Opt out fees being contested.

Posted: April 30, 2014 in Uncategorized

Many states that have heavy opt out fees for smart meter customers are seeing bills introduced into their legislatures to get those fees thrown out. In a letter to us Smitty Pignatelli said opting out could be facilitated by simply calling the power company. He never mentioned any fees.

Some current opt out fees in states with smart meters:

CA  $75 initial plus 10/mo
ME was $12… bill will reduce to zero
NV  $110 plus 15/mo
FL $95 plus 13/mo
GA  zero
MD $75 + 11/mo bill would reduce to zero
VT $10 bill would reduce to zero

Headline from utility website: How To Stop Smart Meter Opt-out Mandates.
Obviously the power companies see these opts outs as a cash cow for them.

MA Bill H.2926 to allow opt outs at no cost was introduced by Rep. Thomas Conroy on June 18, 2013 but died in committee.

Is this you? Most I know would rather cut back power usage on their own instead of paying more to the electric company. A recent study found that Americans are willing to pay more for electricity if it means that it comes from cleaner sources, according to a study in Nature Climate Change. The researchers found that the average household would pay $162 more annually, or 13 percent, to support 80 percent clean energy (not including natural gas and nuclear) by 2035.

  1. Xy says:

    In British Columbia, Canada, nearly 200,000 hold outs never opted in. Instead they claimed a right to withhold consent to allow meter removal and to retain the terms of the original contract with the utility. They exposed the fraudulent nature of the so called “choices” program. Most recently they have claimed a right to meter possession. No small accomplishment.
    When resisting transgressions by government in collusion with utilities, it is strategic to not allow the enemy to gain outposts inside your own mind. Language is one of those outposts. One sure way to prevent this is to not use THEIR language to describe YOUR actions. For instance, while it is evident that many are the victims of stealth installation of thee network management communications devices, the term “Opt Out” is still an industry term. It gives the impression that utilities rule. The word reeks of the implication that the issue is one of compliance with authority. Even the casual use of this term Opt Out makes it sound as if the customer is the one with no choice but to be cast in the role of a supplicant who must behave like a serf, hat in hand, and beg the authority for permission to not be harmed, bilked, spied on, and eventually burned in his bed.
    This is all wrong. Language matters.
    The term Opt Out tends to misrepresent the objectives of those who refuse and hold out.
    Of course the ideal is to refuse to opt in in the first place, which is very different than to be tricked and trapped.
    Which is where an industrial grade of whole house suppressor can defeat the primary objective of the smart grid carpet baggers to co-opt private property, use it for their own purposes and trick the customer into paying to run the smart grid.
    Try to buy and have an electrician install a very good quality industrial grade whole house suppressor. It MUST be designed to withstand the heat generated by suppression of smart grid radar microwaves, which is what has been directed into your whole house wiring, with or without a smart meter.
    This is the way to avoid harm until those responsible are forced to remove it To have been forced into the grid is a form of taser rape, forcible electrical induction akin to slow motion electrocution. Thos exposed to this often become chronically disable for life. If this was a hit-and-run car accident would a person describe themselves as requesting a chance to opt out of sustained injuries?
    No one asks to “opt out” of rape.
    The biggest trick involved here was to present this as an individual choice. How can it be a private choice to allow a device capable of sending weaponized frequencies up to thirty miles. Does anyone have a choice when their neighbours “choose”to expose themselves and those all around them to this blanket radiation? And even if they made such as “choice” was it done on the basis of fully informed consent? And if it was not done on the basis of fully informed consent about the many hazards and risk, aren’t those who perpetrated this fully liable for all consequences?
    Many have already used the law for such refusal.
    One cannot be forced to do anything of this nature unless one first grants consent to authorities to rule over one’s life. A utility is not an authority. ON the contrary each private property owner who refuses technological trespass is their own authority and has every right to refuse all of this.
    Your meter socket or base is safety rated and UL rated. So is the electromechanical meter they seek to remove. Your meter socket was designed to be matched to an electromechanical meter. It is electrically incompatible with a smart meter, Your meter socket/base, your service panel or circuit box, your uninsulated home wiring, switches, fixtures, outlets, none of your home’s entire electrical system was designed to withstand nor is intended to be used to transmit conflicting frequencies. The usurpation of your home system to run a smart grid is a form of technological theft of private property, private metadata. It is also tampering which renders your meter socket uninsurable. It is also a form of incipient arcing, a la San Bruno. There is no law which can force anyone to accept a radiation generating and enabling two way transmission surveillance device.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s