La
w and Legislation Report
915 I Street, 1st Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2022-00191 June 21, 2022
T
itle: Legislative Advocacy Correspondence
Locat
ion: Citywide
R
ecommendation: Receive and file.
C
ontact: Consuelo Hernandez, Director of Governmental Affairs, (916) 808-7395, [email protected], Office of the City Manager P
resenter: None
A
ttachments:
1-Legislative Advocacy Correspondence_May _2022
Date Bill/Subject Author Description of Issue Position Notes 5/19/2022
Comments on CPUC Draft Resolution Approving Cruise LLC's Application for Autonomous Vehicle Passenger Service Phase 1 Driverless Deployment Program
5/13/2022 AB 2895 Arambula
Permits and Licenses: Temporary Changes: Water or Water Rights Transfer
Oppose Unless
Amended
5/6/2022 AB 2142 Gabriel
Income Taxes: Exclusion: Turf Replacement Water Conservation Program Support Coalition letter
5/3/2022 AB 1690 L. Rivas Vaping Waste Pollution Prevention Act Support Coalition letter 5/3/2022 AB 2208 Kalra Mercury Lamp Pollution Prevention Act Support Coalition letter 4/29/2022 IIJA Implementation
FHWA Request for Public Input on the Implementation of the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act
Federal Highways Administration
Request for Input - City Cover Letter
4/19/2022 SB 1410 Caballero CEQA: Transportation Impacts Oppose Senate Environmental Quality
Committee
4/7/2022
RAISE Grant
Application
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission’s application for RAISE program to implement the North Lathrop Transfer Station and Lathrop Wye Project Support
3/24/2022 SB 1369 Wieckowski Adaptive Reuse Projects: By-Right: Funding Support Senate Governance and Finance
Committee
3/22/2022 SB 1370 Pan Alcoholic Beverages: Licensees Support Senate Governmental Organization
Committee
3/22/2022 SB 907 Pan Electronic Benefits Transfer Systems: Farmers' Markets Support Senate Human Resources Committee 3/22/2022 AB 2120 Friedman Transportation Finance: Federal Funding: Bridget Support Assembly Transportation Committee Position Letters 2021-2022
3/17/2022 AB 1858 Wicks Substandard Buildings Support
Assembly Housing and Community
Development Committee
3/17/2022 AB 1939 Rivas Pupil Instruction: Science Requirements: Climate Change Support Assembly Education Committee 3/14/2022 AB 2142 Gabriel
Income Taxes: Exclusion: Turf Replacement Water Conservation Program Support
Assembly Revenue and Taxation
Committee
3/8/2022 SB 1065 Eggman Abandoned and Derelict Commercial Vessels Support Senate Natural Resources and Water
Committee
2/20/2022
SJRRC/SJJPA Valley
Rail Program
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC) and San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA) grant application requesting funding to continue expansion of the SJRRC/SJJPA Valley Rail Program Support 1/18/2022 AB 1400 Kalra California Guaranteed Health Care for All Act Support Assembly Appropriations Committee 1/11/2022 SB 513 Hertzberg Homeless Shelter Grants: Pets and Veterinary Services Support 12/27/2021 AB 1400 Kalra California Guaranteed Health Care for All Act Support 11/16/2021
Comments on proposed Disadvantaged Community Designation, CalEnviroScreen 4.0
Support with
concerns
9/20/2021 SB 792 Glazer Sales and use tax: reporting: retailers Request for
Governor signature
9/17/2021 AB 122
Boerner
Horvath Vehicles: required stops: bicycles
Request for
Governor signature
9/14/2021 AB 970 McCarty Electric vehicle charging stations: permit approvals Request for
Governor signature
9/14/2021 AB 1443 McCarty Mental health: involuntary treatment Request for
Governor signature
8/31/2021 SB 222 Dodd Water Rate Assistance Program Support 8/12/2021 AB 988 Bauer-Kahan Mental health: 988 crisis hotline Support Governmental Organization
Committee
8/12/2021 AB 988 Bauer-Kahan Mental health: 988 crisis hotline Support Health Committee 8/12/2021 SB 222 Dodd Water Rate Assistance Program Support if amended 7/1/2021 AB 970 McCarty Electric vehicle charging stations: permit approvals Support 6/30/2021 AB 1443 McCarty Mental health: involuntary treatment Sponsor 6/29/2021
Support of San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission’s (SJRRC) application for $25 million from USDOT’s Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) program Support
6/25/2021 AB 122
Boerner
Horvath Vehicles: required stops: bicycles Support
