote was noon Saturday. The election began earlier this month after concerned members petitioned to have the issue put to a vote.

The results broke down to 74 percent in favor of the fees, while 26 percent were opposed.

The nearly 3,000 votes against the fees mirrors the number of people who have opted out of using a smart meter since the co-op began installing them.

Had the board’s decision been overturned, fees for servicing non smart meter users — roughly $340,000 a year — would have been spread across all members.

Those against smart meters have cited health and privacy concerns with the devices.

Jonathan Jay, one of three drafters of a petition which ultimately sent the issue to a vote, said he was more excited about the high voter turnout than disappointed about the result.

He called the mass participation a positive sign and a step in the right direction.

“It’s awesome that so many people took part in the election,” said Jay, who is running for a board seat, after learning the outcome. “I think that’s good for the co-op and good for democracy and I think that’s the most important thing for a co-op. And I’m glad we’ve had that conversation.”

Members voted by mail, by phone and online between Jan. 4 and Saturday. The election was conducted by Merriman River Group, a Connecticut-based election management firm.

Counting was observed by a representative of the Oahu branch of the League of Women Voters, KIUC said in the press release.

The cost of the current election has been pegged at $63,000.

The campaign season saw advertising by both sides, as well as a injunction request by member Adam Asquith that aimed to block the co-op from collecting non-smart meter fees, but it was denied in 5th Circuit Court last week.

The previous record voter turnout was 34 percent in the 2003 directors’ election, when 7,595 members voted, KIUC said.

Thirty-two ballots were marked over or under, which means they either voted for neither or both decision-points.

Sixty-two ballots were voided, which could be for a marked out bar-code so it couldn’t be read or the ballot wasn’t returned in the special envelope or the member voted online and then sent in a mail ballot.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Kauai's foolish electric company 1/19/14
.

High Tech Optimism

SUBHEAD: In defense of high-tech tools for living a more sustainable life. And a critique.

By Derek Markham on 17 Janaury 2014 for TreeHugger -
(http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/defense-high-tech-tools-living-more-sustainable-life.html)

[IB Publisher's note: We couldn't hrlp but make a running commentary on the content of this techno-optimistic utopian nonsense. Yes use the existing technology, but it isn't much more than a temporary crutch.]


Image above: Keyboard with seedlings growing out of dirt. Either the keyboard or the plants won't survive. From original article.

High technology is here to stay. [IB: Here to stay? Every one of the devices alluded to here will be curio or drink coaster within the decade. There will be no way to resurrect your old smartphone, ipod or tablet from the boneyard.] 

It's in our pockets, on our desks, and in our cars, and regardless of the initial (and even ongoing) cost to the environment, some of it can and is helping us to make our lives more sustainable. [IB: "Regardless of the cost" is the key phrase here. The expense and rare materials needed to manufacture high-tech telecommunications gear we use by the billions is taking an unsustainable toll on the environment.]

After publishing my piece on low-tech and simple tactics for living more sustainably yesterday, I found it interesting that the one high-technology point I used (small solar chargers) was met with some criticism, both on the post itself and on social media channels (and in several private conversations).

The biggest arguments that several commenters here (you know who you are) love to make against the "greenness" of many tech products tend to come from an LCA (life-cycle analysis) and EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) perspective. [IB: This is correct thinking.] In other words, asking if the product does the most work, with the least amount of energy input and the lowest environmental impact, and then what happens to it at the end of its useful life? (Obviously I'm simplifying and summarizing that quite a bit.)

One of the problems with using the word sustainable is that because it's such a black and white issue for some folks, it can be construed as meaning only that which is fully able to be sustained indefinitely with no external inputs, with no middle ground whatsoever. [IB: This is a straw-man put up to be knocked down. Mr. Markham is saying it is an black and white issue. It is not, and he knows it. He said "It's in our pockets, on our desks, and in our cars, and regardless of the initial (and even ongoing) cost to the environment". These consumer products are everywhere and are viable for only a short time.  They need to be replaced and their market expanded to make a profit. That is what is unsustainable.].

The ]It's a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good, and I'd argue that strictly speaking, 100% sustainability isn't really achievable, just due to entropy and the natural aging process of just about everything on the planet, and that what we can and should aim for is living "more sustainably."

By that I mean taking steps to reduce our environmental footprint, our energy consumption, our water usage (and wastage), our household and office waste streams, as well as steps to replace the amount of single-use items with those that are longer lasting and made with renewable resources, and to replace some of our fossil-fuel based energy use with that coming from renewable sources.[IB: The steps are simple but painful for many. Drastically reduce your consumption of manufactured goods and processed food. Stop moving around so much by car and plane. Get simple tools you can maintain for a lifetime. Grow your own. Make your own. Entertain tour friends.]

