MA Legislation

Donate!

BILLS STILL BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE 2020

“I am ______ (say name) calling to ask that ______ (say name) STOP H. 383, which promotes 5G. Please STOP this terrible bill.

Please also support S. 1988, to allow residents a no-fee non-transmitting utility meter.

Finally, I recommend looking at the Massachusetts legislation online at Last Tree Laws and meeting with co-chair Kirstin Beatty to discuss feedback and 2021 bill sponsorships. I would be glad to help set up a joint remote meeting.”

Please contact state leadership, your own legislator, and the House Ways and Means Committee:

Note: House emails end mahouse.gov and Senate emails end masenate.gov

“I am ______ (say name) calling to ask that ______ (say name) support an amendment to S. 129, available online at LastTreeLaws.com under MA legislation, for a sincere investigation of wireless technology by minimizing political influence.

Please also pass S. 1988, to allow residents a no-fee non-transmitting utility meter.

Finally, I recommend looking at the Massachusetts legislation online at Last Tree Laws and meeting with co-chair Kirstin Beatty to discuss feedback and 2021 bill sponsorships. I would be glad to help set up a joint remote meeting.”

Note: The last italicized section is only for your own legislators.

Please contact state leadership, your own legislator, and the Senate Ways and Means Committee:

Note: House emails end mahouse.gov and Senate emails end masenate.gov

Calling is better, especially at this late date. If you send an email, please follow up with a phone call. Emails get lost!

Here is a model email & additional resources.

AMENDMENT & DETAILS ON BILLS ABOVE:

The amendment below is to insure independence and a wide range of stakeholders in an investigation of wireless and other electromagnetic radiation. Excepting the American Environmental Academy of Medicine and the American Academy of Pediatrics, none of the organizations has made a public statement on this issue. Notes:

    • This bill provides greater independence from politics than the New Hampshire bill would be a poor choice and S. 129 and is better than H. 383 which promotes 5G.

For amendment of H. 383 OR S. 129 – a full replacement text
Or as a new bill in 2021

Prepared by Kirstin Beatty (Beatty.fyi, co-chair of Last Tree Laws)

 

A Wireless or Electromagnetic Investigation

Resolved, Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, there shall be a special commission to research the impact of electromagnetic (EMR) and radiofrequency (RFR) radiation on consumer protection, public health, and and the environment, and determine, if detrimental, how to allay health and financial repercussions, the former having primacy.

The commission shall be composed of the following 21 members, as follows:

(a) The Attorney General or designee;
(b) A nominee of the Massachusetts Teachers Association;
(c) One union member nominated by the Massachusetts AFL-CIO;
(d) One telecommunications worker representative nominated by the Communications Workers of America;
(e) One doctor nominated by the American Environmental Academy of Medicine;
(f) One scientist nominated by the Silent Spring Institute;
(g) One doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Medical Society, ideally with expertise in either cancer, neuroscience, or infertility;
(h) One scientist nominated by Community Action Works;
(i) One pediatric doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics;
(j) One representative or lawyer nominated by the Massachusetts Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action;
(k) 2 representatives nominated by the Massachusetts American Civil Liberties Union;
(l) A representative of the State House selected by the Speaker of the House;
(m) A senator of the State Senate selected by the President of the Senate;
(n) A representative of small business appointed by the governor;

(o) 3 non-voting members appointed by governor:
-Telecommunications representative;
-Medical system representative;
-Engineer in wireless networks;

(p) 4 non-voting commissioners, directors, or their designees for the following departments:
Public Health;
-Telecommunications and Cable;
-Technical Assistance and Technology Office;
-Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation.

Chairmanship, legislative and policy decisions for reports to the Commonwealth shall be decided by vote of all members with voting status. Commission members shall elect a chair by majority vote, who may be replaced at any time upon majority vote.

No voting member or spouse of voting member of the commission shall have a history of or current telecommunication, energy, IT, or utility industry clients or job dependency; nor shall any voting member have current telecommunications, energy, IT, or utility direct financial investments exceeding the sum of $5,000. No voting member or spouse of a voting member of the commission shall receive funding or a job from telecommunication, energy, IT, or utilities in the two years following the commission’s final report. All commission members must file a statement of any relevant conflicts of interest as specified above, including in relation to immediate family members, i.e. parents, children, siblings, uncles, aunts, with the Secretary of State during the commission period and continuing through each year until two years after the commission ends. These statements must be made public by the Secretary of State.

The meetings and communications shall be subject to the Massachusetts open meeting laws so as to be transparent. The commission shall be assisted by and have access to the resources available to the legislature and the executive branch in its investigations. The commission shall file a report of its recommendations and proposed legislation or regulatory changes, if any, with the clerks of the House and Senate and with the chairs of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure not later than December 31st 2022, and may file a series of reports.

S. 129 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications

Please see criticism and appointee problems below. Here is a short article critiquing the bill.

      • Summary: Establishes a commission to investigate wireless but as written has significant risks of politicization.
      • Status: Click bill no. above and scroll down – presently in Senate Ways and Means
      • Favorable report by Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure [Members: Paul Feeney, Bill Welch, Tackey Chan, Jay Livingstone, Diana DiZiglio, Joseph O. Boncore, Ryan Fattman, Jonathan D. Zlotnick, Adrian C. Madaro, William J. Driscoll, Jr., Mindy Domb, Tami Goveia, David H.A. Lebouef, Jack Patrick Lewis, Steven S. Howitt, Joseph D. McKenna]
      • Criticism:
        • Most appointment descriptions are ideal for filling with industry representatives or dependents;
        • Lacks specific language to prevent appointment of compromised individuals – no limit on industry clients, no limits on voting by industry reps or dependents, no limits on financial interests, no limits on career dependence – nothing;
        • Industry has influence not just from the vote of an industry rep, but from people whose jobs depend on industry;
        • Why give industry, a non-person, a vote? Industry, a non-person, has a seat but the people who have been harmed lack a seat. The point is protect the people and even the economy for the people, not industry;
        • Lacks full breadth of representation. Here is a relevant copy of  a May 2, 2020, request for a changes by Kirstin Beatty naming some groups that could be included – but these would still be too few to be a counterweight.
      • More Appointee Problems:  The governor has in the past appointed industry insiders and lobbyists to fill his cabinet and commissions. Highlighted in red below are individuals who could easily favor or be chosen to represent industry rather than the people:
      • Dept. Commissioners, Director, or designees:
        1. Public Health
        2. Telecommunications and Cable
        3. Technical Assistance and Technology Office (Dir.)
        4. Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation (Dir.)
      • Other appointees:
        1. Telecommunications Representative – beholden to industry
        2. Engineer in wireless networks – career dependent upon industry
        3. Attorney in environmental law – easily filled by MA-based industry lawyer in environmental law who represents the industry and is involved in “environmental” nonprofit focused on corporations
        4. Academic who researches medical technology (?) and public health – career likely dependent on grants from Big Pharma for which wireless has become important as a new and large source of profits
        5. Scientist in environmental medicine knowledgeable of electromagnetic and radiofrequency radiation and research methods easily filled by industry “scientist” such as Peter Valberg
        6. Massachusetts Medical Society member with background in environmental medicine
        7. Pediatrician knowledgeable of electromagnetic radiation in children – May be a token member, easily overruled