6/25/2021 SCR 51 Pan Sacramento Municipal Utility District: zero-carbon emissions goal Support Coalition letter 6/16/2021 AB 777 McCarty State property: transfer: housing Support 6/7/2021 H.R. 3404 Rep. Huffman The FUTURE Western Water Infrastructure Drought Resiliency Act Support 6/7/2021 Cannabis state budget request Support
5/26/2021 Transportation state budget request Support
5/26/2021 CA Child Savings Accounts state budget request Support Coalition letter 5/17/2021 SB 210 Wiener Automated license plate recognition systems: use of data Opposition 5/4/2021 State Historic Tax Credit Program state budget request Support 4/22/2021 AB 777 McCarty State property: transfer: housing Support 4/20/2021 AB 859 Irwin Mobility devices: personal information Oppose Unless
Amended Coalition letter
4/13/2021 Independent Live Venues state budget request Support 4/13/2021 Green Means Go state budget request Support
4/13/2021 AB 1443 McCarty Mental health: involuntary treatment Sponsor AB 43 Friedman Setting speed limits to enhance traffic safety Support 4/12/2021 AB 550 Chiu The Safe Streets and Work Zones Act of 2021 Support 4/12/2021 AB 1500 Garcia
Water, Wildfire, Prevention, Drought Preparation, Flood Protection, Extreme Heat Mitigation, and Workforce Development Bond Act of 2022
4/1/2021 AB 859 Irwin Mobility devices: personal information Oppose Unless
Amended
3/30/2021 SB 369 Pan
Flood control: Yolo Bypass Cache Slough Partnership Multibenefit Program Support
2/3/2021 AB 122
Boerner
Horvath Vehicles: required stops: bicycles Support
Letter to California High-Speed Rail Authority re draft 2020 Business Plan Support
2/3/2021 SB 323 Caballero Local government: water and sewer service: legal actions Support Coalition letter with the Assn of CA
Water Agencies (ACWA) and others
2/3/2021 SB 45 Portantino
Wildfire Prevention, Safe Drinking Water, Drought Preparation, and Flood Protection Bond Act of 2022 Support
Coalition letter with other water
agencies
1/26/2021 AB 80/SB 91
Assembly &
Senate Budget
Committees COVID-19 relief: tenancy: federal rental assistance Support December 2020 AB 15 Chiu COVID eviction protection Support 12/15/2020
Letters to Dept. of Public Health asking that essential water services workers be included in Phase 1-B vaccine distribution
Regional Water Authority and
California Municipal Utilities Assn
coalition letters
12/14/2020
Letter to CA Air Resources Board requesting Sacramento be included in year 3 of the AB 617 Community Air Protection Program
Floor Alert!
Support AB 2208 (Kalra): Mercury Lamp Pollution Prevention Act
• Phases out the sale of general purpose compact fluorescent lamps by 1/1/2024 and linear fluorescent lamps by 1/1/2025.
• All fluorescent lamps contain mercury. Mercury and its compounds are highly toxic to humans and the World Health Organization puts mercury in the top ten most problematic chemicals for public health. Worse, the mercury is contained in thin glass lamps that break easily and expose people to mercury vapors of which they are often unaware of the dangers of the exposure or how to safely clean-up a broken lamp.
• Mercury lamps must be brought to a household hazardous waste facility to properly dispose of them, and many don’t and instead throw them in the trash, where they break and create direct exposure of mercury to workers in solid waste and recycling systems.
• Light emitting diode (LED) technology can easily and affordably replace fluorescent lamps and are readily available in stores throughout California. LEDs use approximately half the electricity as fluorescents to produce the same amount of light, last 2-3 times longer, and do not contain any mercury.
• AB 2208 is a climate protection measure that would accelerate the transition to a low- carbon economy through use of energy-efficient LED lighting.
• The Statewide Commission on Recycling Markets and Curbside Recycling recommended banning the sale of fluorescent lamps due to readily available mercury-free options.
• AB 2208 will save California consumers $1 billion annually on their residential, commercial, and industrial utility bills by 2030 by transitioning to LEDs.
• AB 2208 exempts special purpose fluorescent lamps including those used in pharmaceutical product manufacturing or quality control, suntanning, medical or veterinary diagnosis or treatment, medical devices, and spectroscopy and photometric applications.
This bill is supported by over 30 waste haulers and recyclers, local governments, environmental organizations, NGOs, and national and statewide recycling associations.