And I think that high-tech does play an important part in that, especially when we use those high-tech items we already own to reduce our environmental footprint in our everyday lives. [IB: Agreed. The high-tech tools we already have can be useful. But don't count on them for the long run.]

Here are a few points in defense of using high-tech tools for living a more sustainable life:

Sharing information and community-building: Most of us already own a computer, and use one for both work and pleasure, and by connecting to the internet, we have access to the biggest repository of information on green living, DIY, energy efficiency, etc. in the history of humankind. [For the time being that is true. That will not be true the day after it is no longer "profitable" for Google to support gigantic server farms and Verizon can't afford to maintain giant communication networks. We'll be back in a flash to the Arpanet used by the the research facilities (.edu), the government (.gov), and the military (.mil).]

There are also a great number of communities on the web that not only instruct and inform across a wide variety of sustainable living topics, but also offer support and human networking for those looking to living a greener life. [IB: The Whole Earth Catalog did a pretty good job of "networking" those interested in the "greener life" in the 60's and 70's. Get yourself a copy of the twelve volume set of the 1970's Foxfire Books at Amazon for $215 (http://www.amazon.com/Foxfire-Complete-Collection-Books-Through/dp/B0073XCN2K/ref=sr_1_1). It will explain hide tanning, weaving, hog dressing,  butter churning, animal care, etc.]

Before the internet and personal computers, that knowledge and those personal connections and communities were much more difficult to attain, so the high technology that goes into personal computers can offer a large amount of leverage to us. 

And again, we already own them, and if we're using them to learn how to live more sustainably (even if just for part of the time), it seems at least incrementally greener than using them only to watch movies and laugh at GIFs and share memes. [IB: True. But also very temporary.]

Digital and paperless products and transactions:
Aside from those that print out their emails or insist on always having a hard copy, many of us are already very comfortable with going digital. Using digital files for everything from ebooks to bill paying to music and video downloads can radically reduce the amount of physical materials that must be produced and disposed of in our lives. Emails vs paper mail is one example that most of us use daily, as is reading the news online or getting a digital version of a book or music album instead of a physical version. I'd also argue that with digital photos, we can now capture more images and videos than ever before, without the need for the film, photo paper, and processing equipment necessary to print them, and by using the web to display them, I can do things such as share a photo of my composting toilet design with an interested person in Sweden without needing to produce and send a physical artifact. [IB: There will be no useable record of today's transactions, publications or images. Do you think in thirty years from now will you be able to read Photoshop files on a Windows 7 formatted hard drive? I have a 1/2 digital tape cassette with a $50,000 CADCAM program created by General Electric that can only be loaded onto a Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) VAX 16 bit computer that is less than 30 years old. Will I ever be able to run that program again? DEC was the second largest computer manufacturer in the world at the time. DEC no longer exists. Does the Smithsonian have an operational VAX.]

Smartphones as multipurpose tools:
With the wider adoption of smartphones as our primary communication device, we can now replace multiple gadgets with one multipurpose device. We don't need to own and carry a separate camera, music player, map and compass (or GPS), or watch with us, unless we need specialist tools (a pro photographer would obviously not simply replace their DSLR with a smartphone camera). In addition to the hardware, the ability to run third-party apps on smartphones opens up a number of angles for living more sustainably, from energy consumption software to e-guides and apps to help us make greener choices in our daily lives. [IB: Like for example Angry Birds or Plants vs Zombies?]

Electric bikes and vehicles:
While many of us won't be in the market for buying an electric car until their prices drop significantly, for those that can afford one as an integral part of a home and personal energy strategy (with PV panels perhaps), electric vehicles can make for a cleaner local environment and reduce the demand for fossil fuels for transportation. A lower hanging fruit for more sustainable transportation is the electric bike, especially when an e-bike can make the difference between being able to commuting by electric bike and having to rely solely on a gas-powered car. Taking bigger and less efficient vehicles off of the roads, especially those used to only transport one person at a time, can be a step toward a greener world. [IB: Not doing daily commuting would do a whole lot more for the world.]

Smarter home technology:
While I think that Lloyd made a great point about the need for "the dumb home, done right" before we need the smart home, most of us can't go out and build a new home that embodies the passive house ethic and appropriate technology. We're stuck with what we have, and so in order to make the homes that already exist more sustainable to live in and operate, we can take advantage of high-tech solutions such as smart energy monitors, intelligent thermostats, connected devices that we can control remotely or schedule the operation of, or even such boring tech advances as double-paned windows and efficient home insulation. For those that can afford it, a PV array (either grid-tied, or a standalone system with its own microgrid) can offer long-term sustainability benefits, and as a lower-cost entry point, LED bulbs can make a difference in greening our lives. [IB: This whole idea of saving the world by shaving a little off consumption through economy of use is self delusional.]

