COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA Joint Committee on Labor and Civil Service and Transportation and Public Utilities City Hall, Room 400 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, May 12, 2026 10:00 a.m. PRESENT: CHAIR JAMES HARRITY COUNCILMAN JEFFREY J. YOUNG COUNCILWOMAN NINA AHMAD COUNCILWOMAN KENDRA BROOKS COUNCILWOMAN KATHERINE GILMORE-RICHARDSON Mr. Kunkel, The Clerk P R O C E E D I N G S CHAIR HARRITY: Good morning. Good morning, everyone. We're going to start getting together now. You're all right, sister? Don't rush. We're good. Good morning, everyone. This is a public hearing of the Joint Committee on Labor and Civil Service and Transportation and Public Utilities regarding Resolution No. 260091. I am going to start off. We are here today to discuss the future of autonomous rideshare vehicles in our city. Rideshare plays a critical role in helping residents get where they need to go, often filling gaps in our public transportation system, while also providing essential income for thousands of working families across Philadelphia. As Waymo begins pilot activity here, it's important that we examine the impact this emerging technology before it becomes fully operational on our streets. At today's hearing, we will seek to answer the important questions surrounding workforce protections, rider safety, emergency response coordination, and oversight measures. I want to note that we invited Waymo, as well as the rideshare networks that currently operate in our city to give testimony today. While it would be -- while it would have been more beneficial to have them available for questions, they have submitted written testimony for our consideration. While innovation and technology can bring opportunities, we also have a responsibility to ensure these advancements are implemented safely and in a way that protects workers and the public alike. All right. I note for the record that a quorum of the committee is present. This hearing is now called the order. Any of my colleagues have anything to say, opening? Anyone? All right, Mr. Steven? Mr. Kunkel, will you please read the title of the resolution 13 being considered today?
Authorizing the Committee on Labor and Civil Service, and the Committee on Transportation to hold joint hearings regarding the arrival of driverless rideshare vehicles in the city of Philadelphia and its impact on labor, the local economy, and public safety. CHAIR HARRITY: Mr. Kunkel, will you please call the roll.
Councilmember Squilla. Councilmember Young. CHAIR HARRITY: Okay. Would any members of this committee like to make any remarks at this time? I think we went through that. Do you have anything to say? Oh, yeah. That's what I think. Yeah. Will the clerk please call the first panel of witnesses to testify today.
Anna Kelly, Senior Policy Advisor EV and Parking, OTIS. CHAIR HARRITY: Okay. Good morning. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good morning. My name is Anna Kelly, Senior Policy Advisor for EV and Parking with the Office of Transportation and Infrastructure Systems. Good morning, Councilperson or Chairperson Harrity and members of both committees. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the important topic of autonomous vehicles in Philadelphia. As I mentioned, my name is Anna Kelly. I'm a Senior Policy Advisor for EV and Parking at the Office of Transportation and Infrastructure Systems. In 2022, the Pennsylvania legislature passed Act 130, which established guidelines to allow certified driverless vehicles to operate commercially in the state. PennDOT regulates the autonomous vehicles technology. The State's Public Utilities Commission, and the Philadelphia Parking Authority manage the commercial licensing of the autonomous vehicle commercial operations. While the city is entirely preempted in regulating this technology by state law, city agencies are actively preparing for commercial autonomous vehicle operations in Philadelphia. Waymo has been actively testing and mapping in Philadelphia under a PennDOT permit since the summer of 2025. Staff from the Office of Transportation and Infrastructure Systems and the Commerce Department have met periodically with Waymo representatives to request information about the rollout and to discuss training resources for the city and for city staff. To date, Waymo has completed testing and is working through the permit process with PennDOT and PPA to initiate commercial operations. We've been assured by Waymo that the commercial launch will be after the upcoming events in the summer of 2026, including the Semiquincentennial and the World Cup. While early studies show some safety benefits to highly autonomous vehicles, depending on the type of technology utilized, it's essential that the city takes steps to prepare for this new technology. Consultations with peer cities and guidance from national transportation groups led the city to develop an intergovernmental working group, which includes OTIS, Streets, Commerce, Police and Fire, to meet regularly to prepare for Waymo's rollout. We're also in frequent communications with PennDOT regarding Waymo's progress towards commercial launch. Other cities have reported issues with Waymo vehicles interfering with emergency response or with road closures. This working group will facilitate efficient responses to incidents and communication between the city and Waymo and will be in place in case of other future entrants into the commercial autonomous vehicle market in Philadelphia. Currently, the working group is coordinating with PennDOT and Waymo to schedule trainings for city staff so that our first responders are prepared when they encounter a Waymo in the field. While the city is preempted from regulating this new technology, we are prepared to work as a united front to ensure that -- to ensure the safety of Philadelphians as autonomous vehicles launch in the city. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I'm happy to take any questions at this time. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. Thank you so much. I just have a few questions to start. Your testimony states the city developed an intergovernmental working group to meet regularly for the Waymo rollout. Can you tell us what type of agenda items will be up for discussion and if the group has met yet? Can you tell us about the issues discussed in the meeting to date? Also, the city is working with PennDOT to schedule training for the city staff. Can you tell me what type of training will be taught and what city agencies along with our first responders will be trained?
