Residents urge Longmont to allow analog meters, allege ADA appeal denied in hearing officers' ruling

Several residents used the public-comment period at the Longmont City Council meeting to press the council to change the city's approach to smart meters and to revisit recent Americans with Disabilities Act accommodation denials.

Susan Foster and several people speaking on her behalf described a multi-stage administrative appeal that they said excluded expert testimony and denied requested accommodations. Foster said she submitted an ADA accommodation request to the city's ADA coordinator in April seeking to "keep my analog meter because of the critical impact wireless technology can have on my damaged spinal nerves and my heart," and that she was denied by staff, city attorneys and a hearing officer. She told the council her 12-page appeal included five experts but that the hearing officer rejected some testimony and denied the appeal in a written decision dated Aug. 23.

Several other speakers echoed Foster's claims and described health and housing impacts. In public testimony, Rosanna Jenny and Linda Lee said experts were excluded from their appeal hearing. Zoe (spelled "Zoe" in the transcript) Galloway said she has experienced hundreds of days of homelessness which she attributed to smart meters and Longmont Power & Communications' (LPC) refusal to permit disability modifications: "I have experienced 370 days of homelessness because of the smart meter and Longmont Power And Communications refusal to permit me my disability modification," she said in public comment. Galloway asked the council to compel immediate relief and to change meters on neighboring houses back to older AMR meters.

Speakers referenced national and state-level examples and organizational resolutions. Foster said she organized a brain-scan study of firefighters and noted that the International Association of Fire Fighters passed a resolution in 2004 calling for a moratorium on cell towers at fire stations; she also said California adopted a firefighter accommodation in 2015. Several commenters argued that the U.S. Access Board has recognized electromagnetic sensitivity in guidance documents and that ADA rules require reasonable accommodations unless doing so would impose an undue burden or fundamentally alter a program.

Longmont staff and officials were mentioned by name in testimony. Foster and others said they had submitted appeals to the city and that hearing officer Brian Luther sided with staff and city attorney Jamie Roth in denying accommodations. At the meeting, council members did not act on the appeals but heard the testimony and signaled they had received the complaints; the comments were recorded into the public record for staff follow-up.

Public commenters asked the council to take three specific actions: 1) add an analog opt-out option into city code; 2) hire an independent investigator to review the due-process handling of the appeals and whether proper procedures were followed by city attorneys and hearing officers; and 3) stop any discriminatory surcharges on people who require modifications for medical reasons.

Council did not take immediate action during the meeting. No ordinance or resolution was introduced on the spot. Several councilors and city staff acknowledged receipt of the complaints and indicated staff would review the appeals record and the procedural questions raised.

","sections":{"lede":"Multiple residents told the City Council that Longmont Power & Communications denied ADA accommodation requests related to smart meters and that hearing procedures excluded expert testimony; they urged an analog opt-out and an independent review of the appeal process.","nut_graf":"Speakers described long administrative histories, medical concerns, excluded expert witnesses at appeal hearings, and in at least one case alleged long-term homelessness tied to smart-meter exposure. Commenters asked the council to amend city code to allow analog meters and to investigate whether due process and disability rights were respected in city appeals.","ending":"Council did not act on the requests during the meeting; staff acknowledged the complaints and will review the hearing record and procedural questions raised by speakers."},