Smarter agriculture and gardening:
For the small home gardener, high-tech products may not appear capable of making a huge difference, but even something as seemingly low-tech as drip irrigation tubing coupled with an electronic control system can radically reduce the amount of water needed to grow food. For the bigger operations, the smallholders and small farmers, the use of soil moisture monitors, weather forecasting devices, smart irrigation controls, and even GPS units on tractors (for more precise control of cultivation and fertilizer application), can help make the growing operations more sustainable. [IB: Permaculture, intensive organic gardening, SRI faming, etc, do not need much technology.]

Small scale solar power:
I like to think of small scale solar power as a gateway to renewable energy options, as portable solar chargers and small independent solar arrays can not only provide energy to power those gadgets and devices mentioned above, but can serve as examples of an alternative to our conventional addiction to the fossil-fuel grid and offer advantages in mobility and energy independence on the small scale. If we can use those small solar chargers and battery banks to teach us to live within our "energy means", then we may also learn to be more mindful of our resources in other areas of our lives. [IB: We agree that small scale solar is a benefit. But it will not be a gateway to renewable energy options that rival our current level of power consumption. Solar PV may end up a less painful route to a lower level of energy use by us over-consumers that may last a generation or so.]

I'm not arguing that we ought to go out and buy more high-tech devices in our quest to live more sustainably, or advocating "shopping our way to a greener life", as some critics say we do here at Treehugger (though I do believe that there is a case to be made for investing in some of this technology to save time or energy and to increase efficiency), but rather that we can move incrementally to a less wasteful and more intelligent use of resources. [IB: What in the hell Derek Markham saying here. He sounds self-conflicted and deluded by Green Smoke and Techno-Optimism.]

After all, we're here on the planet already, and we consume natural resources just to stay alive. We can't go back and wipe the slate clean and start over, only this time with 100% renewable and 100% sustainable energy, tools, and materials. [IB: "We can't go back"? Oh yes we can, or we won't get through the coming bottleneck when this industrial contraption we are in rolls over and dies. We are going to go through the rabbit hole with only a memory of our current electronic friends and a need for knowledge base on reality.]

We've got to start where we are, and that means learning to live more sustainably, using less energy, less water, and less resources, and I think that high technology definitely has a role to play in that. [IB: Yes. An ever diminishing role.]

See also:
Ea O Ka Aia: Seven Sustainable Technologies 1/15/14

.

Vote NO on KIUC Corruption

SUBHEAD: Members of KIUC are not going let a corrupt board operate their cooperative like Enron.

By Ray Songtree on 9 January 2014 in Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2014/01/vote-no-on-kiuc-corruption.html)

[IB Publisher's note: This is the text of a planned full page ad in The Garden Island News scheduled for Monday, 13 January 2014. Note that the title and subhead of this article were added by IslandBreath.org and not by Mr. Songtree. It is our opinion that the KIUC management is a corrupt body.]
 

Image above: Mr. Burns, the Electric utility owner, looks out the window at protesting customers. From The Simpsons (http://simpsonswiki.com/wiki/Homer%27s_Odyssey).

“First, there must be a sufficient demonstration that implementation of the smart meter programs will actually produce a net economic benefit to customers. Second, customers must be afforded a meaningful and fair opportunity to opt-out of smart meter installation without being penalized by unwarranted and excessive costs.”    – Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette
KIUC is spending tens of thousands of dollars of your money on expensive post cards, email campaigns and internet and radio spots, to hide the real issues at KIUC and sabotage a legitimate challenge to their decision making process. The check and balance mechanism of the petition option has been replaced by bad faith. For this reason the present ballot is being challenged by a second petition.

In a Coop, is there political manipulation or open communication? A sincere Board would offer a mediation process that was public and video taped. KIUC would rather attack the opinion of at least 10% of the members with underhanded divide and conquer strategies.

In a repeat of the disgraceful manner in which KIUC misrepresented the FERC-FreeFlow petitioners in 2011, and spent your money to hide the issues from you, KIUC once again has not informed Kauai the reasons why a new ballot is before us now. KIUC relies on lack of information to get their way.

The internet has changed the world, and KIUC needs to wake up and change also. The public now has a chance to have as much expertise as anyone, because all of us can see a wide spectrum of research on any topic. The old way of managing the public with dictates is over with. Now the public will manage the leaders or leaders will be exposed as manipulating deceivers.

At KIUC, incredibly, new Board Directors are not told about RISKS at KIUC. Thus, lack of transparency becomes the blind default culture at KIUC where denial and backroom plotting reigns. The game is monopoly at KIUC, not honesty, openness and cooperation. This began with the buy out of Kauai Electric in which attorneys represented their “clients”, not the people of Kauai, and made us all debt slaves.

