- View a comprehensive history of all legal documents pertaining to our fight against fluoride.
- It was put together by James Robert Deal.
The Latest Update is on Top, scroll down the page to see History dating back to February 18, 2003
November 25, 2013
November 6, 2013
Declining to review the decision of the Appeals Court, the Washington State Supreme Court ruling, granted cities reembursement of fees & costs. The grounds and amounts are still unclear. Applicable Rules
June 19, 2013
Appeals Court issued a decision:
1. Enforcement of a private cause, via a search warrant, not intended by RCW 69.41.060.
2. Fluorides in public drinking water held not to be drugs (defaulting to the 1954 Kaul ruling.)
3. Reimbursement of cities' fees and costs denied--Citizens' appeal not frivolous.
January 7, 2013
Hearing arguments and receiving further evidence from Citizens, three Appeals Court justices were asked to break ground by recognizing the explicit legal definition of a drug as “any substance used with intent to treat or prevent disease”
December 4, 2012
Citizens filed an Amicus Curiae Brief to the Appeals Court concerning the definition of drugs.
April 9, 2012
Eloise Kailin issued a press release: Appeals Court to Evaluate Fluoride as a Drug in Drinking Water.
March 23, 2012
Port Angeles/Forks issued a response to the appeal by Dr. Kailin.
November 25, 2011
November 17, 2011
Protect the Peninsula’s Future, Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water and Sequim physician Eloise Kailin appealed to the State Supreme Court to overturn the Superior Court’s ruling regarding the definition of fluoride compounds as drugs.
October 13, 2011
A growing number of communities are choosing to stop adding fluoride to their water systems, “I’m in opposition to putting a medical treatment into the public drinking water supply without a vote of the people who drink that water,” said Norm Roche, a newly elected Republican county commissioner who spent 10 years doing policy research for the county Water Department. more
June 17, 2011
Washington Superior Court dismissed the lawsuit (challenging the use of fluoride in Port Angeles and Forks) on the basis of a 1954 State Supreme Court ruling they could not overturn, declaring that fluoride, used to fluoridate water, is not a drug. Appealed 11-17-2011
April 28, 2011
Protect the Peninsula’s Future, Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water and retired Sequim physician Eloise Kailin filed a lawsuit Thursday in Clallam County Superior Court challenging the use of fluoride in the Port Angeles and Forks communities on the basis that it does not meet other state criteria. more
March 3, 2011
The Kaiser State Health Facts web site shows Washington State having the highest Alzheimer's death rate in the nation. This horrendous fact may arise from fluoride. Many Washington cities fluoridate their water. Calcium in water blocks the assimilation of fluoride. Both Washington and Oregon have soft water but Washington has low calcium levels resulting in greater fluoride assimilation whereas Oregon doesn't allow fluoridation. Oregon has only 276 deaths per 100,000 individuals compared with 407 for Washington. See data for all states.
January 10, 2011
In response to objections by FAN, EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs proposed a ban on the use of sulfuryl fluoride (a pesticide used to kill insects in stored food products) based on their findings that children are overexposed. This is the first time EPA has ever granted an objection. more
January 7, 2011
The EPA / Health Dept. admitted there is too much fluoride in our water! They propose a first-ever reduction in the maximum from 1.2 to 0.7 ppm. Researchers found the percentage of (12-15 year old children affected by) fluorosis has risen dramatically to 41%—more Here are estimates of the number of Washington State children who would be affected by fluorosis and what their teeth would look like.
January 3, 2011
Dr. Eloise Kailin and other environmentalists, on behalf of Protect the Peninsula's Future, met with state representatives Van De Wege and Tharinger, who seemed very receptive to points made about fluoridation and the initiative process. See Dr. Kailin's presentation.
Dec. 28, 2010
The Supreme Court denied our request to reconsider its decision: fluoridation is an administrative issue and thus is not subject to the initiative process. Although we will not get to vote on either initiative to stop fluoridation, the fight against fluoridation is not over. Stay tuned to see what our next approach will be. See our press release for more info.
Oct. 27, 2010
We received a letter from the Supreme Court indicating that it will consider our "motion to modify" (which refers to who pays court costs). We still await notification of whether the Court will reconsider its 5 to 4 ruling not to allow the initiatives to go to the ballot.
Oct. 26, 2010
Another city abandoned fluoridated water! After 44 years of fluoridating water, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada voted out the practice despite strong support by the Ontario Dental Association and the local newspaper, The Record.
Oct. 26, 2010
The Washington State Supreme Court has accepted an amicus brief submitted on behalf of 7 organizations supporting our motion asking the Court to reconsider its recent decision. Acceptance of these amici suggests the Court will reconsider its decision (our claim: the court might have overlooked key points). All we need is for one justice to change his/her decision to make the outcome go in our favor and to bring the initiatives to the citizens for a vote.
Oct. 18, 2010
Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water today issued a press release naming 7 organizations that filed Amici in support of Port Angeles citizen initiatives, Our Water-Our Choice! and Protect Our Waters, in a request to the state Supreme Court to re-consider its denial of allowing the initiatives to be on the ballot.
Sept. 24, 2010
Article about the Supreme Court Decision published in the Peninsula Daily News.
Sept. 23, 2010
The Washington Supreme Court Decision, announced today, went against Protect Our Waters and Our Water, Our Choice. Although this is a setback, the decision was split 5 to 4 and persuasive arguments were presented by the 4 justices who dissented (see p. 17). This by no means ends the fight--several approaches are being considered and will be posted here shortly.
Aug. 22, 2010
A document recently made available, the American Water Works Association Standard for Fluorosilicic Acid, indicates how FSA is a byproduct in the manufacture of phosphate fertilizer. It describes the extreme measures & safety gear required for handling FSA. It also indicates the maximum levels for contaminants.
July 22, 2010
Concerns over insoluble contents in fluoride products from China prompted Amesbury, Mass to stop fluoridating their water.
July 11, 2010
Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water sent a press release to the Peninsula Daily News on June 21 indicating that the group was re-activating because of specific safety concerns. Although News Assistant Mike Carman indicated that he would include these concerns, they were omitted from the newspaper notice. More
July 8, 2010
Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water is incorporated. More
July 4, 2010
An article in Time magazine (April 1, 2010) listed fluoride from toothpaste and water as #4 among the top 10 common household toxins. Fluoride was indicated as being neurotoxic and possibly tumorigenic when swallowed. It was also pointed out that the ADA advises that children under 2 not use toothpaste containing fluoride.
July 4, 2010
Palaeopathological evidence for fluorosis has been found in what is now Bahrain, where ancient people drank naturally-fluoridated water at what is now considered an optimal and safe level for prevention of caries. However, a report in Forensic Ecologist, January 2010 shows that up to 80% had caries, around 50% of the teeth showed dental fluorosis, and skeletal fluorosis was fairly common.
July 4, 2010
The European Court of Justice ruled that fluoridated water must be considered a medicine. Read an analysis by Doug Cross, which is followed by links to his references as well as links for the original court judgment, the opinion of the Advocate General, and a review by two British lawyers.
July 1, 2010
The Center for Disease Control reported results from a nationwide survey (1999-2004) showing that 41% of children 12-15 had dental fluorosis--nearly double the rate in the 1980s. Dental fluorosis has increased since fluoridation started in the 1940s, raising concerns about toxicity. See this extraction from a report by the Fluoride Action Network.
June 21, 2010
The Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water sent a Press Release to the Peninsula Daily News with information about the re-activation of the group and the reasons for doing so.
June 9, 2010
Attorney Gerald Steel wrote a letter to the Washington Board of Health (on behalf of Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water) asking the Board to amend the Washington Administrative Code to require FDA approval for all drugs, including fluoride, intended to treat disease.
