Hacker News Reader

Comment by jerlam | Hacker News Reader

I don't see any reason that individual Bay Area cities cannot pass laws against Waymo operating there. Why they would do so is a different matter. I'm hopeful though.

View on HN

I suspect the reason is that California cities do not, in fact, have control over this aspect of regulation. I won't claim to be a policy expert, but the failed SB-915[0] seems to imply that this is the case. SB-915 was a proposed bill to allow cities to permit or regulate AVs. It seems reasonable that if a law was attempted to be passed to permit cities to regulate AVs and the bill fails even after modification that it was the case that cities were previously unable to regulate AVs and cities remain unable to regulate AVs. Absent greater knowledge on the subject, that is.

0: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml...

Municipalities are generally preempted from regulating matters of statewide concern. In CA, the state decided to have the CA DMV regulate operational safety and the CPUC regulate the commercial service. Individual cities are prevented from enacting local laws that encroach upon state authority.

The bar for "statewide concern" is also extremely low. It basically includes whatever the state government choose to pay attention to.

> Individual cities are prevented from enacting local laws that encroach upon state authority.

It's simpler than that; cities are wholly created and controlled by the State. California could one day decide to close all the cities and centralize and it would be 100% legal. States delegate their authority to cities.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com