BERKELEY, Calif. — Allegations have surfaced that a judge in the case against Berkeley's cell phone warning ordinance has ties to the wireless industry.

CTIA, the wireless industry trade group (formerly the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association), is challenging a law that requires stores to post information on proper cell phone use so that radiation exposure doesn’t exceed federal guidelines.

The case was heard in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in mid-September by a three-member panel that included Judge Michelle Friedland, whose husband, Daniel Kelly, is allegedly an engineer with wireless company Tarana.

According to Ellen Marks, director of the California Brain Tumor Association, Friedland may have had a conflict of interest because Tarana's significant investor is AT&T - a CTIA member that could have a major stake in the outcome of the case.

"If Berkeley prevails, his job could be at risk,” Marks said. "They might have financial implications from this, and if the CTIA prevails, they have a lot to gain from this."

The CTIA has claimed that Berkeley's ordinance violates free speech. Berkeley has countered that the required postings were simply guidelines directly from the cell-phone manuals, warning that people who carry a cell phone close to the body may exceed federal guidelines on exposure to radio-frequency radiation.

A spokesman for the 9th Circuit confirmed that Kelly works in the telecom industry, but said Judge Friedland herself would not comment. Calls to Mr. Kelly and to Tarana were not returned.

Marks said the case is significant because many other cities have expressed an interest in similar ordinances, and some have received letters from the CTIA threatening litigation.

San Francisco has been working to pass a similar law, and City Supervisor John Avalos said that if the allegations are true, Friedland should have disclosed this possible link.

"If there's any hint of such a relationship between her partner and such work within a telecommunications company, she should disqualify herself,” Avalos said.

The court has the case under consideration but has not yet issued a ruling. Berkeley's legal team has the option to file a complaint alleging conflict of interest, but has not done so thus far.



get more stories like this via email

Wisconsin lawmakers recently debated reforms for payday loans. Efforts to protect consumers come amid new research about financial pain associated with cash advances offered through smartphone apps. The Center for Responsible Lending is out with findings that detail how "earned wage advances" from digital platforms come with extra costs disguised as things like tips. Traditional payday lenders are often criticized for charging excessive interest rates on loans that are usually around $500.

Lucia Constantine, a researcher with the Center for Responsible Lending, said customers are usually seeking smaller amounts from the apps, but she warns they can be just as costly.

"They are trapping consumers in a cycle of borrowing that is similar to that of a payday loan, " she said.

The report said after using these financial products, customers are seeing overdrafts on their checking accounts increase by 56% on average. Industry leaders deny they're barraging consumers with hidden fees, stressing that features such as suggested tips are optional. More broadly, a bipartisan payday loan reform bill in the Wisconsin Legislature failed to advance this month.

Constantine said like longstanding payday lenders, these cash advance apps can be hard to regulate. Meanwhile, she urged those in a bind to explore other options.

"[They should] try talking to their friends and family as a first source. The other option which I would recommend is reaching out to their credit union or banking institution to see if they can get some sort of small-dollar loan," she said.

She noted places such as credit unions typically provide more transparency on loan costs. According to the report, three-quarters of consumers took out at least one advance on the same day or day after a re-payment was posted.


get more stories like this via email

Food prices remain high, in Montana and across the country.

A new report by the Federal Trade Commission says the country's largest grocery companies are gouging consumers, by keeping prices artificially high.

Many grocers, retailers and wholesalers have consolidated to cut costs. Grocers continue to blame supply chain problems, even though regulators have said most of those issues have been resolved.

President of the advocacy group Farm Action, Angela Huffman, said retailers were doing more than making up for lost revenue during the pandemic-era supply chain disruptions - and the FTC report says they continue to do so.

"In 2021, the retailer revenues, they rose to more than 6% higher than their total costs, and that those profits are still going up," said Huffman. "So, in the first nine months of 2023, the profits increased to 7%."

At nearly 6.5%, Montana had the nation's ninth-highest grocery price increase in 2023.

The FTC data show Amazon, Kroger and WalMart each gained market share during and after the pandemic - while profits continued to rise.

Other large retailers and wholesalers have consolidated, which they say gives them more buying power and the ability to pass those savings on to customers.

Huffman said that isn't what's happening, and calls on regulators to fine the grocers, or more.

"This would be kind of the farthest extent of what they could do, but go so far as breaking them up," said Huffman. "In years past, they broke up the telephone companies and the railroads and, you know, that would be the ideal outcome for us, is to take away their excessive power."

Huffman also points to a 150% increase in egg prices in 2023, which producers blamed on the avian flu. The FTC says the disease did not justify the drastic price hike.

April is Financial Literacy Month, when the focus is on learning smart money habits but also how to protect yourself from fraud.

One problem on the rise in the Southeast is the "impostor" scam, when scammers represent themselves as fake government agents or bogus businesses. They are really on the prowl for your cash and personal info, costing victims in North Carolina almost $190 million last year alone.

Natalya Rice, Southeast Regional attorney for the Federal Trade Commission, listed some key red flags to look out for.

"Utilizing a payment app, sometimes even cryptocurrency, things like that," Rice noted. "Anyone who contacts you from what seems like it could be a legitimate company or business, if they're asking you to send them money or some type of payment through one of these type of payment methods, that is a red flag that you're dealing with a scammer."

Other warning signs include requests to transfer your funds or even demands for a verification code to access an account. If you have concerns, Rice advised it is best to stop communication and contact the actual company directly. Still other scams big in the Southeast include online shopping, investments and job offers.

Nationwide, a record $10 billion was lost to scams in 2023.

More than 25,000 North Carolina residents reported possible identity theft last year. Rice recommends acting promptly when you realize or suspect you have been scammed. The first step is to contact your financial institution and report the incident to its fraud department. She added it is crucial to notify federal and state agencies for further investigation.

"You can go to reportfraud.ftc.gov and fill out a report there and let us know what happened," Rice noted. "In the state of North Carolina, there's also another place you'll want to report it to, and that's the North Carolina Attorney General's Office."

If you suspect your identity has been compromised, Rice stressed the FTC can assist you in developing a recovery plan. She added getting your money back is never guaranteed but the sooner a scam is reported, the sooner it can be investigated and other people can be warned.


get more stories like this via email