Contact: Priscilla Quiroz, (805) 846-3644
[email protected]
National Stewardship Action Council (Sponsor)
Active San Gabriel Valley
Atrium 916
California Electronic Asset Recovery
California Product Stewardship Council
Californians Against Waste
Center for Environmental Health
City of Sacramento
City of Sunnyvale
Clean Water Action
Eco-Healthy Child Care
Ecology Center
Environmental Working Group
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Green Science Policy Institute
GreenWaste
National Association of Environmental Medicine
Natural Resources Defense Council
Republic Services
Responsible Purchasing Network
RethinkWaste
Safer Made
Safer States
San Francisco Baykeeper
Sea Hugger
Sierra Club California
StopWaste
The Story of Stuff Project
SWANA California Chapter’s Legislative Task Force
Tri-CED Community Recycling
Turtle Island Restoration Network
Western Placer Waste Management Authority
Women's Voices for the Earth
Zero Waste Sonoma
7th Generation Advisors
Floor Alert!
Support AB 1690 (L. Rivas): Vaping Waste Pollution Prevention Act
• Phases out the sale of single-use, all-in-one non-rechargeable and non-refillable electronic vaping devices for tobacco by 1/1/2024.
• Vaping devices are hazardous waste and illegal to dispose of in California’s trash or recycling stream.
• Californians are confused by misleading labels and unknowingly discard vaping devices into household waste or recycling bins where they can, and do, cause explosions and fires that can result in catastrophic and costly damage to property and the environment, with the potential to hurt people working in the waste industry.
• Among youth, e-cigarettes, especially the disposables, are more popular than any traditional tobacco product because they are cheaper to purchase. About 54% of youth who use e-cigarettes use disposables. In 2020, the use of disposable e-cigarettes increased about 1,000% among high-school e-cigarette users and 400% among middle- school e-cigarette users.
• 51% of young e-cigarette users reported disposing of empty disposables in the trash, 17% in a regular recycling bin not designed for e-cigarette waste, and 10% reported they simply throw them on the ground.
• The Statewide Commission on Recycling Markets and Curbside Recycling and California’s Ocean Protection Council has both recommended banning the sale of e-cigarettes.
• AB 1690 will eliminate a source of single-use electronic waste and risk of fires in our materials management system.
This bill is supported by over 30 waste haulers and recyclers, local governments, environmental stewardship organizations, NGOs, and national and statewide recycling associations.
Contact: Priscilla Quiroz, (805) 846-3644
[email protected]
National Stewardship Action Council (Sponsor)
African American Tobacco Control Leadership Council
Association of California Healthcare Districts
Breathe Southern California
Californians Against Waste
Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research, and Education (COARE) City of Sacramento
Defenders of Wildlife
Families Advocating for Chemical and Toxics Safety (FACTS) Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Friends of the Ballona Wetlands
Friends of the Petaluma River
Heal the Bay
Human Response Network
Northern California Recycling Association
Oceana
Pacific Beach Coalition
Plastic Oceans International
Plastic Pollution Coalition
Republic Services
RethinkWaste
Russian River Watershed Association
San Francisco Tobacco-Free Coalition
San Luis Obispo County Tobacco Control Coalition
Santa Clara County Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission Save Our Shores
Save the Albatross Coalition
Sea Hugger
Seventh Generation Advisors
Surfrider Foundation
Tobacco-Free Coalition of Santa Clara County
UPSTREAM
West County Wastewater
Wishtoyo Chumash Foundation
Zero Waste Sonoma
Zero Waste USA
The 5 Gyres Institute
May 6, 2022
The Honorable Chris R. Holden
Chair, Assembly Appropriations Committee
1021 O Street, Suite 8220
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: AB 2142 (Gabriel) – Income taxes: exclusion: turf replacement water conservation program – Support
Dear Chair Holden:
The undersigned organizations are pleased to support AB 2142 (Gabriel). This bill will reinstate an important exemption for turf replacement rebates from gross income in California, aligning it with certain other permanently exempt water efficiency rebates.
The Honorable Chris R. Holden AB 2142 (Gabriel)
May 6, 2022 • Page 2
California is in its second drought within a decade and it is critical for the state to continue to invest in both immediate conservation and ongoing water efficiency as we adapt to climate change. Water efficiency incentive programs are an effective tool in this effort. For example, since 1990, The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MET) has invested more than $840 million in rebates and other conservation incentives, resulting in an estimated water savings of nearly 3.5 million acre feet, enough to provide water for more than 10 million households.
