Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Smart Meters Emf topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges Shakopee to pursue smart‑meter opt‑out and cites EMF health concerns; council notes limited authority
Summary
A Shakopee resident urged the city on Oct. 7 to create a no‑cost opt‑out for smart meters and raised health and environmental concerns about electromagnetic fields, while councilors noted the city council does not govern the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
At the Oct. 7 council meeting, a resident identified as Andrea used public comment time to urge the city to pursue an opt‑out policy for smart meters and to investigate health and environmental effects she attributed to electromagnetic fields (EMF).
Andrea described a history of local appeals to the Shakopee Public Utilities (SPU) committee and told council members she had provided “thousands of studies” about EMF harms. She said Southern Valley Alliance-like products are being rolled out without updated federal exposure limits and referenced a Feb. 2019 U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decision in Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, saying the court found the Federal Communications Commission had not adequately addressed some scientific comments about health effects.
Andrea also asserted that smart meters produce frequent, high‑intensity radio‑frequency bursts and said some utilities (she named Xcel Energy and Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative) offer complete opt‑out programs while Shakopee Public Utilities does not. She said the smart‑meter manufacturer had warned in an SEC filing about potential adverse publicity or liability related to radio‑frequency exposure claims. Andrea requested that the council ask the utility for a no‑cost waiver so residents who wish to keep analog meters can do so without financial penalty.
Council members clarified the scope of council authority. A council member explained there is a distinction between the city council and the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission and that state-level public utilities commissions oversee municipal utilities. Council members encouraged Andrea to use the SPU commission process and to pursue appeals with the state public utilities commission if needed. Andrea said she had contacted the state commission and found bureaucratic barriers. Council members thanked her for raising the issue and noted that the council lacks direct control over SPU policies.
No city action or vote was taken on the smart‑meter issue at the meeting; the remarks were recorded as public comment.