Consider that a certain KIUC Board Director was elected for ten years using Filipino votes. These votes were won by spending KIUC membership money on a project in Cabugao Philippines as a demonstration of... Filipino solidarity? Why was this particular town picked?

We have right to know. General membership funds were spent to win over one racial block vote for someone who the other Board Directors made the Chairman. So all were complicit in this political manipulation for ten years. Naming names isn't appropriate. The whole administration failed us.

After I made this observation public on KauaiTruth.com two years ago, KIUC had The Garden Island News and KIUC staff erase any history on the web, of a sister coop in Cabugao. “Hide it.” Was something dishonest going on that is now being covered up? All expenses at KIUC should be open to scrutiny, otherwise we don't have a Coop, we have the mafia.

Has KIUC been transparent? What are the terms of the Federal contract with “Smart” Grid? If KIUC is a member owned Coop, why are the terms kept hidden from us? How many of Board has even seen the terms?

With this institutionalized dishonest corporate culture at KIUC, lets look at the controversy over the opt-out fees.

If “Smart” Meters have saved money, then 30,000 accounts should have received a monthly discount, and those who opted-out of a “Smart” Meter would be left with a higher monthly bill. Simple. But that never happened because the infrastructure and data analysts for “Smart” meters, cost more than the traditional system. No savings. No lower bills.

KIUC “education” was just campaign promises handed to them by a federal program that looked attractive because it too made promises... that were false. Until KIUC realizes this, KIUC is just repeating lies.

There will be no savings, because the cost of “Smart” Grid is more expensive than what we have been told. The truth has been hidden. And so, your bill will just increase while KIUC keeps telling you, “We are saving money.”

The globally organized plan is that soon we will be forced to buy “Smart” appliances, and KIUC will manage them remotely with their wireless “Smart Meters”, and tell you, “This is not invasive! This is for you to save money!” But your bill will increase.

“But this is efficient!” For who is it efficient and at what cost? “Efficiency” now means top/down control over others.

Privacy - KIUC says that “Smart” Meters are not a breach of privacy. Of course they are a breach of privacy because they collect personal data. Now we are no longer secure in our own homes. (Fourth Amendment) KIUC doesn't even know what the abilities of Smart Meters are. How could they, when KIUC doesn't own the software!

Safety - KIUC has repeated the fallacy that “Smart” meters are safe.

Of course they are not safe, because the FCC standards are based on whether a device (or even a cancer causing cell phone tower) heats your body (Specific Absorption Rate – SAR) not on whether a new technology causes headaches, insomnia, dizziness, makes your bones brittle, effects your hormone levels, and will eventually cause disease.

Over 1800 peer reviewed studies at Bioinitiative.org prove that extremely weak wireless frequencies will, over time, cause genetic disease and cancer. Not sometimes, but guaranteed. The wireless industry, such as AT&T, hides dangers from us. Facts are also hidden by Science Institutes funded by industry. The internet is now where your doctor goes for medical research. You can also.

Of course wireless is dangerous if Apple Inc. quietly warns, in the fine print, to keep your IPhone 5/8 inch from your ear, so that Apple won't be liable when you get a tumor.

Then of course, wireless devices like “Smart” Meters, which are 100 to 800 times stronger than your cell phone, are dangerous. (Stopsmartmeters.org/ 2011/04/20/ daniel- hirsch-on-ccsts-fuzzy-math/)
Of course, if you are waking up now between 3 AM and 5 AM, like many others on Kauai, with your head ringing from “Smart” Meters, they are dangerous!

Or course, if your neighbors' “Smart” Meter is using your house wiring like a giant antenna, surrounding you with new

frequencies that interfere with your cell metabolism, they are dangerous!

But since KIUC will not look at this research or connect these dots, the dots don't exist, right? Wrong. Disease is increasing. Something is wrong.

The FCC has a revolving door between industry and its own leadership positions. The FCC, like the USDA, is now an industry front. Your mobile phone isn't safe; your food is no longer safe. Anyone who does the research about rising incidence of autism and Alzheimer’s, knows something new in the last three decades is killing us.

We saw asbestos trumpeted as the new miracle, we saw lead in gas, and we were told second hand smoke was safe, and now KIUC is saying dangerous “Smart” Meters are not dangerous. To say there are no risks for an untested brand new technology is perfectly irresponsible. By never mentioning risks, KIUC is being criminally negligent.

So far 10% of members did their own research and opted out. You will opt-out too when you realize that the health risks with “Smart” Meters are so substantial that lawsuits will surely be the result.
Because data is being collected without our “right to know” who is using the data, privacy lawsuits are coming also.

