The ‘robotaxis’ crowding San Francisco’s streets, and the people who hate them

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — Anyone on San Francisco’s streets knows its latest technical marvel: cars moving through traffic without a driver. Now, unlimited numbers of those vehicles can charge riders while operating at all hours, per the state regulator.

The California Public Utilities Commission in 2022 authorized Waymo to join Cruise LLC in participating in California’s pilot program to offer limited “driverless” vehicle passenger service. Until Thursday, those vehicles operated throughout San Francisco and parts of nearby cities, only charging fares with a driver present.

The commission voted 3-1 to permit the companies to start charging fares when operating unlimited numbers of the driverless vehicles, at all hours. That gives them unprecedented freedom, positioning themselves as leaders in the self-driving cars industry. 

The companies — which report mileage and collisions to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the California Department of Motor Vehicles — claim their vehicles create safer streets. 

However, public pushback has been swift as videos of vehicles stalling at intersections and blocking emergency vehicles spread in recent months.

The San Francisco Fire Department said in a July email that there have been more than 50 incidents where autonomous vehicles blocked emergency vehicles, ran over fire hoses or caught hoses in axles. 

An independent citizens’ group mobilized to protest. Safe Street Rebel members’ videos of placing traffic cones on the cars’ hoods to stop them, dubbed “coning,” went viral.

“Instead of allowing the expansion of AVs, we want the city to invest in public transportation and meet our Vision Zero goals for reduced traffic deaths,” a group statement said.

San Francisco resident Cyrus Hall said that as an engineer, he thinks the companies should pause service to fix glitches and prevent accidents.

“When I’m crossing the street, I want to be able to look at the drivers at the intersection and make eye contact,” he said. “You simply cannot do that with a robot.”

Hall said the companies are acting quickly because they are “hemorrhaging money.” Waymo has gone through rounds of layoffs and The Verge reported in April that Cruise lost $561 million during 2023’s first quarter. However, the latter said it will hit $1 billion in revenue by 2025.

“The AV market is on the knife’s edge, which is why they want authorization for widespread use so they can get more money from their investors,” Hall said. 

Berkeley resident Matthew Lewis said he thinks that unlimited autonomous vehicles will worsen the city’s traffic congestion. He pointed out that San Francisco already restricts how many taxis can operate to prevent congestion, and the county Transportation Authority reported in 2018 that Uber and Lyft accounted for 50% of increasing congestion between 2010-2016.

Shanin Specter, an injury attorney lecturing at UC Law San Francisco, said he thinks autonomous vehicles have not been proven as safer than human-driven cars. He thinks that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration should regulate the vehicles.

“I think there needs to be a very rigorous and detailed assessment of safety that takes into account the thousands of various circumstances that could arise that test the safety of the vehicle,” he said.

In the commission’s special hearing Monday to assess the vehicles’ safety issues, Cruise employees said that the vehicles experience fewer than half as many collisions as those caused by human drivers. The company said it runs 300 vehicles during the night and 100 during the day. 

But city officials said the number of incidents of vehicles blocking emergency crews have worsened. The companies’ remote operators can only send suggestions to a stalled vehicle, rather than moving it remotely. 

Cruise and Waymo said in rare cases first responders can take control of a vehicle. San Francisco’s fire chief Jeanine Nicholson retorted: “It’s not our job to babysit their vehicles.”

Nicholson told the commission Monday neither company reports data counting all “interference” incidents. She said they don't communicate with the city effectively and that “It’s been a one-way conversation.” 

More than 100 people spent four hours Thursday debating the issue. Some opposed permitting more vehicles, saying they want better regulation of the companies’ software. Others protested Commissioner John Reynolds voting on the matter, since he was a lawyer for Cruise in 2021.

San Francisco Paratransit Coordinating Council vice chair Jessica Felix said private companies are not exempt from the Americans with Disabilities Act, and that autonomous vehicles are not compliant.

But others supported the vehicles, calling them safer than human drivers and an option to help people living with disabilities get around safely. 

National Federation of the Blind California president Tim Elder said, “Blind people really benefit from this technology. We need to responsibly expand it. The need for these is really high.”

Commissioner Genevieve Shiroma was the only detractor. Reynolds did not recuse himself, saying enough time has passed since his employment at Cruise.

Follow @nhanson_reports

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit