Robotaxis Make Headway in California
SACRAMENTO — California’s government obviously is notorious for its slow-moving and bureaucratic permitting processes — and its frequent hostility to private enterprise. Despite the state budget’s reliance on capital-gains revenue from the tech industry, officials here also can be quite meddlesome when it comes to AI and social media. But recent news from the California Public Utilities Commission, which regulates autonomous passenger-service vehicles, offers some encouraging news.
The agency announced last month that it will allow Waymo’s driverless taxis to expand into 12 additional counties, bringing its footprint to 18 counties that serve most of the state’s 39-million residents, per news reports. This includes two entirely new markets, Sacramento and San Diego. I’ve been watching Waymos pilot around the capital city in tests for months, but they have, by requirement, done so with a human driver. Now we’ll see them in driverless mode.
By approving Waymo’s Advice Letter No. 4 that was submitted in January, the commission acted fairly rapidly by state bureaucratic standards. And, per a report in Electrek, the agency gave the company great latitude, as it applies to “all speed limits, freeways, highways, city streets, rural roads, parking lots, driveways, and rail crossings, day and night, in rain, fog and hail. The only real carve-out is widespread snow or ice.” The latter isn’t an issue in any of the state’s metro areas.
There’s really no downside to allowing this company to expand its operations, and many upsides — especially given its gradual rollout and safety-focused strategy. The worst jab, per The Los Angeles Times: “Still, collisions involving Waymo vehicles have garnered public attention and criticism, including when a Waymo struck and killed a beloved neighborhood cat in San Francisco last year.” Remember that a Waymo-involved collision is not necessarily a Waymo-caused collision.
And if the death of a cat, however sad, is critics’ biggest gripe, then the AV industry is doing well on the safety front. The data certainly confirms that point. A July report from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, an insurance industry research group known for automobile crash tests, found: “Per vehicle mile traveled (VMT), Waymo’s driverless vehicles deployed in San Francisco, Phoenix, Los Angeles and Austin were involved in 68 percent fewer crashes than human drivers, researchers found. The sample was restricted to crashes that a person would typically report to the police.”
A 2024 study from the prominent reinsurance company, Swiss Re, found: “The Waymo Driver exhibited significantly better safety performance, with an 88 percent reduction in property damage claims and a 92 percent reduction in bodily injury claims compared to human-driven vehicles,” per Reinsurance News. That was based on 500,000 claims and 2 billion miles driven. There’s always room for better accident tracking and closer monitoring of safety data, but these are pretty clear numbers that have been extensively reported by the news media. Yet public and legislative concerns remain.
The former stems largely from the strange nature of the new technology. It’s odd seeing a car driving around without a driver. (The first trip in one is fascinating, but it quickly becomes routine.) The technology has had a few problems. For instance, there were reports of San Francisco Waymos blocking streets during a power outage — something the company has since addressed with updated software and new service protocols. The company also paused service in some cities following severe weather. But these are normal growing pains in any innovative industry.
Legislators, however, are a different story. Many are allied with transportation unions, which see the technology as an existential threat to their workforce — especially if it expands to long-haul trucking. Some states are embracing laws that require a driver in them, which defeats the purpose of the technology — and won’t protect many jobs, anyway.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom had vetoed such a bill for large trucks in 2024. That year, a more troubling measure would have allowed local governments to individually regulate them. That could have seriously hobbled the industry, as it’s difficult to navigate multiple laws given the number of individual cities in the state’s major metros. It died. At the regulatory level, robotaxis also need permits and approval from the Department of Motor Vehicles, which last year gave Waymo the OK to begin driverless testing in additional cities.
Beyond safety, the expansion of robotaxis provides another alternative for Californians to get around, which is always a plus. The breakup of the taxi cartel by these new technologies — first ride-sharing services (Uber and Lyft) and now Waymo and some of its potential competitors (Zoox and Tesla) —offers more choice. Competition always is good for keeping down prices. I recently hailed a traditional taxi at an airport as drivers argued over who would take me — and it reminded me of how much this whole experience has improved thanks to these app-based technologies.
But perhaps the most heartening thing, from someone who covers California’s regulatory morass, is watching the state finally get its act together and approve a promising new technology. The process has taken some time and hasn’t been without contention, but the latest approval still might offer valuable lessons for other California agencies.