H.383  An Act relative to a 5G technology task force

This bill must be stopped or amended. Here is a short article critiquing the bill.

    • Summary: This is an industry-led commission to study and propose “fair” 5G laws for 5G development. See testimony:  Critique of 5G Technology Task Force H 383.
    • Sponsors: Rep. Bradley Jones, B. Hill, E. Poirer, Rep. S. Gifford, etc.
    • Favorable Report by: Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies.

S. 1988 An Act Relative to Utilities, Smart Meters, & Ratepayers Rights

All legislators need to be educated and persuaded to support this bill! Here is are recent, relevant docket submissions on smart meters from state Senator Moore,  several organizations & professionals,   Massachusetts Association for the Chemically Injured, and a very detailed account by advocate Patricia Burke. There is also a summary article here. This has been followed by a reply comment by the Attorney General that appears to be initiating discovery into the complaints.

    • Summary: Allows opt out of wireless meters and does so without a fee.
    • Sponsors: Sen.s Michael Moore, D. DiZoglio, Rep. K. Hogan, Sen. D. Tran, Rep. C. Gonzalez, etc.
    • Favorable Report By: Favorable report given by the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy (Chairs Sen. Barrett, Rep. Golden, Vice-Chairs Sen. Pacheco, Rep. Dykema). See link (click bill no.) for progress and new committee).

BILLS SENT TO STUDY (NO LONGER ACTIVE)

WIRELESS LEGISLATION 2015 – 2016

Bill SD. 2212 An Act relative to studying radiation health and safety risks for protective measures

    • This investigative commission was empowered to enact bans, etc.
    • This was not resubmitted.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

Bill SD.2256 An Act requiring physician training on non-ionizing radiation and electrohypersensitivity

    • Short bill requiring physician training in electromagnetic sensitivity and other harms of electromagnetic radiation.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

WIRELESS LEGISLATION  2015 – 2017

H. 2868 (2015) S.1864 (2017) An Act relative to utilities, smart meters, and ratepayers’ rights (Sen. Michael Moore) – Similar to 2019 -2020 bill of same name. Critique was made by Director Kirstin Beatty that bill did not apply to town-owned utilities, and changes appear to have been made. This bill was originally submitted on behalf of concerned Worcester residents and Halt Smart Meters Massachusetts, which no longer has a website.

S. 1222 (2015) S.1268  (2017) Resolve creating a special commission to examine the health impacts of electromagnetic field (Constituent Cece Doucette 2015, Sponsor Sen. Karen Spilka 2017) Initially this bill did not prevent industry influence, and some changes were made in following sessions.

Previous Wireless Legislation 2017 – 2018

S.2080  An Act increasing medical awareness and insurance coverage of non-ionizing radiation injury and reliance upon credible independent medical research (Constituent Kirstin Beatty) ~ Detailed bill for quality control for electromagnetic exposures in hospitals; that credible research be defined; and medical insurance coverage be included for electromagnetic harm.

S.2079 An Act reducing non-ionizing radiation exposure in schools (Constituent Kirstin Beatty) ~ Idealistic bill demanded removal of school wireless and addition of criminal penalties, yet was passed forward from Education committee.

H. 2030 An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education (Rep. Carolyn Dykema)~ Similar to 2019-2020 bill of same name and to a Maryland bill, decent in concept except for an important error - allowed continued wireless installation - and as the Massachusetts education board was not then particularly free of industry influence.

Resolve S.2431 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications (Sponsor Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure) This bill resembles a bill of the same name submitted in 2019 – 2020.

S.107 An Act relative to disclosure of radiofrequency notifications (Sen. Julian Cyr) ~ A labeling bill.

S.108 An Act relative to the safe use of handheld devices by children (Sen. Julian Cyr) ~ Labeling bill modeled on Berkeley ordinance.

Download for a slightly different version of these bills – not perfect:  MA Wireless Legislation

BILLS THAT HARD-WIRE OR REDUCE EXPOSURES

S. 1982 An Act relative to wifi and cellular infrastructure along rail lines – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: Requires approval of locally elected bodies for railway antennas, but sadly only for Quincy, Braintree, Holbrook, Abington, & Rockland
    • Sponsor: Sen. JF Keenan

S. 207 An Act ensuring safer technology investment by the Massachusetts Broadband Institute- NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: Adds accountability, safety & security to MBI mandate; requires use of funds for maintaining reliable, hard-wired grid & for hard-wiring public spaces including State House
    • Co-Sponsor Rep. Carlos Gonzalez
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

H. 587 An Act Reducing Public School Non-Ionizing Radiation and Wireless Exposures – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: For school policy to limit wireless exposures and hard-wire connections where possible – funding needed!
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 1271 An Act Educating Patients on Environmental Health Risks such as Wireless Exposures – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: Patient education and health care quality control measures
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 1867 An Act Reducing Library Non-Ionizing Radiation Exposures from Wireless and Electricity – NOT ACTIVE

    • Allows state library grants to be given to hard-wire libraries
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