If you want to avoid paying for KIUC's legal defense, as these lawsuits roll out worldwide, you should opt-out. Pesticides will be outlawed. Dangerous wireless devices will be banned. It doesn't matter how much money industry or utilities spend to hide disease, they can't hide it.

If you keep a “Smart” Meter on your home, like a deer in the headlights paralyzed, KIUC will bill you for their legal fees!

If you opt out of a “Smart” meter, you will sleep better and not have to pay for these coming lawsuits. You will be a plaintiff on the right side of history.

Be smart, opt-out. And now that you have opted out, do you think you should pay a levy on the services you have already been paying, for over ten years?

KIUC has tried to split the membership into unselfish and selfish members. Imagine a Board playing divide and conquer with its own membership, when the issue was how they make decisions! Rather than listen, they smear. This shows how arrogant and anti-democratic KIUC has become.

Kauai Transparency Initiative suggests voting NO on the present ballot if you are tired of KIUC corruption. Vote NO if you think both sides of an issue should always be presented on a ballot. And write to me to get a copy of new protest petition. KauaiTruth@gmail.com

Until KIUC openly presents the down-side risks of every issue, we cannot trust anything they say.

Until then, we are being played like fish. Don't take the bait. Vote No More BS and let's mandate a new chapter of transparency and respect on Kauai.

To see original copy of ad click here (http://www.islandbreath.org/2014Year/01/140110tgiad.pdf).

• Kauai Transparency Initiative International believes that human nature is loving. “Right to know” leads to informed choice which leads to local stewardship. When government and industry are honest and open with citizens and consumers, people will naturally choose health for themselves and future generations. A mother protects her child. KTII exists to help causes that work for transparency and disclosure. The goal is an informed loving society on Kauai and afar.



"Unfair Wording" Petition to KIUC

SUBHEAD: Partial text of a proposed full page 2nd ad including a  petition to nullify the KIUC Board rewording of Smart Meter charge ballot wording.

By Ray Songtree on 10 January 2014 in Island Breath -

This Petition calls for a nullification of Jan 25 Opt-Out Fee Ballot as the wording was not representative of the Petitioners' position.  This Petition summary above outlines the types of corruption that enabled the unfair ballot and offers solutions.

The present ballot was worded by KIUC to specifically hide from the Kauai public, mountains of research that is known worldwide about wireless dangers and privacy invasion.  The online documentary "Take Back Your Power" (TakeBackYourPower.Net) needs to be discussed.

In a controversy, the hiding of controversy is denial and runs counter to the mass awakening we need to create a healthy future.
  1. We members of Kauai Island Utility Cooperative challenge the unanimous Board decision of Dec 17, 2013 which approved wording for Opt-Out Fee Ballot (that will end collecting of those votes on Jan 25th)... The wording of Opt-Out Fee Ballot was not approved by Opt-Out Fee Petition Committee because the wording does not explain the reasoning behind the petitioners' effort. Therefore the ballot was not fair and this present petition calls for nullification of that ballot and apology from KIUC for unfair presentation of issue. 

  2. We call for an open debate on Smart meter cost effectiveness, privacy invasion, and health risks... that is, another ballot with both sides of issues presented.  We suggest that before another ballot about opt-out fees comes out, that KIUC show the film "Take Back Your Power" in Waimea, Koloa, Lihue, Kapaa, Kilauea and Hanalei to be followed by debates/discussions between petitioners and Board Directors.  (Board Directors have had this DVD for six weeks, and public can see it online for $2.99 at www.TakeBackYourPower.net)

  3. We challenge the assumption in Board Policy 32, E. 3) that says KIUC Board can override any ballot disagreement at it's “sole discretion”... Every petition would be due to a disagreement, and one side of disagreement cannot have “sole discretion” to override the other.  A mediation protocol that is videotaped for TV public review would allow for more membership involvement.  Only in the case when an openly aired discussion could not solve a dispute would a ballot be needed. 

  4. We challenge the assumption in Board Policy 32, E. 4) that states: "The Ballot for the approval of any Challenged Action shall contain an objective summary of the substance of the Challenged Action..."   This wording assumes that KIUC management and Board, with its claimed "sole discretion", can make an objective summary of an action against them.  This is illogical.  An objective summary is not possible when the challenge is about sound judgement. Therefore both sides should be able to present their argument, for or against a position, in the wording of any ballot.  Wording should be fairl and educational, not designed to smear.
  5. We call for overhaul of Policy 32 to include a mediation procedure prior to need for an expensive ballot.  This reworking of policy 32 should be publicly recorded and input from membership actively encouraged.  Lawyers paid to consolidate power and make membership an adversary of management should not be involved.