Further, even when the state is not facing drought conditions, California has made a commitment to “Conservation as a California Way of Life” through the enactment of SB 606 (Hertzberg, 2018) and AB 1668 (Friedman, 2018). As part of that commitment, the Administration is in the process of establishing a water use objective for urban water agencies that will create numeric goals that each agency must meet, and incentive programs will be key to its success.
The Franchise Tax Board has projected minimal General Fund revenue impacts with losses in 2022-23 being $150,000 and $100,000 in future years. The significant financial and environmental benefits of these turf replacement programs far outweighs the minimal fiscal impact. Further, low to middle-income households benefit most from these programs. In a 2019 study utilizing census tract data, MET found that 68 percent of their turf replacement rebates went to low to medium-income households; San Diego County Water Authority did a similar study, and found that 55 percent went to low to medium-income families.
The State has permanently exempted other water efficiency rebates, recognizing their effectiveness in advancing efficiency objectives. Rebates for water efficient toilets and clothes washers, certain plumbing for recycled water, and energy conservation are all permanently exempt from both personal and corporate taxes in California. (Cal. Rev. & Tax Code §§ 17138, 17138.1, 24308.1.) Turf replacement programs, like these other rebates, play an important role in continued water efficiency and conservation efforts.
Taxing water efficiency rebates is a disincentive for households to participate in these critical programs.
Even with incentives, most households will need to invest a significant amount of their own income to replace lawns with drought-tolerant landscaping. And taxing these rebates is an especially significant barrier for low-income households who participate in these programs.
California Law previously exempted turf rebates from taxable income, but those provisions were allowed to sunset in December 2019. Part of the rationale at that time was that California was not in a drought, but the environment is changing rapidly due to the impacts of climate change and it is important that the State’s public policy reflects this changing reality.
For these reasons, the undersigned organizations respectfully request your “Aye” vote when the bill is heard in the Assembly Committee on Appropriations.
Sincerely,
Jennifer M. Capitolo
Executive Director
California Water Association
Danielle Blacet
Deputy Executive Director
California Municipal Utilities Association
Justin Skarb
Director of Community Affairs & Government Relations
California Water Service
Sarah Foley
Executive Director of Operations
California Water Efficiency Partnership
The Honorable Chris R. Holden AB 2142 (Gabriel)
May 6, 2022 • Page 3
Derek Dolfie
Legislative Affairs, Lobbyist
League of California Cities
Jessica Gauger
Director of Legislative Advocacy & Public Affairs
California Association of Sanitation Agencies
Rosario Cortes Kapeller
Senior Legislative Respresentative
California Special Districts Association
Gary Link
Legislative Affairs Director
Northern California Water Association
Caroline Koch
Water Policy Director
WaterNow Alliance
Sean Bothwell
Executive Director
California Coastkeeper Alliance
Garry Brown
Founding Director
Orange County Coastkeeper
Inland Empire Waterkeeper
Coachella Valley Waterkeeper
Ben Pitterle
Science and Policy Director
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper
Charles Wilson
Executive Director
Southern California Water Coalition
Nicole Sasaki
Staff Attorney
San Francisco Baykeeper
James Peifer
Executive Director
Regional Water Authority
Deanna Jackson
Executive Director
Tri-County Water Authority
Mary Ann Dickinson
CEO
Dickinson Associates
Adel Hagekhalil
General Manager
Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California
Gary Arant
General Manager
Valley Center Municipal Water District
Donald M. Zdeba
General Manager
Indian Wells Valley Water District
Paul Helliker
General Manager
San Juan Water District
Greg Thomas
General Manager
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
John Bosler
General Manager/CEO
Cucamonga Valley Water District
John Mura
General Manager/CEO
East Valley Water District
Peter Sanchez
General Manager-Secretary
Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District
Jessaca Lugo
City Manager
City of Shasta Lake
Chris Rogers
Mayor
City of Santa Rosa
Krista Bernasconi
Mayor
City of Roseville
The Honorable Chris R. Holden AB 2142 (Gabriel)
May 6, 2022 • Page 4
Joshua Haggmark
Water Resources Manager
City of Santa Barbara
William Busath
Director
City of Sacramento, Department of Utilities
Robert Grantham
General Manager
Rancho California Water District
Paul A. Cook, P.E.