Bill S. 155 (2009), etc., S. 125 (2019) An Act to regulate the sale and use of microwave ovens – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: To prevent leakage, sale of dysfunctional ovens, ovens sized to allow pets inside, and ownership of more than one.
    • Sponsor Constituent Donald Kusser via Sen. John Keenan and Rep. Michael Morrissey

BILLS FOR WIRELESS LIMITS

S. 1273 An Act banning especially dangerous wireless facilities, emissions, and products – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: To stop 5G and ban small cell towers in front of homes and allow banning other items deemed dangerous – note the state has this right based on Constitutional and federal law.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

BILLS FOR MONITORING & EDUCATION

S. 1272 An Act registering wireless facilities to allow for monitoring and to ease access to contact information – NOT ACTIVE

    • Registers wireless facilities with state radiation department, which is to work with MA Broadband Institute to create a map. Registration is crucial for towns & citizen knowledge.
    • Co-sponsor: Rep. Carlos Gonzalez
    • Sponsor: Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 1271 An Act Educating patients on environmental risks such as wireless exposures – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: Encourages doctors to educate patients on wireless, mold, digital addiction, and other pollutants as relevant.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

H. 2011 An Act Providing for environmental risk fact sheets from the Department of Public Health – NOT ACTIVE

    • Dept. of Public Health will prepare & publish fact sheets on environmental health risks (incl. wireless)and respond to citizen concerns—accountability measures to DPH
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 130 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications – NOT ACTIVE

    • Warns to read product manual and keep appropriate distance from cell phone
    • Editing: Best to remove suggestion that recommended distance equals safety.
    • Sponsor: Rep. J. Cyr

BILLS TO REDUCE SCREEN TIME EXPOSURES (Blue light, wireless risks, etc.)

S. 294 An Act Limiting school screen time – NOT ACTIVE

    • Removes state mandate requiring students to use technology (this begins in Pre-K) and allows schools to set school screen time limits. See screentimetestimony2020
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

H 588 An Act Requiring privacy protections and supporting safer technology in schools – NOT ACTIVE

    •  Allows opt outs of technology by students/parents for privacy/safety/clout; recommends hard-wiring; makes school data use for political ID, marketing, & abuse unlawful; restricts data retention to that necessary for education
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 295 An Act Accounting for technological privacy and safety in schools with local and state committees – NOT ACTIVE

    • Local council monitors school privacy and safety policies & creates curriculum on safer technology use. State committee provides helpful template.
    • Sponsor K. Beatty

BILLS TO INVESTIGATE & REPORT

H. 2888 Resolve to investigate the results reporting of the National Grid Worcester smart meter pilot program – NOT ACTIVE

    • Seeks to correct false financial reporting being misused to assert cost-savings of wireless utility infrastructure.
    • H. 2888 Pamela Steinberg via Rep. Mahoney

H. 2840 An Emergency Act to Investigate the Results Reporting of the National Grid Worcester smart meter pilot program . . . – NOT ACTIVE

    • Same as H. 2888 above.
    • Patricia Burke via Rep. S. Dooley

H. 2885 An Act establishing a commission to study the environmental and health effects of evolving 5G technology – NOT ACTIVE

    • A study of health risks—however, initial sentence ought to include all wireless, not just 5G; representation of others like parents, sensitives, etc., and the latter may need to be financially supported—see critique of 5G Task Force for more ideas.
    • Sponsor Rep. J. Lewis

ONLY GOOD IF AMENDED –  FOR WIRELESS LIMITS

H. 1874 An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education – NOT ACTIVE

    • Important Edit:  Replace “purchase and installation of wireless internet services” with “reducing wireless and electromagnetic exposures.”
    • Improvements:
      • Something concrete, such as requiring removal of wireless from schools, would be better for quick results.
      • Building Biologists and electrical engineers could be brought in for an independent report of how best to cut electromagnetic exposures.
    • Sponsor Rep. C. C. Dykema

ONLY IF AMENDED – TO INVESTIGATE

H. 2901 (2011) H. 2032 (2013) H. 2007 (2015) H. 1192 (2017)  H. 1956 An Act relative to a special commission to study electric and magnetic fields – NOT ACTIVE

    • Help Request:  Critique was sent to Linsky’s office and the committee by constituent Kirstin Beatty prior to 2019 – 2020, but his resubmission in 2019 was the same.  Perhaps the written submission was not reviewed – if someone could pass on the information to him personally that would be helpful.
    • Issue 1: Appointees Environmental League of Massachusetts and American Cancer Society are connected to the utility and/or telecommunications industry.
    • Issue 2: Given that the science is fairly solid that electric and magnetic fields can cause ill health, why not immediately adopt the ALARA principle, “As Low As Reasonably Allowable,” as other states and countries already have in place?
    • Sponsor Rep. D.P. Linsky

DRAFT UNDER CONSTRUCTION: BILLS PROPOSED FOR 2021-2022

A public statement by the state legislature would be helpful. A helpful statement would reduce electromagnetic exposures by urging the following steps:

      1. allow consideration of environmental & health effects in denying zoning requests by amending Telecommunications Act of 1996 47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(B) iv;
      2. demand a revision of FCC exposure guidelines in alignment with current science and decent caution;
      3. encourage divestment from wireless communications;
      4. encourage a slow economy and slow, healthy jobs;
      5. research and identify safer communication design;
      6. fully fund safer, hard-wired communications;
      7. increase whistle-blower protections in industry and federal government;
      8. limit agency conflicts of interest by criminalizing such abuse;
      9. encourage medical training and public health wireless and electromagnetic education; and,
      10. at the state and federal level, eliminate any mandate to require use of digital technology K-12 through college in any subject unless digital technology is the subject of the course.

The amendment below is to insure independence and a wide range of stakeholders in an investigation of wireless and other electromagnetic radiation. Excepting the American Environmental Academy of Medicine and the American Academy of Pediatrics, all organizations are neutral. Notes:

    • This bill provides greater independence from politics than the New Hampshire bill  and S. 129 and also is better than H. 383 which promotes 5G.