Feb. 23, 2010
The Washington State Supreme Court heard our case. Their decision is pending. Watch a video of the hearing.
Sept. 4, 2009
Gerald Steele and James Robert Deal (lawyers), Dr. Eloise Kailin (retired physician), Lynn Lohr (a nurse with fluoride hypersensitivity), and Randy C. Smart (analyst) met with Senator Murray aides currently reviewing a medical bill containing allocations for fluoridation. The aides were courteous and receptive and discussed fluoride's history and controversies. A review of facts and perspectives led to a consensus that fluoridation was, at minimum, controversial. The aides will recommend to the Senator that fluoride funding be barred from the health care bill unless allocated for valid testing.
May 23, 2009
The European Court ruled that food (also having a medicinal function --includingfluoridated water) must be labeled and regulated as medicines. The Court is vigorously working towards ending fluoridation in Great Britain. This ruling could help our drive to get fluoride labeled as a medicine. More
May 4, 2009
Dr. Eloise Kailin news release: The Supreme Court (State of Washington) agreed to hear an appeal of the decision denying citizens the right to vote on two initiatives.The rights to obtain initiative and referendum were obtained by petitions signed by over half the registered voters and adopted by the City in July 2006. By 9-11-06, two initiatives were certified as having sufficient signatures to put to a vote. Then the City and Washington State Dental Foundation derailed the political process by pursuing a lawsuit. The Supreme Court has now agreed to decide if citizens can vote on the certified initiatives.
May 1, 2009
The Washington Supreme Court accepted our appeal and will hear our case. This is great news because it means that our arguments must have been persuasive enough for them to review the ruling of the Court of Appeals! Some of the rules that apply are given here.
Feb. 10, 2009
A statement was sent by Dr. Hardy Limeback, Head of Preventive Dentistry at the University of Toronto, to the UK's South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA). Dr. Limeback argued against fluoridating the Southampton area, pointing out that fluoridation was no longer effective, it causes fluorosis, fluoridation chemicals have not been tested for safety, and there are serious health risks. Despite his statement and the SHA’s own survey indicating that 72% of the population was opposed, the SHA voted on February 26, 2009 to force fluoridation on Southampton area citizens.
Feb. 10, 2009
With the election of a new county commissioner, Skagit County rescinded its decision to fluoridate, made two years ago. Congratulations to all the citizens who refused to give up despite the odds against them from local newspapers and the powerful dental lobby. If it can be done in Skagit County, it can be done in Port Angeles!
December 2, 2008
Dr. Geofrey Nochimson of the Department of Emergency Medicine at Sentara Careplex Hospital in Hampton, Virginia, describes acute fluoride poisoning. Fluoride is found in toothpaste, dietary supplements, cleaners, insecticides, rat poison, food, drinks, fluoridated water, and many other products. Although most cases of acute poisoning occur from accidental ingestion of rat poison and insecticides, the effect of gradual accumulation from these products and fluoridated water is largely unknown.
November 24, 2008
An association named Fluoride Class Action based in Lynnwood, represented by attorney James Robert Deal II, today filed a motion to participate as a friend of the court (Amicus Curiae) regarding proposed Port Angeles initiatives. Fluoride Class Action asks the state Supreme Court to review and reverse a decision of the Appeals Court, which denied PA citizens the right to vote on the two local initiatives. Press Release
November 24, 2008
A brief will be presented by OWOC and POW to the state Supreme Court in conjunction with an Attorney from Fluoride Class Action.
November 9, 2008
The Director of Environmental Sustainability in Grand Rapids, Michigan, the first city in the world to fluoridate, has ordered a new review of the scientific evidenceconcerning the risks and benefits of the chemicals. The decision was “based on a number of studies linking fluoride to problems with the thyroid, kidneys, central nervous system and skeletal system - including cancers.” More
October 28, 2008
The Health Department responds to Dr. Kailin's question of whether NSF Standard 60was being met. Port Angeles gets fluoride from J. R. Simplot of Rock Springs, Wyoming. No testing is done outside NSF. Out Health Dept. has faith in this process seeming without any checks on it. They seem reluctant (or unable) to furnish testing documentation that might address standards.