  6. We challenge KIUC making their position in present ballot the "yes" choice.  Psychologically this plays to peoples loyalties and hopes.  The choices should be A or B, not yes or no.  "A" needs to be the challengers' position as this is their ballot.  The underdog should be favored, not sidelined. We want diverse input, not monopoly.

  7. We call for end of membership paid electioneering by KIUC. Policy 32 should state that there is ban on electioneering.  There should be no electioneering with radio, email, internet,  newspaper or any other media that requires money or KIUC staff.  Paid Board Directors are also dis-allowed to campaign.   Rather, we suggest six public debates as  per #2 above, so that public can readily get familiar with the issues. The audio, video and transcript of these fair educational events where informed choice replaces propaganda, should be downloadable from KIUC website and sent to all media outlets and blogs on Kauai.  Youtube for permanent documentation would be pono.  Also, KIUC should not endorse any new candidate for Board Director position as this is sets up a publicity bias which works against new voices.

  8. We call for ban on KIUC employees representing KIUC Board Policies. Our elected representatives should be the only KIUC spokespersons at any meeting or public presentation or press release.  We don't want to see the CEO or any other managers standing in for our elected officials.  Our relationship is with our elected officials, not hired hands. Our Board Directors are accountable to us and need to be up front, at attention.  That is their job.

  9. We call for fairness and respect in form of reimbursement to members who win in a dispute.  When Board loses a dispute with members, KIUC should re-imburse petitioners or court challengers for all their expenses, as these members have correctly used the check and balance system of participatory democracy to insure KIUC is a working and robust Cooperative, as per the 2nd Principle of a Coop from KIUC website. We call for retroactive reimbursement, going back to the first petition in 2011 and also the injunction by Adam Asquith.  Those Petitioners and plaintiff won those argument by law, despite being sabotaged by ballot wording and an expensively leveraged campaign against them, and in Asquith's case, KIUC spending money on an expensive attorney who said before the federal judge that he welcomed more litigation, as he would make more money.  KIUC should encourage open sincere discussion so that these expenses and disputes are rarely needed in future.

  10. We call for a check and balance system of participatory decision making that insures open and transparent discussion of issues.  To further this goal, we call for videotape broadcast of all KIUC Board meetings, just like County Council does, and online polls to gather membership opinion and trends. Polling cannot be open to KIUC employees or their families.  Due to past manipulations, these polls should be managed by a third party. This will be far less costly than ballots.

  11. We call for an end of all confidentiality agreements at KIUC except in the case of privacy of employees and members, and closed bids for competing contractors.  On an island with no competing utilities, in a utility that is member owned, confidentiality agreements only protect corruption.  We call for an end to secrecy and an end to the corporate culture of fear at KIUC.

  12. We call for a review of wage scales and perks at KIUC.  An open community discussion about salaries at KIUC, that compares the salaries of Mayor, Police Chief, and Fire Chief with KIUC positions is needed.  KIUC employees should work for the membership, not to get ahead of everyone else on island with their own bloated wages.  This is Kauai.

  13. We call for an end to all charity donations by KIUC.  KIUC is a utility, not a political machine that derives loyalty through buying favor.   It is not the purpose of a utility to choose for the public who does and does not get charity support. Our monthly power bill should be as low as possible, and not inflated by administrative whims and designs. 

  14. We call for an online poll to decide whether Kauai Currents magazine should continue at all.  As of now Kauai Currents is just a promotional tool for loyalty to KIUC leadership and staff.  Rather, updates can easily be included in mailed monthly bill, instead of a costly glossy PR magazine. We call for an end of any desire to socially engineer the people of Kauai. Instead we call for honest information and opportunity for informed choice.

  15. We call for Board Directors to stop spending $9,000/year each in travel costs, and organize conference video technology instead.  With that saved money, their stipend can be increased as we expect Directors to interact more with public in a new era of community involvement.
To see original copy of petition click here (http://www.islandbreath.org/2014Year/01/140110tgiad2.pdf).

.

Smart Meters and your money

SOURCE: Jonathan Jay (jjkauai@gmail.com)
SUBHEAD: If this payment request is allowed, it will mark the end of cooperation between members and KIUC.

By Douglas Whitmore on 8 January 2014 in the Garden Island -
(http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/guest/kiuc-smart-meters-and-your-money/article_dccec2ec-78b0-11e3-a490-001a4bcf887a.html)


Image above: Mashup by Juan Wilson of Enron/KIUC logo, President David Bissell and a scene from stage play of "Enron" by Lucy Prebble. From (http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2012/04/kiuc-power-play-meeting.html).

Well folks, they’re at it again. KIUC is charging some co-op members additional money for services whose costs have always been shared equally by the membership — in this case meter reading. What is behind the KIUC extra charges?