For amendment of H. 383 OR S. 129 – a full replacement text
Or as a new bill in 2021

Prepared by Kirstin Beatty (Beatty.fyi, co-chair of Last Tree Laws)

 

A Wireless or Electromagnetic Investigation

Resolved, Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, there shall be a special commission to research the impact of electromagnetic (EMR) and radiofrequency (RFR) radiation on consumer protection, public health, and and the environment, and determine, if detrimental, how to allay health and financial repercussions, the former having primacy.

The commission shall be composed of the following 21 members, as follows:

(a) The Attorney General or designee;
(b) A nominee of the Massachusetts Teachers Association;
(c) One union member nominated by the Massachusetts AFL-CIO;
(d) One telecommunications worker representative nominated by the Communications Workers of America;
(e) One doctor nominated by the American Environmental Academy of Medicine;
(f) One scientist nominated by the Silent Spring Institute;
(g) One doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Medical Society, ideally with expertise in either cancer, neuroscience, or infertility;
(h) One scientist nominated by Community Action Works;
(i) One pediatric doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics;
(j) One representative or lawyer nominated by the Massachusetts Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action;
(k) 2 representatives nominated by the Massachusetts American Civil Liberties Union;
(l) A representative of the State House selected by the Speaker of the House;
(m) A senator of the State Senate selected by the President of the Senate;
(n) A representative of small business appointed by the governor;

(o) 3 non-voting members appointed by governor:
-Telecommunications representative;
-Medical system representative;
-Engineer in wireless networks;

(p) 4 non-voting commissioners, directors, or their designees for the following departments:
Public Health;
-Telecommunications and Cable;
-Technical Assistance and Technology Office;
-Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation.

Chairmanship, legislative and policy decisions for reports to the Commonwealth shall be decided by vote of all members with voting status. Commission members shall elect a chair by majority vote, who may be replaced at any time upon majority vote.

No voting member or spouse of voting member of the commission shall have a history of or current telecommunication, energy, IT, or utility industry clients or job dependency; nor shall any voting member have current telecommunications, energy, IT, or utility direct financial investments exceeding the sum of $5,000. No voting member or spouse of a voting member of the commission shall receive funding or a job from telecommunication, energy, IT, or utilities in the two years following the commission’s final report. All commission members must file a statement of any relevant conflicts of interest as specified above, including in relation to immediate family members, i.e. parents, children, siblings, uncles, aunts, with the Secretary of State during the commission period and continuing through each year until two years after the commission ends. These statements must be made public by the Secretary of State.

The meetings and communications shall be subject to the Massachusetts open meeting laws so as to be transparent. The commission shall be assisted by and have access to the resources available to the legislature and the executive branch in its investigations. The commission shall file a report of its recommendations and proposed legislation or regulatory changes, if any, with the clerks of the House and Senate and with the chairs of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure not later than December 31st 2022, and may file a series of reports.

This is a 2019-2020 bill - this is so important! The bill is decent, but could be revised.

S. 1271 An Act Educating Patients on Environmental Health Risks such as Wireless Exposures – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: Patient education and health care quality control measures - divided into sections for each part.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

Such a bill may not be worth moving forward due to likely losing a legal challenge. Please consider the bill below to require a standard format for warnings.

Cellphone labeling was recently blocked by a ninth circuit federal Appeals Court in an ordinance, and appears to have the backing of the U.S. Supreme Court due to a remand requesting reconsideration based on certain decisions.

For this reason, state cellphone labeling may also face legal challenges.

Senator Cyr submitted a cellphone labeling bill in 2019-2020, MA S. 130, and may resubmit. Below there is a recommended rewording.

"For safety, The Federal Government requires that cell phones meet radio frequency (RF) exposure guidelines. If you carry or use your phone in a pocket or the phone is otherwise in contact with your body when the phone is on and connected to a wireless network, you may exceed the federal guidelines for exposure to RF radiation. Refer to the instructions in your phone or user manual for information about how to use your phone safely."

Since a specific cellphone warning label has been prohibited by a federal appeals decision, instead recommended is a standard format for warning labels that can can be implemented for all new manufactured goods by a set time (a year?) from pasage of the act, and that:

      • Requires all manufacturer warnings, for any product,
        1. to be accessible for reading before purchase of any product;
        2. include on product packaging clear directions for accessing warnings and any relevant requirements of use necessary to avoid harm;
        3. be written in simple language.

A bill requiring approval of cellular infrastructure by the local governing authority will likely be resubmitted by Sen. Keenan.

This is a small step in the right direction, but we recommend a few changes in the text as follows to apply the rule to the entire state:

An Act relative to wifi and cellular infrastructure along rail lines

SECTION 1. Notwithstanding the provisions of any general or special law to the contrary, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority or its successors, including but not limited to the Division of Public Transit in the Massachusetts Surface Transportation Authority shall be prohibited from constructing, erecting, placing and/or maintaining any monopoles or antennae to support wi-fi or cellular service within the City of Quincy and the towns of Braintree, Holbrook, Abington, and Rockland, without approval from the local governing authority, which in a city having a Plan D or Plan E charter by the affirmative vote of a majority of all the members of the city council, in a city not having such a charter by vote of the city council, subject to the provisions of the charter of such a city, and in a town by a majority vote of the board of selectmen.

A bill to allow opting out of smart meters will likely be resubmitted by Sen. Michael Moore unless passed in 2020. We support the bill, as written below, but would create an additional bill or add:

      • addressing solar incentives, such as a requirement that solar incentives allow for use of analog meters without penalty;
      • a requirement for a digital opt-in when new utility meters are needed; or
      • going forward, a replacement with analogs of all transmitting meters.

An opt out is a step in the right direction of stopping smart meters. The problems of smart meters are manifold, including: (a) intense wireless exposures; (b) circuitry and fire hazards; (c) frequent billing errors; (d) surveillance; (e) additional energy and other expenses; (f) variable billing and remote shut off likely to hurt the poor.

An Act relative to utilities, smart meters, and ratepayers’ rights

SECTION 1. Chapter 164 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 116B the following section:-

SECTION 116C: Smart/wireless utility meter information

a) As used in this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

(1) “Electromechanical analog meter”, means a purely electric and mechanical device, using no electronic components, no switch mode power supply, no transmitter, no antenna, and no radio frequency emissions.

(2) “Utility company”, shall mean an electric, gas, or water company, or town or city-owned utility or other utility provider.

