Santa Cruz Good Times

Thursday
Aug 28th
Text size
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Town Hall with Supervisor Mark Stone

Mark StoneThe Board of Supervisors will consider extending its moratorium on PG&E’s SmartMeters at its Jan. 10 meeting. What would extending the moratorium accomplish? Does the Board have any plans to approach the installation of SmartMeters differently than it has been?

 

The Board of Supervisors voted on Dec. 13 to direct county officials to return on Jan.10, 2012 with an analysis of the existing moratorium, as well as a draft ordinance to extend that moratorium for an additional year.

As to what extending the moratorium would accomplish, you have to look back at what happened prior to, and after, the county’s first moratorium was enacted back in 2010. At that time, PG&E’s initiative to install SmartMeters in millions of homes was well under way. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which is the state agency charged with regulating PG&E, had already approved the $5 billion price tag for the plan, a cost which, as you know, is passed on to the customers as the meters are installed. But from the beginning, PG&E's rollout has been marred by complaints of billing inaccuracies, health and privacy concerns, and the company’s poor customer service in addressing these concerns. Dissatisfied with PG&E’s apparent indifference, customers began taking their complaints directly to the CPUC, whose response, unfortunately, was equally indifferent. It appeared for a time as if customers, held captive by a utility that holds a virtual monopoly on electricity, had nowhere else to turn except their representatives in local government. City and county governments soon began to add their collective voices to the individual complaints, and many passed resolutions either opposing SmartMeter installations, or banning them outright through moratorium ordinances similar to the one we enacted here in Santa Cruz County. Though PG&E has clearly demonstrated that it is not legally required to honor any moratorium passed by local governments, our opposition, ignited by the inexhaustible energy of a small but vocal group of dedicated folks, successfully convinced the CPUC to order PG&E to provide options for customers wishing to opt out of the SmartMeter program.

As to whether/how the Board of Supervisors will take a different approach to the installation of SmartMeters, I think we’ll have a clearer picture of that after our Jan. 10, 2012 meeting.

2. What are the options that the CPUC is considering?

When CPUC officials ordered PG&E to come up with an alternative plan for customers wanting to opt out of the SmartMeter program, shutting off power to a family with young children two weeks before Christmas was almost certainly not what they had in mind. What PG&E apparently failed to appreciate is that concern for one’s health or the health of one’s family trumps everything else. PG&E’s decision to cut power to folks in our community simply because their last act of desperation was to replace the SmartMeter with an analog meter was a despicable one. I’m pleased that power has been restored to these folks, and I would urge the company in the strongest possible terms not to repeat that mistake.

What is before the CPUC right now is PG&E’s “radio-off” proposal, which would allow customers to opt out by switching off the wireless function of the SmartMeter. Initially, PG&E planned to charge customers $135 to $270 up front to have the device's radio transmitter disconnected. Those customers would then pay $14 to $20 per month for a technician to read their meter. While CPUC supports PG&E’s radio-off concept, it indicated that it isn’t willing to allow the utility to charge its customers as much to do it. CPUC’s proposed ruling would allow the utility to charge an upfront fee of $90 and a monthly charge of $15 for most customers, much less than what PG&E asked for in its initial proposal. For CARE customers—lower income or elderly customers on special low rate plans—CPUC’s proposal would waive up-front fees and charge them $5 per month. Once a CPUC approved opt-out plan is put into effect, the delay list would no longer be valid, and all delay customers currently on the delay list would be transitioned to a wireless SmartMeter unless they elect to participate in the opt-out option. The earliest the proposal can come before the CPUC’s Commissioners for a vote is Jan. 12, 2012.

The Board voted unanimously on Dec. 13 to notify CPUC that it opposes any fees levied on those who choose to opt out of SmartMeters. As Supervisor Ellen Pirie and I stated in our letter to the Board, “Customers with health concerns related to SmartMeters should not be forced to buy protection from these meters.” And imposing opt-out charges on low and fixed-income customers enrolled in the CARE program is unconscionable.  

