Two hundred people turned out Thursday in Santa Rosa to rail against PG&E SmartMeters, complaining that individual opt-out fees are unfair, that cities should be able to get out of the program and that the wireless technology is a health threat.
"Do not impose a tariff to opt out, and allow communities to opt out," Fairfax Town Councilman Larry Bragman told an administrative law judge conducting a public hearing for the state Public Utilities Commission. "If you do that, you will drive more innovative solutions."
"It is unconscionable to extort money for safety, especially for people who cannot afford the cost of removal of this toxic device," said Ami Hartley.
Judge Amy Yip-Kikugawa will prepare a report for the PUC, addressing whether the fees PG&E charges customers who refuse to have a SmartMeter installed are justified.
A second issue is whether a community, be it a senior citizens complex or a city, should be able to opt out.
The hearing at the Steele Lane Community Center was the fifth and last to be held in the state. Other hearings were in Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Bakersfield and Sacramento.
The judge's recommendations are expected to be presented to the PUC in the spring in advance of a summer vote on modifying the SmartMeter system, PUC officials said.
PG&E began installing SmartMeters in February 2010, promoting the wireless meters as a way for consumers to better analyze energy use and make smarter choices about, and possibly cut, energy consumption.
It also is a cost-cutting measure for the utility, which can reduce staffing and save money by employing fewer meter readers.
The meters and the wireless technology, much the same as cellphones, immediately drew complaints that the radio emissions are a health risk and the meters are inaccurate.
"Two meters were put in, and I started getting shooting pains and headaches," Rebecca Heisler told the judge. "Within six weeks, I had to leave my house."