(3) “Wireless meter” shall mean: Any transmitting metering device with electronic components and/or any electric or battery operated meter that is capable of measuring, recording, and sending data by means of a wireless signal from a utility consumer or member to a utility company, municipality, or cooperative association in a manner utilizing one-way communication, two-way communication, or a combination of one-way and two-way communication either through the meter itself or through a device ancillary to the meter. Common names include, but are not limited to, AMR, ERT, smart, AMI, and Comprehensive Advanced Metering Plan CAMP.

(4) “Equivalent technology” shall mean utility infrastructure that communicates data using wireless frequencies, but which may be undisclosed due to proprietary rights.

b) The department of public utilities shall direct utility companies to provide ratepayers the following:

(1) a choice of the type of utility meters to be installed and operated on their places of residence, property or business; among the choices offered shall be the installation and ongoing operation of an "electromechanical analog meter"; and

(2) the ability to retain and operate an “electromechanical analog meter” on an ongoing basis at no cost; and

(3) the right to replacement of a wireless meter with a non-transmitting electromechanical meter at no cost.

c) The utility companies shall be required to obtain the ratepayer’s written consent:

(1) before installing wireless meters or "equivalent technology" on the ratepayer’s property and

(2) before altering the functionality of said meters.

d) The utility companies shall provide written notice to ratepayers within 90 days of the effective date of this act for the purpose of informing said ratepayers if wireless meters have been installed on their properties. Ratepayers shall have the right to request that the utility companies remove said wireless meters and install in their place electromechanical analog meters that emit no radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. There shall be no cost or other periodic usage charges to the ratepayer for such removal, replacement installation, and use of a non-wireless utility meter. The utility company shall promptly comply with such removal and replacement installation request made by the ratepayer to said company.

e) Utility companies are:

(1) prohibited from shutting off service to a ratepayer based on the ratepayer’s utility usage or on the ratepayer having electromechanical analog meters;

(2) prohibited from imposing any disincentive on a ratepayer for not consenting to the installation or use of wireless meters;

(3) required to notify ratepayers in writing that the installation and use of wireless meters are not mandated by state or federal law and are not permitted without the ratepayer’s consent;

(4) prohibited from discriminating against ratepayers who may have medical conditions that are exacerbated by exposures to pulsed microwave radio frequencies; and

(5) prohibited from installing "equivalent technology", such as direct wireless connection to devices in the home or business, on poles or in any other manner near the home or business of an individual requesting a non-transmitting meter.

f) The department of public utilities shall establish terms and conditions to comply with the requirements of this section.

g) This section shall take effect upon its passage.

A bill to allow libraries to hard-wire using state library funds, S. 1867, will likely be resubmitted and may be improved.

This needs sponsors in 2021 - this was previously put forward on behalf of co-chair Kirstin Beatty by Sen. Humason, who has left that office.

An Act reducing library non-ionizing radiation exposures from wireless and electricity

SECTION 1. Chapter 78 of the General Laws is hereby amended, in Section 19G, as appearing in the 2016 Official Edition, by inserting after the first paragraph the following paragraph:-

The board shall use funding to encourage public libraries to reduce non-ionizing radiation exposure, including from use of wireless communications and electronic technology, through hard-wiring connections, segregating areas of exposure, product purchase, and other means to reduce non-ionizing emissions from technologies.

The following bill was submitted in 2019-20 for hard-wired investment. Several questions:

    • Is this the best option?
    • Can the cost be shunted on industry?

S. 207 An Act ensuring safer technology investment by the Massachusetts Broadband Institute- NOT ACTIVE


    • Summary: Adds accountability, safety & security to MBI mandate; requires use of funds for maintaining reliable, hard-wired grid & for hard-wiring public spaces including State House
    • Co-Sponsor Rep. Carlos Gonzalez
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

This sounds radical, but allows for a process - a ban may remove claimed FCC jurisdiction. Does not address satellite WiFi, however.

S. 1273 An Act banning especially dangerous wireless facilities, emissions, and products – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: To stop 5G and ban small cell towers in front of homes and allow banning other items deemed dangerous – note the state has this right based on Constitutional and federal law.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

A section of this bill provides quality control measures to encourage nursing homes and health care facilities to reduce EMR.

S. 1271 An Act Educating Patients on Environmental Health Risks such as Wireless Exposures – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: Patient education and health care quality control measures
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

This is a bill introduced by a constituent on a regular basis that is not likely to pass - could be modified for greater chance of passage:

Bill S. 155 (2009), etc., S. 125 (2019) An Act to regulate the sale and use of microwave ovens – NOT ACTIVE

    • Summary: To prevent leakage, sale of dysfunctional ovens, ovens sized to allow pets inside, and ownership of more than one.
    • Sponsor Constituent Donald Kusser via Sen. John Keenan and Rep. Michael Morrissey

This is a bill from 2019-2020. May need to require proof positive of identify by registering board members as entities as well.

S. 1272 An Act registering wireless facilities to allow for monitoring and to ease access to contact information – NOT ACTIVE

    • Registers wireless facilities with state radiation department, which is to work with MA Broadband Institute to create a map. Registration is crucial for towns & citizen knowledge.
    • Co-sponsor: Rep. Carlos Gonzalez
    • Sponsor: Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

The state could require of all cellular infrastructure the following:

    • proof of identify - registration of board members
    • electromagnetic pollution insurance
    • bonds
    • ?

Currently, even the pre-K standards require use of digital technology such as cellphones! A screen time bill is proposed below, based on 2019-20 MA S. 294  by K. Beatty. This bill:

    1. Removes state technology mandates set across all subjects in state standards;
    2. Sets a basic limit on screen time;
    3. Allows minimal passive viewing in preK and early elementary;
    4. Prohibits virtual reality ages 14 and below;
    5. Allows schools to set lower or, with guardian permission, higher limits.

Lingering Question: Can this be made applicable to private schools?

An Act Encouraging limits on school screen time

SECTION 1. Chapter 69 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2016 Official Edition, is hereby amended by inserting, after Section 36, the following section:-

(a) As used in this section, the following words shall have the following meanings:

“Screen time” is time viewing a technological or digital screen which includes but is not limited to a television, a smart board, projector, or computer.