The $11 million smart meter project began following a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy which paid for one-half of the costs. In privacy litigation, the KIUC lawyer, presumably under oath, told a federal judge that this was a “test installation” (see U.S. District Court, Civil No. 12-00134HG-rlp).

What? We’re participating in a test without even knowing it? Is this similar to the pesticide companies secretly testing their poisonous formulas on Westside fields? KIUC has employed the same type of sneaky silence, failing to disclose that this demonstration project is collecting data including (according to the contract) control of your utilities and the length of time you use the Internet. The overall intent of this grant is to determine the feasibility of smart meters, not to ensure implementation and long-term use.

Were you told that the smart meter that was installed on your home or business was part of a test? Is this what you signed up for? Oh, you didn’t sign up?  Well, so it goes — welcome to  “KIUC World,” where your informed consent doesn’t matter and the KIUC master plan takes precedent.

About 3,000 co-op members or approximately 10 percent of the cooperative have deferred installation of smart meters and retained their old meters due to health or privacy concerns. This group contributed equally to purchase of smart meters but don’t have them on their house or business, and have not received credits for their contribution. Moreover, the opt-out group continues to pay to maintain the smart meter program, supporting the computers, technicians, consultants, data analyzers and upkeep of the network. This 10 percent group derives no benefit from these charges during this test period or in the future but continues to participate because they are cooperative members.

Now KIUC has selected out these paying co-op members to punish them because they rejected the use of smart meters. These co-op members are forced to pay a tariff of $10.27 per month in order to maintain their original meters. KIUC claims that this is the cost of having the meterman come to their houses to read the meter. This expense is many times more than the cost for meter readers a year or so ago and is exorbitant compared to the national average for reading meters of 50 cents a month.

KIUC needs money because of the competition from solar, and if this cost recovery approach can be used with smart meters, shouldn’t it work in other areas? Before long KIUC may designate other expenses that allow special assessment to other households and/or businesses. This is contrary to the very tenets of our rural electrical cooperative and directly conflicts with the spirit of aloha found on Kauai. If this payment request is allowed, it will mark the end of cooperation between members and the end of our utility cooperative as we know it today.

The request by KIUC to impose extra fees on selected members of the cooperative who opted-out of the smart meter program is not fair, violates laws of equality, disregards members’ rights to privacy and health in the home, is punitive and represents the first attempt to break up the cooperative. I believe that the KIUC members should overwhelmingly overturn the request for special fees submitted by KIUC to the PUC. Just vote no!

• Douglas Wilmore, M.D., is a Kilauea resident. He is an a Emeritus Professor of the Harvard Medical and has served on numerous committees for hospitals, universities and the federal government dealing with individual safety and privacy.


.

KIUC Election Fraud

SUBHEAD: The upcoming KIUC member vote on extra fees for all customers without smart meters is being handled in an unethical manner.

By Jonathan Jay on 31 December 2013 in Island Breath -  
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2014/01/kiuc-election-fraud.html)

http://www.islandbreath.org/2014Year/01/140101votenobig.jpg
Image above: PR graphic KIUC is using in "fair" election it is conducting with a modification by Juan Wilson. Click to embiggen. Feel free to utilize.

It is totally unfair, and highly unethical for KIUC management to use member money to try and persuade members how to vote when there is an issue before the membership.

This is a clear violation of basic clean campaign practices, and yet another example of unethical mismanagement of member moneys by KIUC management.

They seem to be unable to stop themselves, so it must be up to the members to put the brakes on them by voting "NO!"

Just look at the advertising and PR material for this "democratic" election. It is like the Hawaii State Office of Elections telling you who to vote for as governor. How is this in any way fair?


By James Trujillo on 1 January 2014 in Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2014/01/kiuc-election-fraud.html)


Image above: This is the PR graphic that KIUC used on their mailer to members notifying them of upcoming vote on special fee for not having Smart Meter. From Jonathan Jay.

Is there a lawyer in the house?  This election should bee cancelled! I would love to hear some ideas about challenging the validity of this election. Is there some ethics committee related to utility coops?
What democratic principle says this is how we roll (all over you!)? I'm sure you're just as pissed as I am. Happy new year!

[IB Publisher's note: The following is a letter written to Jimmy Trujillo that was sent to  KIUC board members Pat Gegen (psgegen@hotmail.com), Jan TenBruggencate (jan@islandstrategy.com), Carol Bain (bain@hawaii.edu).]


Aloha Friends,

Hau'oli makahiki hou!  I write this to you as a concerned member of our coop and have recently learned of an outcome driven campaign to influence the results of the up coming special election. all three of you have earned my respect as intelligent, community minded individuals who have a well developed sense of ethics and principles. I have voted and advocated for your campaigns in the past and will more than likely support them in the future.

