“Your home needs to be a sanctuary”: Berkshire residents clash with Eversource over smart meter safety
An Eversource representative defended the benefits of the smart meters, while others reported health issues and alleged privacy claims resulting from the device’s rollout.
Written byLeslee Bassman
March 24, 2026Lee — Following several meetings discussing the rollout of new smart meters by electric provider Eversource, the Lee Select Board hosted a community forum on March 23, hoping to resolve some of the questions Berkshire residents—like Courtney Gilardi—have about the program. The new smart meters will replace the current meters of all Eversource customers in Massachusetts.
Gilardi’s two children suffer from electromagnetic field (EMF) sensitivity, an issue stemming from exposure to radio frequency (RF) signals. The illness prompted their physician to suggest the girls stay away from devices that emit those signals. As a result of EMF exposure, Gilardi said her daughters experience skin rashes, nausea, dizziness, and headaches.
For Gilardi, the problem is that the new digital electric meters transmit data from homes or businesses through a communication circuit, ultimately landing in the company’s information system. That transmission is accomplished through a constant pulsing of radio frequency (RF) signals, an issue for the Lenox/Pittsfield mother who has tried to maintain a hardwired household to minimize the risk of EMF contamination for her family. At the session, Gilardi voiced concern over the safety testing of such devices that lack an evaluation for their biological effects and asked Eversource to offer a program for elderly, disabled, and medically impaired individuals so those groups can avoid RF emissions. “Your home needs to be a sanctuary,” she said.
Eversource addresses benefits, concerns surrounding smart meters
Eversource Senior Vice President Jared Lawrence touted the smart meter rollout as one of corporate efficiency, obviating the need for drivers to go through community streets to collect ratepayers’ energy usage data. Likewise, the benefits extend to ratepayers endowed with increased control over their usage by gaining information in real time as to how much electricity they are using and avoiding a surprise bill at the end of the month, he said. The technology will also assist in power outages, allowing company technicians to detect outages as they occur, even if the homeowner or tenant is away.
Although smart meters have been in use in other states across the country, some users are opposed to the devices and have reported that, in addition to health risks, the units cause home fires and higher bills and constitute an invasion of privacy with the minute-by-minute data submitted to utilities.
Lawrence defended the product as “100 percent safe for our customers.” He countered that the unit would communicate with the system for only about 60 seconds daily but will sound a “chirp” more often to maintain contact with the network in place. The data accumulated by the device is not shared with outsiders unless the ratepayer agrees, Lawrence said, and smart meter communications are made through a single, closed system to prevent cyber issues. With smart meters, entire communities are better off as the site of a problem—such as a fallen tree causing a power outage—can be immediately diagnosed remotely, he said.
Lawrence noted that not a single smart meter of the 8 million devices under his purview has ever been the source of a fire. He advocated that the smart meter contains the same type of battery that is installed in a home smoke detector and the new technology has withstood testing by its manufacturer and UL. Lawrence said his data shows that the intensity of the RF pulses produced by the device “are drastically less” than what is emitted from other home devices.
“I do believe that it’s well within the range of what is considered safe,” he said of the smart meters.
For Gilardi and others, opting out of the new devices comes at a cost: $34 per month, representing the cost to Eversource to send a technician to the home to gather the billing cycle data instead of a smart meter offering remote transmission. A one-time $42 fee will also be charged to a customer who opts out if a smart meter has already been installed.
Lawrence said he supports the right of customers to choose not to have the communicating smart meters in their home but held firm that the opt-out fee is needed to reconcile the additional effort his company must make to retrieve the pertinent billing information. That rationale did not bode well for most forum attendees.
“It’s very expensive for people who are on fixed incomes,” Gilardi said. “Our taxes and even just our electric bills, we’re having a hard time paying. For many people, they’re choosing between eating and having to keep their electricity on or medications. So, $400 [a year] is significant to many of us in the community.”
According to Lawrence, all Eversource customers are destined for a new meter. The only difference in the meter for those opting out is the communication switch that will be toggled off. For those opting out, the smart meter will post “radOff” as its status to indicate the device is not communicating or connected to the Eversource network. Should a consumer deny the Eversource technician access to the meter for the changeout, electric service to that ratepayer will be discontinued, Lawrence said.
Other participants asked Lawrence if his company would consider retaining analog meters, with the ratepayer held to email in the meter reading and eliminate possible surveillance issues or fire and health risks.
Safer technology as an answer
Cecilia “Cece” Doucette, co-founder and director of both Massachusetts for Safe Technology and Safer Screen Time, alerted the audience to the “invisible serious risk” posed by EMF exposure and the heightened RF pulses inherent in smart meters. Those risks reportedly carry long-term effects such as cancer, DNA damage, infertility, neurotoxicity, autism, and Alzheimer’s disease, as well as short-term effects including insomnia, headaches, nosebleeds, fatigue, irregular heartbeat, and behavioral issues. Children are most at risk for negative impacts from RF exposure as they develop.
Doucette advocated for safer technology—that is, actions residents can take to hardwire their homes, thereby lessening RF exposure. She countered Eversource’s opt-out fee with data that Vermont customers have not been subject to an opt-out fee since 2012 and pointed to promising pending legislation within Massachusetts that would eliminate opt-out fees.
Doucette’s slide presentation can be found here.
Building biologist Rex Funk, who is also an electromagnetic radiation specialist based in Woodstock, N.Y., offered a historical overview of electric meters that began as analog devices requiring a meter reader to gain data. The technology then moved to battery-powered devices before evolving into automated meters that broadcast to a utility networking infrastructure but require a drive-by vehicle for reading. With the current advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), or smart meters that offer two-way radiation transmissions, Funk agreed with Doucette that this final iteration means “much more radiation.”
When it comes to smart meters, he offered methods to lessen RF exposure such as not installing the device on a bedroom wall, requesting an opt-out meter that does not radiate RF, relocating or shielding a broadcast antenna, and agreeing to upload a monthly photo of an analog meter for a reading.
Funk’s slide presentation can be found here.
Lee Select Board members previously submitted a letter to state officials supporting pending legislation promoting a no-fee smart meter opt-out choice for customers and signed a resolution placing a moratorium on smart meters within the town. However, the latter measure has failed for other municipalities that passed a smart meter ban as determined to be “non-binding” by the state’s attorney general.
S.A.F.E. Helps You 