General Manager
Irvine Ranch Water District
Steven J. Elie
Board President
Inland Empire Utilities Agency
Anthony Goff
General Manager
Calleguas Municipal Water District
Dan Muelrath
General Manager
Diablo Water District
Matthew Litchfield
General Manager
Three Valleys Municipal Water District
Thomas A. Love
General Manager
Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District
Paul E. Shoenberger, P.E.
General Manager
Mesa Water District
Grant Davis
General Manager
Sonoma County Water Agency
Erik Hitchman
General Manager
Walnut Valley Water District
Ed Stevenson
General Manager
Alameda County Water District
Nina Jazmadarian
General Manager
Foothill Municipal Water District
Stephen L. Cole
Assistant General Manager
Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency
Jim Barrett
General Manager
Coachella Valley Water District
Lisa M. Borba
President
Contra Costa Water District
Mark S. Krause
General Manager
Desert Water Agency
David Pedersen
General Manager
Las Virgenes Municipal Water District
Ben Horenstein
General Manger
Marin Municipal Water District
Robert J. Hunter
General Manager
Municipal Water District of Orange County
Allen Carlisle
General Manager/CEO
Padre Dam Municipal Water District
Brett Hodgkiss
General Manager
Vista Irrigation District
Gregory R. Reed
General Manager
West Basin Municipal Water District
The Honorable Chris R. Holden AB 2142 (Gabriel)
May 6, 2022 • Page 5
J. Wayne Miller
President
Yorba Linda Water District
Angela Ramirez Holmes
President of the Board of Directors
Zone 7 Water Agency
Joe Mouawad, P.E.
General Manager
Eastern Municipal Water District
Mike Alvarado
General Manager
La Cumbre Water Company
Michael R. Markus, P.E., D.WRE.
General Manager
Orange County Water District
Robert McDonald, P.E., MPA
General Manager
Carpinteria Valley Water District
Carlos Lugo
General Manager
Helix Water District
Ron Duncan
General Manager
Soquel Creek Water District
Matt Young
Manager
Santa Barbara County Water Agency
CC: The Honorable Jesse Gabriel
Members, Assembly Appropriations Committee
May 13, 2022
The Honorable Dr. Joaquin Arambula
California State Assembly
1021 O Street, Suite 6240
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: AB 2895 (ARAMBULA) WATER: PERMITS AND LICENSES: TEMPORARY CHANGES: WATER OR WATER RIGHTS TRANSFERS - OPPOSE UNLESS
AMENDED
Dear Assembly Member Arambula:
On behalf of the City of Sacramento (City), I am writing with an “Oppose Unless Amended” position on AB 2895, as amended on April 27, 2022, which is intended to facilitate the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) processing of temporary change petitions for water transfers of one-year, or less.
AB 2895 would cause further delay to the time sensitive temporary water transfer process. Though intended to facilitate the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) processing of temporary change petitions, AB 2895 would have the opposite effect by causing unnecessary delays that hinder timely access to transferred water.
Temporary water transfers are time sensitive and based on hydrologic conditions that typically are not fully realized until the spring. AB 2895’s additions of “documentation of consultation with DFW”, the creation of a “pre-notice” to the SWRCB, and the changes to the SWRCB’s hearing provisions, create added uncertainty for the petitioners, extend the timeline of the temporary transfer approval process, and potentially cause the transferred water to not be delivered where it is needed most.
While AB 2895 is intended to facilitate the SWRCB’s processing of temporary water transfer petitions, as a water transferrer, the City is concerned that this bill will have the opposite effect by causing additional delays. These delays will not only negatively impact access to transferred water, but the City utilizes the revenues generated to fund low-income programs for our qualified customers and offset the cost of climate adaptive critical infrastructure projects to avoid rate adjustments. 915 I Street New City Hall 5th Floor
Sacramento, California 95814-2604
[email protected] O: 916.808.7005 F: 916.264.7680 The City shares the concerns raised by others, and should the following amendments be adopted, the City will remove its opposition:
• D
elete section 1726(b)(3) that requires documentation of consultation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) to accompany each petition; or revise it to conform it with the existing requirement in 23 CCR section 794 that requires a petition to include proof that a copy of the petition has been served on DFW. • Restore the SWRCB hearing provisions for temporary change petitions back to existing law by reinserting the petitioner approval and decision deadline language.
• Amend the “pre-notice” provisions (section 1727) to require that the SWRCB utilize the existing WTIMs (Water Transfer Information Management system), managed by DWR, which already provides a venue for filing a preliminary intent to transfer and assists resource agencies in anticipating the potential for the year. • Consider whether a double public comment period is consistent with intent to facilitate timely temporary transfers of water.