“Passive screen time” is time viewing a technological or digital screen in which one only observes and does not interact or alter the screen by typing or otherwise moving the body.

“Interactive screen time” is time viewing and interacting with or altering a technological or digital screen by typing or otherwise moving the body.

“Virtual reality” is an interactive screen time experience taking place in a simulated visual environment, either real or imagined, and may incorporate auditory and sensory feedback. Augmented reality systems is a type of virtual reality in which perception of the real world is augmented by computer-generated perceptual information such as visual, auditory, haptic, somatosensory, and olfactory.

(b) It shall be unlawful for any student enrolled in either public primary or secondary schools in the Commonwealth to exceed screen time limits or during school hours and through related school assignments after school hours, except as when substantially beneficial to relieve disability.

It shall further be unlawful to mandate screen time as a condition of mandated public primary and secondary coursework or school activities.
Courses or school activities that revolve around screen time must be voluntary, and screen time requirements in those activities highly relevant to the subject matter of the course or school activity. Participation in courses or school activities with additional screen time, whether foreign language, computer language, or other relevant subject, must obtain student legal guardian consent while providing justification for the additional screen time and explaining how risks of excessive screen time will be limited.

Use of virtual reality shall be preceded by notice of any potential risks or cautionary warnings accompanying use, obtain legal guardian consent, and shall be not be used by children or adolescents through the age of fourteen.
Each school committee shall establish a policy dealing with students and staff who violate this law that includes consequences to prevent violations and may include redirection. This policy shall include staff and student education on the hazards of excessive screen time.

Nothing in this law preempts more restrictive state or local limitations. However, additional screen time outside the parameters of the screen time limits must be approved not only by student legal guardians, but by a school committee or Technology Safety Council that is inclusive and not exclusive of district or school parents, teachers, and legal guardians.

(c) Screen time restrictions are provided according to grade level as follows:

(1) Pre-K through kindergarten screen time: maximum of 4 hours, none of which may be interactive

(2) First through second grade passive screen time: maximum 5 hours per school year;

(3) First through second grade interactive screen time: maximum of zero hours

(4) Grade three through eight passive screen time: maximum of one hour a day and 5 hours total in the school year;

(5) Grade three through eight interactive screen time: maximum of 20 minutes a day and a maximum of 3.5 hours total in the school year;

(6) Grade nine through ten passive screen time: maximum of one hour a day and 5 hours total in the school year;

(7) Grade nine through ten interactive screen time: maximum of one hour daily and 12 hours total in the school year.

(8) Grade eleven through twelve passive screen time: maximum of one hour a day and 7 hours total in the school year;

(9) Grade eleven through twelve interactive screen time: maximum of one hour daily and 12 hours total in the school year.

SECTION 2. Section 1I of chapter 69 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2016 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph after the first paragraph:-

Technology shall be optional and not a required public school subject. Unless voluntarily choosing a technology course, no public school, student, or legal guardian shall be treated with prejudice or found wanting in an evaluation due to following a principle of restricting or avoiding student digital technology use or choosing not to purchase or upgrade digital technological equipment. A student or school may safely restrict or avoid digital student technology use and still be provided high marks in evaluation based on other measures, and may pursue alternative models of education such as the Montessori model. Within reason, however, such a school may be expected to insure students understand age-appropriate aspects of digital technology use related to safety, health, responsibility, societal impacts, and privacy.

Instead of the school technology fund set in law the following replacement is suggested to:

      • provide safe telecommunications and internet
      • study safer technology or safer substitutes
      • provide professional development that:
        • addresses issues and local district needs
        • affirms and offers tech alternatives to reduce tech reliance
        • limits screen time

Section 3A: Statewide educational technology plan; goals; development and implementation

Section 3A. A statewide educational technology plan, to be known as Massachusetts education-on-line, shall be developed by the Massachusetts corporation for educational telecommunication, hereinafter referred to as MCET. Said educational technology plan shall incorporate the following goals:

(a) health- and socially-conscious implementation of technology in public schools, including, but not limited to, the establishment of a hard-wired statewide telecommunications and technology link with minimal chemical and electromagnetic emissions among public college and university campuses and school districts through the use of computer and communications technology;

(b) facilitating the implementation of a statewide professional development plan in coordination with the commissioner of education for teachers, principals, and superintendents to reduce technology reliance and support screen time boundaries; affirm and offer technology alternatives; actively address technology issues, including but not limited to privacy, digital addiction, bullying, health, ransomware, and environmental costs; and meet needs for technology as set by local school districts; and

(c) support study and examination of options for safer substitutes or safer technology.

For the purposes of this section, said educational technology plan shall be broadly construed to include, but not be limited to, programs, courses, and capital expenditures including computer hardware and software, networks, television, --[cross out satellite transmissions]---, fiber optics cable, calculators and video and audio tapes. Subject to appropriation, MCET may provide grants to universities, colleges, schools and school districts for the purposes of purchasing the equipment and other materials necessary for the implementation of said educational technology plan. The MCET executive director, in consultation with the secretary and the board of education and the board of higher education, may establish such advisory groups or committees as he deems necessary for the development and implementation of said educational technology plan.

Updated version of 2019 bill S. 295, this bill could be split in two and modified to allow more time, but any modification should insure that local control is retained. The bill has two parts:

    1. Requires schools to set processes and evolving, benchmarked goals to support privacy and safer technology behaviors.
    2. Establishes state and local committees to develop policy and a scope and sequence for curriculum on digital tech issues and mitigation.

An Act Accounting for technological privacy and safety in schools with local and state committees

SECTION 1. Chapter 71 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2016 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding, after Section 93, the following section:-

SECTION 93A. DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNOLOGY PRIVACY AND SAFETY MEASURES

(a) As used in this section, the following words shall have the following meanings:

“Granular opt-out processes for different uses of data” is providing separate options to refuse different types of data sharing. Considerations include but are not limited to placement in a yearbook or directory, using cloud services, or using school-issued devices or personal devices.

“Opt-out alternatives for technology” is an opt-out of using technology with a comparable or alternative non-technological assignment.

