Elk Grove, CA Resident Files Lawsuit Against SMUD

In January, Sacramento Smart Meter Awareness member Mark Graham filed a lawsuit against SMUD in Sacramento County Superior Court, for elimination of opt out charges and a credit for the charges already paid.

A number of Sacramento residents spoke at the Feb. 4th SMUD meeting, where the lawsuit was presented to the directors. (video above) They have now heard an earful about the problems related to smart meters- maybe one of these days they will change their policy and begin to protect public health and safety. Mark Graham’s lawsuit is about the validity of the smart meter opt out charges, not directly about wireless radiation and health impacts, but one outcome of the lawsuit could be greater attention and awareness of the health impacts of wireless radiation.

There has been coverage of Mr. Graham’s lawsuit and the smart meter issue generally, in both the Sacramento Bee and the Sacramento News and Review. More information can be found on the Sacramento Smart Meter Awareness lawsuit web page.

One of the speakers in support of the lawsuit, Marlene de Pinto, summed up her public statement by saying:

“I think there are a lot of hurt people, and I just wanted to give them a voice”

Thanks to everyone who continue to raise their voice against the smart grid program- silence is death when faced with the widespread misinformation being disseminated by utilities.

To view the documents filed in the case you can create a free account at the Sac County Superior Court’s public case access page.

https://services.saccourt.ca.gov/PublicCaseAccess/

This entry was posted in California, Citizen rebellion, Democracy, Electro-Hyper-Sensitivity, health effects, legal issues, neighborhood organizing, PG&E, radio-frequency radiation, Sacramento, Safety, Smart Grid. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Elk Grove, CA Resident Files Lawsuit Against SMUD

  1. Mark Graham says:

    March 26, 2016

    Good job. Thanks for writing this. The Sacramento Bee article accurately presented the issue from my point of view.

    Next up is that I will meet with the SMUD attorney to “meet and confer” as required by the California Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41 before SMUD files its demurrer.

    http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CCP&division=&title=6.&part=2.&chapter=3.&article=1.

    Here is a sneak preview. SMUD’s attorney wrote, in part: “2. Under Cal. Gov. Code § 818.2, SMUD has statutory immunity from damages arising from the adoption of enactments, such as the resolutions underlying the smart meter program.”

    However the Government Code’s definition of “enactment” does not include resolutions passed by the board of directors. The Government Code, section 810.6 says: “‘Enactment’ means a constitutional provision, statute, charter provision, ordinance or regulation.”

    http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&division=3.6.&title=1.&part=1.&chapter=&article=

    Occasionally SMUD passes ordinances, such as Ordinance 15-1 passed last year to change the way they handle the hearing prior to a rate increase. However all of the policy documents I challenged in my lawsuit are resolutions: Res 07-08-10 and Attachment E, Res 12-03-09 and its attachment, and Res 13-03-08.

    Thanks again for all your support. To all those who are opposing smart meters, keep up the great work.

    Mark

Comments are closed.