If you could please help me understand the decision by the leadership and management of KIUC to commence a blatant attempt to influence the outcome of the special election. who decided that this was an appropriate use of membership resources? What body, committee or manager approved this proposal to purchase media time or space to influence member's choice on the ballot? How much was budgeted for this 'voter education' campaign and was this part of the $ 67,000 price tag for the special election?

I, like many other coop members, will want some answers to the myriad of questions that this decision has generated. I hope that your involvement, as board members who have membership interest at heart, will provide us with a fair chance to address these questions and concerns. Please let me know who the appropriate person is to formally register my complaint and how is the best way to contact them.

Mahalo for your consideration of these matters and I look forward to your response. Please feel free to forward this to the appropriate person(s) as I hope this discussion will broaden and a better understanding of the issues can develop.

Again, best wishes for a happy new year and mahalo for representing coop members interests on the KIUC board.
Bee well... JT




KIUC Bar­gained in Bad Faith

SUBHEAD: Foul Ball! The board of KIUC unilaterally rewrites election ballot and advocates voting YES.

By Jonathan Jay on 31 December 2013 in Island Breath -  
(http://p2pkauai.org/crying-foul/#more-847)

http://p2pkauai.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/NO-New-Fees.jpg
Image above: Alternative promo image for upcoming election by Jonathan Jay. Click to embiggen.

The bal­lot lan­guage we pre­fer (addi­tions under­lined in bold):


What orig­i­nally appeared to be a cor­dial and pro­duc­tive meet­ing between KIUC and Peti­tion­ers about the bal­lot lan­guage for the upcom­ing spe­cial vote, turns out to have been a farce.  “KIUC was nego­ti­at­ing in bad faith.” said Jonathan Jay one of the Peti­tion­ers. “Since our agree­ment, they have com­pletely re-written the bal­lot ‘at their sole dis­cre­tion. One must won­der, what was the point of us meet­ing with them if they were just going to do what they wanted to anyway?”

That’s not what democ­racy looks like.


 When we sat down, with KIUC offi­cials in a pri­vate meet­ing two weeks ago, we worked out a bal­lot that was:
1) sim­ple,
2) easy to under­stand,
3) nar­rowly focused

“On Octo­ber 1st, the board of direc­tors voted to charge ser­vice fees to those cus­tomers who chose not to use KIUC’s “smart meter”
As a mem­ber of KIUC, do you approve of the board action described above?”

The only thing that needed to be done to com­plete the bal­lot lan­guage was to include the exact amounts of the new ser­vice fees so vot­ers could see them when they voted, specifically:
a monthly $10.27 fee, a setup fee of $50.64 for res­i­den­tial, and $138.80 for busi­ness accounts.
The bal­lot lan­guage we pre­fer (addi­tions under­lined in bold):


Seems sim­ple enough.  After all, vot­ers can vote YES or NO based on see­ing what the fees are.


At the Spe­cial Pub­lic Meet­ing on Dec. 9th, many peo­ple seemed to agree. KIUC Man­age­ment heard plenty tes­ti­mony from folks on both sides of the issue, call­ing for a bal­lot that was sim­ple, and included the new fees.

How­ever, both meet­ings appear to have been a cha­rade. Despite their ear­lier agree­ments, and despite what peo­ple said at the pub­lic meet­ing, KIUC has gone their own way, and writ­ten new bal­lot lan­guage them­selves. Instead of a bal­lot that is free from biased infor­ma­tion that cleanly presents ‘just the facts’ and leaves it up to the voter to decide, KIUC has moved back­wards toward lan­guage already rejected in our first meet­ing.

KIUC went their own way and uni­lat­er­ally re-wrote the bal­lot to be:
1) less sim­ple
2) harder to under­stand
3) include extra & hypo­thet­i­cal infor­ma­tion
4) exclude the larger fees; $50.64 res­i­den­tial & $138.80 business
All in an effort to min­i­mize the impact of their new fees, and bias the voter to their desired out­come

Observe:

“The KIUC Board of Direc­tors voted to charge fees to those who choose not to use the stan­dard smart meter. The fees, includ­ing a $10.27 monthly charge, were approved by the Hawaii Pub­lic Util­i­ties Com­mis­sion and cover the addi­tional costs of installing and read­ing older meters.
This bal­lot allows mem­bers to approve or reject the board action.
A YES vote sup­ports the board deci­sion. It means that only those who choose not to have a smart meter will pay the addi­tional charges.
A NO vote over­turns the board deci­sion. It could result in all mem­bers pay­ing the costs of installing and read­ing the old meters.”

Sadly, KIUC is demon­strat­ing they know noth­ing of what a fair elec­tion looks like. Hewa! Kapakahi! Cor­rupt! & Crooked!

.