For the reasons stated above, the City must respectfully oppose AB 2895 unless it is amended as outlined above. Should you have any questions about our opposition, please contact Brian Sanders, Government Affairs Specialist in the Department of Utilities, at (916) 808-1635 or [email protected].
Sincerely,
J
ay Schenirer
Chair, Law and Legislation Committee
May 19, 2022
California Public Utilities Commission
Consumer Protection and Enforcement Division
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
RE: CPUC DRAFT RESOLUTION APPROVING CRUISE LLC’S APPLICATION FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE PASSENGER SERVICE PHASE 1 DRIVERLESS
DEPLOYMENT PROGRAM
Dear Director Peterson and Commissioners:
On behalf of the City of Sacramento, I am writing to convey strong support of the comments filed by the City and County of San Francisco/SFMTA on the California Public Utilities Commission’s (CPUC) Draft Resolution Approving Cruise LLC’s Application for Autonomous Vehicle Passenger Service Phase 1 Driverless Deployment Program. We echo similar concerns.
While Cruise’s application for commercial deployment only applies in San Francisco, we recognize that our city may be next and, therefore, we have a vested interest the outcome of this decision. SFMTA analysis of 2020 Annual Report Data from the CPUC shows that passenger service provided by Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) has been almost exclusively delivered in California’s large cities , including Sacramento. For the foreseeable future, we anticipate that autonomous vehicle (AV) ride hailing will als o be concentrated in these same cities. For this reason, the Commission must consider the concerns of cities impacted in the future as you authorize driverless AV ride-hailing for San Francisco.
While promising, many of the claimed benefits of AVs have yet to be demonstrated and others have little or no foundation. Companies that have committed to zero emission vehicles for AV ride-hailing ahead of State mandates should be applauded but the effec t that these services will ultimately have on the climate and congestion depends on how they are used, which will be influenced by how they are regulated. Market forces will play a large role 915 I Street New City Hall 5th Floor
Sacramento, California 95814-2604
[email protected] O: 916.808.7005 F: 916.264.7680 in determining how AV ride-hailing layers into existing mode choices but the CP UC must pay attention to the potential externalities and unintended consequences, including the energy and congestion consequences associated with deadheading. If A V ride-hailing adds more vehicles (many empty) to our streets and the CPUC does nothing to control their growth, this will not lead people to relinquish personally owned vehicles. If that happens, AV ride-hailing will become a climate and congestion disaster, not a solution.
With respect to safety, AV ride-hailing companies appear to have very limited experience and inconsistent results complying with state and local traffic codes. As motor vehicles governed by both State and local regulations, compliance with basic operation and safety laws on our streets should be the primary concern of the CPUC for driverless AVs.
Furthermore, the inability of local or State law enforcement to cite AVs for moving violations based on existing California Vehicle Code language should be addressed by the CPUC prior to the issuance of a permit to allow their deployment on public streets. One particular moving violation of concern is stopping to pick up and drop off passengers in a travel lane.
This conduct is commonly the cause of citation for both commercial and non-commercial vehicles and has been witnessed on several occasions by Cruise during their testing phase, which suggests that the vehicles are actually programmed to violate the law. This creates an unmanageable and potentially dangerous situation when AVs are designed to act inappropriately and law enforcement has no mechanism for penalizing that conduct.
Another concern is an AV stopping in the travel lane, which is especially dangerous to passengers with disabilities and to vulnerable road users. The Commission should not treat this as a trivial issue. Automated driving won’t make cities safer unless the Commission requires their operators to adhere to their own claim that this technology removes the element of human error from the driving experience.
The economic recovery and vitality of California cities depends on careful Commission action. Cities cannot afford for the Commission to authorize unlimited deployment and take a “wait and see” approach as the Commission did with TNC deployment. It took years of work and action by the Legislature before the Commission began to address the climate impacts and disability access failures of TNCs. That work is still moving slowly.
Cruise’s deployment permit should not allow the company to grow beyond 30 vehicles until Cruise has demonstrated to the Commission, to California cities and to the public that their vehicles have been engineered to comply with the law and that law enforcement can issue moving violations to them when they do not.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. If you wish to discuss our concerns further, please contact Consuelo Hernandez, Director of Governmental Affairs, at [email protected] or 916-808-7395.
Sincerely,
Jay Schenirer
Chair, Law and Legislation Committee
CC: [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]