“Students and staff” includes all students in pre-K through 12th grade, including students in home schooling, as well as preK-12th grade staff and teachers, including tutors and extra-curricular leaders. Tutors or other arranged staff, including legal guardians or volunteers, that provide extra-curricular activities or other educational learning, are also included.

“Scope and sequence” refers to a document providing an overview of the scope, or depth and breadth, of content to be taught at a specific grade level and the sequence, or order in which content should be taught throughout the year.

“Confidential data” is data collected on students or staff and which includes:

(1) standard identifying information:

i. names of staff and students

ii. dates of birth

iii. addresses

iv. grades

v. medical information

vi. exam results

vii. staff development reviews

viii. assessments

ix. other personal identifying information

(2) identifying data such as location-tracking, photographs, and biometric data, which includes unique biological identifiers such as voice audio or fingerprints

(3) personal writings or other personal work such as art

(4) political views

(5) socioeconomic data

(6) disciplinary data

(7) similar data or information on other individuals that are not students or staff, but may be referenced in or extracted from student and staff data.

(8) observed and inferred data from the data provided

(b) Each school committee in conjunction with the superintendent or with the board of trustees of a charter school shall support the security, privacy, safety, and wellbeing of students and staff by establishing the following, allowing for exceptions when not applicable:

(i) Granular opt-out processes for different uses of data;

(ii) Identification and labeling of processes and equipment which may risk confidentiality or safety;

(iii) Respectable informed consent and opt-out procedures;

(iv) Shredding or secure erasure of unneeded data;

(v) Access to clearly described vendor data collection policies and data security for relevant students, legal guardians, and staff;

(vi) Preferred technology vendors, software, websites, and equipment to meet considerations for privacy, health, safety, access, and limitations on marketing;

(vii) Staff training and student technology education on confidentiality, privacy, safety, health, security, and marketing concerns;

(viii) Policies on digital devices to protect confidentiality, privacy, health, security, safety, and prevent marketing concerns;

(ix) Policies and procedures on screen time limits;

(x) Timelines to move towards hard-wiring equipment, isolating systems, providing safer technology, reducing technological reliance, and other more expensive or time-consuming procedures for security and safety;

(xi) Full identification and records of preferred vendors, software, and equipment, to allow legal redress;

(xii) Evolving goals and established processes for reducing staff and student reliance on and use of technology that undermines confidentiality, health, safety, security, wellbeing, or serves marketing purposes; and

(xiii) Yearly benchmarks set by the district and schools to move towards goals set in (b) (xii).

(c) Each public school committee in conjunction with the superintendent and each board of trustees of a charter school shall provide for a scope and sequence for curriculum on using digital technology more safely and with sociological awareness, hereafter called Digital Scope & Sequence (DSS). The DSS shall include, as age-appropriate, personal, health, and sociological problems arising from technology use. DSS topics shall include but not be limited to the areas of privacy, automation, addiction, job turnover, monopoly, propaganda, marketing, stalking, profiling, health, environment, resource scarcity, programming errors, and weapons. In conjunction with these topics, the DSS shall require education on mitigation of technology problems and age-appropriate practices in healthier, safer and more environmentally-friendly and responsible technology use, behavior, and communication.

The DSS shall be designed flexibly to allow for integration of concepts across disciplines, current events, and to respond to rapidly evolving technology.

(d) Each public school committee in conjunction with the superintendent and each board of trustees of a charter school shall provide for a Digital Safety Policy, hereafter called DSP, for safer use of technology. Any such DSP shall:

(1) Require the notification of the parents, legal guardians, students, and additional stakeholders of the policy and any changes to it every two years at the beginning of the academic year with opportunity for public input and recommendations;

(2) Be evaluated at least every two years by the school committee in conjunction with the superintendent or board of trustees of a charter school to ensure that the policy conforms to current law, internet practices and technical requirements of teachers, provided that the results of the evaluation are made subject to a public hearing to accept public comment and input;

(3) Require employment of a DSS pursuant to subsection (c) of this section;

(4) Insure technology use is educationally-focused;

(5) Provide for accessibility through universal design;

(6) Provide a procedure for legal guardians and students to register complaints with respect to DSP failures;

(7) Establish and make publicly available the specific measures to protect privacy, safety and health pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, and make publicly available the individuals responsible for making these decisions; and

(8) Restrict access to online content that contains obscenity, pornography, or material harmful to minors including the following measures:

i. Make publicly available specific measures to block, filter, or alter websites, the basis for doing so, and the individuals who are responsible for making those decisions;

ii. Provide a procedure for teachers to override a website that has been blocked, provided that the website does not contain obscenity, pornography, or material harmful to minors;

iii. Establish criteria for the overruling of a request by a teacher to allow access to a website that is blocked by internet protection measures, a procedure to provide the requesting party with an explanation of the reasons for denial of a request, and a procedure to record and submit any requests and overrulings to the school committee every two years;

(e) Each district or charter school shall establish a Digital Safety Council with relevant expertise or abilities to develop, examine, and review the DSS and DSP, and shall publicly invite and not exclude parents, legal guardians, and local public school teachers as members who must be in the majority. Digital Safety Council members may not have served or serve as a product defense consultant or expert for the industry, and members must submit conflict of interest statements that shall be retained in district or charter school records and be freely available to the public. The Digital Safety Council shall have 9 months to provide an initial draft, which shall be provided to the local public school teachers and the local community for a 45-day review period to allow for criticism and ensuing revision for a period of four months.

(e) The state Board of Education shall provide a template for the DSP and DSS and may provide additional recommended resources and materials. The Board of Education shall establish a state-wide Digital Safety Council, hereafter called DSC, to prepare templates and additional materials, and shall provide support, a platform for reports, and coordination of meetings, whether by secure conference call, online exchange, or in person.

The state DSC shall include 6 public school teachers (including former or retired public school teachers), 3 legal guardians of public school students, 3 advocates, 2 medical professionals, and 1 public school administrator. The state Education Board shall insure the DSC is established by accepting for appointment teachers nominated by the Massachusetts Teachers Association, an advocate nominated by the Massachusetts ACLU, an advocate nominated by the Children’s Screen Time Network, an advocate nominated by [uncertain – Environmental Health Trust?], a physician nominated by the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatricians, and a psychologist nominated by the Massachusetts Psychological Association. If any organization listed chooses not to nominate to the DSC, then the state Education Board may select an individual. The Education Board shall also be tasked with identifying a public school administrator to join the DSC.