October 21, 2008
Jess Grable addressed the City Council during the public comment period. She recapped the history of Washington cities that have rejected fluoridation. She also provided solutions in lieu of the fluoridation of our water. Council members were provided with a handout.
October 21, 2008
Dr. Eloise Kailin spoke at the County Board of Health meeting asking why there has been no response from the State or County Boards of Health to the Constructive Notice given them in January, emphasizing the Boards potential liability for not protecting public health in that fluorosilicic acid fails to meet ANSI/NSF Standard 60(Washington State requirement). She presented board members with a letter/ handout detailing her concerns and asking again for a reply.
October 14, 2008
The Court of Appeals forwarded to the Supreme Court our petition to have the Supreme Court review our case. It normally takes at least 6 months for the Court to decide whether to accept a petition.
October 7, 2008
Gerald Steel letter to City Council. The attorney for Protect the Peninsula’s Future wrote to the Port Angeles City Council warning them that the State Environmental Policy Act requires a determination that procedures, to be used in the new Port Angeles Water Treatment Plant, meet SEPA standards. He emphasized that the combination of alum (which the City plans to use to clarify the water after the dam removal) and fluoride has been shown to promote the development of Alzheimer’s Disease.
The study he cites is mentioned in Chapter 7 (p. 178 or 211 in different versions) of the 2006 National Research Council Report Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA Standards.
Articles from the Wall Street Journal and Brain Research also demonstrate a link between alum and fluoride.
September 26, 2008
Petition for Review filed with the state Supreme Court by Gerald Steel, acting for the two initiative committees, Our Water-Our Choice! and Protect Our Waters. The petition asks to review the lower courts' refusal to allow citizens of Port Angeles to vote on the two initiatives. We think we meet the criteria for review in that there is broad public interest in the result and in that there is confusion and conflict with several laws which only the Supreme Court can sort out. We now await the decision of the Supreme Court to accept or deny the review. Details
September 24, 2008
A San Diego group called Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, headed by Jeff Green, has received sufficient donations and matching funds to meet the group’s requirement of $50K to allow filing a class action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of using industrial-grade hydrofluosilicic acid to fluoridate drinking water. The suit will assert that the 9th and 14th amendments to the Constitution guarantee our right to be free of bodily intrusion by medications. The plan is for the suit to include several individuals, including women who are pregnant and unable to escape fluoridation thereby exposing their fetuses to fluoride, which even the American Dental Association recommends against. Absorption through the skin will be part of the complaint. This suit would have considerable implications for Washington State. Details
September 4, 2008
A study in the September issue of Environmental Health Perspectives concludes that Fluoride induces endoplasmic reticulum stress and inhibits protein synthesis and secretion. The authors view this as a possible mechanism by which dental fluorosis occurs.
August 27, 2008
The Court of Appeals refused to reconsider their decision not to allow citizens to vote on the clean water initiatives. Our next move will be to ask for a review by the Supreme Court, which will be done by September 26, 2008. We are also starting a review of out-of-state court cases that considered fluoride to be a drug as opposed to an additive under utility jurisdiction.
July 15, 2008
The Washington State Court of Appeals declined to allow citizens of Port Angeles the right to vote on two clean water initiatives.
March 25, 2008
The Washington State Appeals Court heard the case.
The City of PA signed another agreement with the WDSF in which the WDSF agreed to provide and pay for a free standing equipment storage shed for the benefit of the Public Works and Utilities Department. No dollar amount is specified.
The matter was heard by visiting judge Haberly. Result--upholding the City in mid January--was appealed promptly to the State Supreme Court who, after many months, sent it to the Appeals Court.
Sept. 19, 2006
...Citizens filed a Complaint for Writ of Mandamus. Agreement was reached and signatures went to the Auditor and were qualified by her as sufficient to allow a vote.