This holiday season, my wish for PG&E is that you may one day “see the light” rather than just profit from it. To the CPUC, I wish you success in your efforts at coming up with the most affordable and equitable solution to a debacle that arose from PG&E’s rotten job of explaining to its customers how the new meters could benefit them.  

Comments (1)Add Comment
...
written by Bill Smallman, January 09, 2012
I respect the right for people not to have their meters making "cell phone calls' emitting emfs. I also know that many people believe the fear of these emf having health effects is overblown. The fact is nobody really knows for sure if there are health effects. Even so, thinking it does, or creating a "negative placebo" clearly would be unhealthy. Obviously, PGE, spent a boatload on R & D on these meters, but they got it wrong in my opinion. I'm not an Electronic Engineer, but why go wireless, when they could be designed to use existing land telephone lines? I've even been told that they could possibly send a signal on the power line itself. It would be Win-Win. Not only would would it eliminate physical meter reading, but meters in rural, non cell phone areas, would work. Suggest this idea to CPUC and PGE. As an aside, there is a benefit to having physical meter reads, as often these people discover problems like gas leaks, bad connections, fire hazards etc. And, why do meter reads once a month on established accounts? Charge an average fixed amount each month, read the meter once or twice a year, and bill the balance.

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

Share this on your social networks

Bookmark and Share

Share this

Bookmark and Share

 

Mercury Enters Libra

It’s the week of Burning Man, the temporary, intentional, alternative, art-filled community on the playas of Nevada. Mercury, messenger of the Sun, enters Libra this week. Libra is the equalizer, a sign of balance and right human relations. Sometimes with Libra, we can be indecisive and confused while learning how to make balanced and right choices. Sometimes to keep the peace we communicate only what others want to hear. Eventually, we learn how to speak from the heart.

 

Final Cut

Cedar Street Video to close after 10 years at downtown location

 

Banter and Spark

Engaging actors, wry script distinguish lightweight rom-com ‘What If’

 

Back to Silicon Beach

With a new wave of startups, the future of Santa Cruz tech looks more promising than ever
Sign up for Good Times weekly newsletter
Get the latest news, events

RSS Feed Burner

 Subscribe in a reader

Latest Comments

 

Himalayan Kitchen

Chef Purna Regmi on the secrets of Nepalese cooking

 

What’s the nicest thing you’ve done for someone this week?

Germany  |  Beekeeper

 

Best of Santa Cruz County

The 2013 Santa Cruz County Readers' Poll and Critics’ Picks It’s our biggest issue of the year, and in it, your votes—more than 6,500 of them—determined the winners of The Best of Santa Cruz County Readers’ Poll. New to the long list of local restaurants, shops and other notables that captured your interest: Best Beer Selection, Best Locally Owned Business, Best Customer Service and Best Marijuana Dispensary. In the meantime, many readers were ever so chatty online about potential new categories. Some of the suggestions that stood out: Best Teen Program and Best Web Design/Designer. But what about: Dog Park, Church, Hotel, Local Farm, Therapist (I second that!) or Sports Bar—not to be confused with Bra. Our favorite suggestion: Best Act of Kindness—one reader noted Café Gratitude and the free meals it offered to the Santa Cruz Police Department in the aftermath of recent crimes. Perhaps some of these can be woven into next year’s ballot, so stay tuned. In the meantime, enjoy the following pages and take note of our Critics’ Picks, too, beginning on page 91. A big thanks for voting—and for reading—and an even bigger congratulations to all of the winners. Enjoy.  -Greg Archer, EditorBest of Santa Cruz County Readers’ Poll INDEX

 

A Cab To Be Coveted

I first tasted Villa del Monte’s 2011 Cabernet Sauvignon at a Fourth of July party, where the hosts had bought a case of it because they love it and didn’t want to run out. It’s one of those wines that will grab you—in the best way—with its full body and rich fruit characteristics.