DSC members shall be provided with reasonable costs for travel, conferencing, and research needs. For low-income DSC members with need, an hourly wage or stipend for meeting attendance shall be provided to prevent exclusion.

The DSC shall invite public comment and presentations or information from technology experts, scientists, and doctors with relevant, current expertise regarding DSS and DSP concerns.

The process and publication the DSP, DSS, and relevant materials shall be within one year from appointment, with drafts published at 3, 6, and 9 months for public comment. The DSS and DSP model materials, including the scope & sequence, shall be updated every two years or sooner to reflect the evolution of technology, society, and the continuing advice of the legal guardians, students, parents, teachers, and school administrators, as well as privacy and safer technology advocates. Updates shall require only one draft and comment period before publication.

A suggested revision is below of H. 587 which in 2019-2020 asked for policy to reduce electromagnetic  exposures only K-12 - the revision below includes the collegiate level.

Section 3 changes the education board current goals #3 & #4 and adds #5 for eco-health from this top-down, automated version: “(3) a deliberate process for establishing and achieving specific educational performance goals for every child, and (4) an effective mechanism for monitoring progress toward those goals and for holding educators accountable for their achievement.”

H. 587 needs sponsors in 2021 - was previously put forward on behalf of co-chair Kirstin Beatty by Rep. Aaron Vega, who is leaving office.

SECTION 1. Chapter 71 of Part I Title XII of the General Laws is hereby amended by adding a new section:-

SECTION 1D. WIRELESS AND NONIONIZING RADIATION EXPOSURES

Section 1D. Every public school shall have a policy to limit exposures to non-ionizing radiation stemming from wireless connectivity and from electricity. This policy shall insure that schools not only work to reduce or eliminate wireless exposures, but also work to reduce or eliminate electrical and magnetic fields emitted by electricity as well as artificial light. This policy shall also encourage students and staff, including any operating via remote education, to reduce electromagnetic exposures at school and at home in alignment with cautious interpretation of current science.

Every public school shall use this policy to work towards hardwiring Internet connections, reducing wireless connectivity, and reducing use of wireless devices. If access is wireless, ideally use of technology shall be limited and use of wireless connections by staff shall occur after regular hours when students have left the school, until such time as a hard-wired connection can be obtained. Ideally, to control and monitor equipment, a segregated area of the school shall be set aside for internet use by the staff and students.
Policy and any standards or rules enforcing the policy shall be provided by the school committee or charter school board, and shall be subject to development and review by a local committee inclusive of and not exclusive of student guardians, parents, and teachers belonging to the school or district.

SECTION 2. Section 15A of chapter 15A of Part I Title II , as appearing in the 2019 official edition, of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after the following section:-

SECTION 15A. WIRELESS AND NONIONIZING RADIATION EXPOSURES
Section 15A. Every public or independent institution of higher education located in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and authorized to grant degrees pursuant to any general or special law shall set a policy to limit student and staff exposures to non-ionizing radiation stemming from wireless connectivity, technology use, and electricity. This policy shall insure that institutions not only work to reduce or eliminate wireless exposures, but also work to reduce or eliminate the electrical and magnetic fields emitted by electricity as well as artificial light. This policy shall encourage students and staff, including any operating via remote education, to reduce electromagnetic exposures at school and home in alignment with cautious interpretation of current science.

Every institution shall use this policy to work towards hardwiring Internet connections, reducing wireless connectivity, and reducing use of wireless devices. If access is wireless, ideally use of technology shall be limited and use of wireless connections by staff shall occur after regular hours when students have left the school, until such time as a hard-wired connection can be obtained. Ideally, to control and monitor equipment, a segregated area of the school shall be set aside for internet use by the staff and students.

SECTION 3. Section 1 of chapter 69 of Part I Title XII of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking out the last sentence and inserting in place the following sentence:-

It is therefore the intent of this title to ensure that each public school classroom provides: (1) the conditions for all pupils to engage fully in learning as an inherently meaningful and enjoyable activity without threats to their sense of security or self-esteem; (2) a consistent commitment of resources sufficient to provide a high quality public education to every child; (3) a respectful process for attending to student academic needs and developing talents; (4) an effective mechanism for supporting positive school climates and teacher quality and professionalism; and (5) insuring the environmental health and safety of public school classrooms by allowing for policies and procedures designed to improve and monitor environmental health of public school buildings.

If fixed the 2019-2020 bill H. 1874, likely to be resubmitted by Rep. Carolyn Dykema, would be a fine supporting measure to accompany the other bill setting policy.

Problem to Fix:  In 2017 (H. 2030) and 2019 (H. 1874), the submitted bill assumed habits or "best practices" can reduce harmful effects of wireless exposures; allows wireless installations; and trusts a non-elected department to decide what is safe. Below is a suggested revised text.

SECTION 1. Chapter 71 of the General Laws is hereby amended by adding the following section:--

Section 98. The department of elementary and secondary education shall develop best practices and guidance for the purchase and installation of wireless internet service and telecommunications in schools to minimize electromagnetic exposures. In developing these guidelines, the department shall consider and prioritize practices that protect the health and safety of public school students and staff. These guidelines shall provide varying approaches in order to account for variable financial abilities or investment of school districts. To develop these guidelines, the department shall consult with engineers and other experts in the field of reducing non-ionizing electromagnetic exposures, including transients and harmonics. Simultaneously, the department shall revise its accountability and education standards to allow school districts to limit electromagnetic exposures by reducing technology use.

SECTION 2. Chapter 15A of the General Laws is hereby amended by adding the following section:--

Section 45. The board shall develop best practices and guidance for the purchase and installation of wireless internet service and telecommunications in public institutions of higher education to minimize electromagnetic exposures. In developing these guidelines, the board shall consider and prioritize practices that protect the health and safety of public institutions of higher education students and staff. To develop these guidelines, the department shall consult with engineers and other experts in the field of reducing non-ionizing electromagnetic exposures, including transients and harmonics.