Sept. 11, 2006
Instead of processing for a ballot title and allowing a vote, the City called a special meeting of Council. A vote was taken: 6 to zero (Wharton abstaining) to send the matter to court to determine whether the subject matter of the initiatives was a legislative matter that could be affected by initiatives or administrative, which is beyond the power of voters. The Council was urged (by the City attorney, the Washington State Dental Foundation representative, and County Health Officer Tom Locke, who said fluoride was not medication) to take the position that control of the water supply is administrative in nature and therefore not subject to the initiative process. Eighteen citizens were present and all 7 who spoke, objected to fluoridation.
Sept. 8 and 12, 2006
These initiatives were filed with City Clerk with over 2,300 signatures on each of them. Only a bit over 1,600 signatures were required. The City failed to submit them to the Auditor so...
Upon the advice of the City Attorney, the City delayed months enacting on an ordinance to carry out these powers. Finally early July, 2006 they passed the enabling ordinance. Two citizens committees formed; each wrote one initiative:
Protect Our Waters wrote the Water Additives Safety Act, setting standards such as a requirement to meet Maximum Contaminant Limit Goals to protect infants and other vulnerable segments of the population from substances which are added to treat or prevent disease in man or animals (disinfectants for water treatment not being affected).
The second initiative from Our Water-Our Choice committee is titled Medical Independence Act and says no substance added to treat mind or body of man may be added (chlorine and disinfectants to make water safe are specifically exempted).
May 18, 2006
City started fluoridation.
Feb. 16, 2006
Signature validation was certified for 3,501 signatures (no need to go further) so validation was reported on by the Auditor.
Feb. 6, 2006
Petition to the Port Angeles City Council filed with the City Clerk to allow Port Angeles Citizens full Rights and Access to Washington State’s Initiative and Referendum Process (I&R). A total of 4,047 signatures were gathered by our group and reviewed by the Clallam County Auditor’s Office. Only 3,486 were needed (which represents over half the registered voters in Port Angeles who voted in the previous election).
Concerned Citizens for Port Angeles formed to discuss the possibility of circulating petitions to give citizens the right to affect legislation through the initiative and referendum (I&R) process.
March 1, 2005
The City signed an agreement with the WDSF and the contractor that specified the terms and conditions for the gift of the fluoridation treatment plant. Interestingly, Section 2.4 emphasizes that WDSF does not warranty the plant’s “fitness for a particular purpose.” Section 2.5 indicates that the WDSF assumes no liability for “the health effects related to the operation of the system” or for the suitability of the system for any particular purpose.
Section 7.1 emphasizes that the City assumes all responsibility regarding any lawsuits, claims, losses, liabilities, damages etc. that result from fluoridating the water. The agreement is remarkable in the extent to which it transfers all potential problems to the City!
Section 5.9 states that, should the City stop fluoridation before the 10 year period specified, the City is obligated to pay up to a maximum of $433,000 to cover the costs of the system and legal fees.
Section 5.5 states that the City must continue fluoridation for 10 years“except in the event the City is prevented from fluoridating the Port Angeles water supply as the result of a court order or other judicial decision.” [emphasis added]
Section 8.9 elaborates on this exemption by stating that the City shall not be deemed to be in violation of the agreement “for any reason beyond its control, including . . . an injunction or other judicial decision.”[emphasis added]
May 20, 2003
The Washington Dental Service Foundation (WDSF) entered into an agreement with the City and a contractor indicating WDSF’s intention to pay up to $260,000 for the design and construction of a fluoride treatment facility.
Feb. 18, 2003
City Council voted to add fluoride to city water. Action was appealed to Superior Court, heard by Judge Verser (Port Townsend visiting judge) who said SEPA did not apply because the health dept., which had to approve it, was exempt. Citizens appealed to the Appeals court which agreed the law specified exemption for health department. Legal action was dropped on this issue.