Sure. So our first working group is scheduled for later this month. The agenda for that working group is still in progress, but our plan is to discuss with the first response agencies what kinds of trainings would be helpful for their staff and to talk about scheduling those trainings. And then we've -- we're working, as I mentioned, consistently with PennDOT. They are sort of the primary point of contact since they do the permitting with Waymo. So they're working with Waymo to schedule these trainings and we're coordinating to make sure that we can make sure city staff can attend. I think you also asked about what type of training. This hasn't been established yet, would be open to thoughts. We want to make sure that city staff can actually interact physically with the vehicles to understand what it would be like if they are -- if they encounter one in the field. We've been told by Waymo that they will come to Philadelphia and complete these trainings. CHAIR HARRITY: Okay. So you don't know about any of the training that'll be done through PennDOT, is what you're saying and --
We'll coordinate with PennDOT to bring the trainings here. Yeah. CHAIR HARRITY: Okay. So there's really no rules yet, is what you're saying?
Sorry, say that one more time. CHAIR HARRITY: There's no 3 rules yet, but they're actually out there driving on our streets. So --
So they're permitted by PennDOT. So they're working through the PennDOT permit process, and the city is entirely preempted in being able to regulate them. So what we're doing is trying to prepare for trainings to make sure that we're ready when this technology does arrive commercially. CHAIR HARRITY: Yeah, because I'd like to know how -- if they violate the driving code, how do we ticket a driverless vehicle? You know, I'm sure there's a lot of other questions, but I'm going to -- we have a big committee here, so I'm going to let my colleagues. Anyone have any questions for this witness?
I have a question. CHAIR HARRITY: Councilwoman Ahmad, and then Councilwoman Lozada. Rue? And then Councilwoman Rue Landau.
Okay. CHAIR HARRITY: Councilwoman -- I'm sorry, Councilwoman Ahmad.
Good morning. Thank you for being here and your testimony. So this is a state authorizing them to be able to be on our streets. What is Philadelphia getting out of this? What is the cost benefit analysis for us? And what can we do to say, no, we don't like this, and this is our city? So we are preempted by the state just because they can say they have some streets they maintain here. I don't -- I do not understand this.
Yeah. So I can only speak to what was authorized in Act 130 --
-- in 2022 at the state level which did authorize statewide for these autonomous vehicles to operate in city streets. And -- so as a result, our response is to get as prepared as we can and bring together all of the agencies to react. But yes, we are entirely preempted by the state.
So is there an -- so any change we want to that authorization would have to come from the state --
-- meaning our state legislature would have to amend whatever PennDOT has allowed, because our voices are not being heard at all in this process. So the question the Chairman asked was about how do we hold them accountable? That's really a very big issue. There's nobody to hold accountable. What is that accountability and consequence perspective? We as drivers have accountability and ticketed all the time, right? So how come this particular mode of transportation is going to escape that? And that's a safety -- biggest concern, is a safety concern. And the other concern, parallel concern, is that -- which we just had a press conference we talked about was, we need to invest in public transit in order for people to get around, in order for environmental justice purposes, all of these things. And so we are -- actually, our rights are being abrogated by allowing this to come in. So I'm just wondering, is the city going to push back? Is the City Solicitor going to do something? Because there is a case to be made that without the voices of all people, they are pushing something on us that we may or may not be ready for. And there needs to be a conversation. I don't know if you have purview to respond to that end. I'm just asking you this to put it on the record.
Yeah, absolutely. I guess what I'll say is we share your concerns, and I can definitely bring that back to city agencies.
So we would -- what we would like is a legal person here, right, to answer the questions about how do we -- when a state mandates something, what is -- what are our rights? Are our rights are being subrogated -- sub, you know, they're getting lower than the state's rights to allow this to happen. The second question, which again, I'm not -- PPA is not here, they're answering -- they wrote a testimony, written testimony. So when a transportation network company does a trip and there's a per trip surcharge, are -- is this, which goes to the School District, is this going to also have that kind of surcharge?
-- the answer to that question, but can refer it to finance and budget or PPA as appropriate.
So before we -- before we have our streets inundated with these things, right, that could cause us harm that was going to make our jobs -- that -- job loss, that is going to hurt the environment. Even if these are electric, it still hurts because there's a large energy usage to do this. So all of those things need to be taken into consideration before we do anything. And for us not to be able to do that, seems to be a real -- a legal issue that I would love our city to respond to because the Legal Department, the City Solicitor, you know, checks everything we do about what impact we have with our bills. So we would like to make sure if we can get a response on that. I'd appreciate that. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I agree with what my colleagues have said here, but also just thinking about what is happening around us nationally. And the fact that as of January 2027, there are a lot of people that are going to lose their benefits, and they're going to be required to do some of these entry level jobs, right? Some of these jobs that don't require for them to have a college degree, right? And these types of jobs, these, you know, the -- my husband is a truck driver, and I hear from him and his friends all the time; trucks move the world, trucks keep cities running. These are the kinds of jobs that could potentially be lost -- be lost if we don't -- if we don't look at this and analyze it in a way that is beneficial to those individuals who don't oftentimes have the opportunity to get those higher paying jobs. And so, have you all been looking at the impact that it will have on everyday people? And how many jobs and wages are going to be lost? Opportunities are going to be lost? Have we looked at that? I was just -- I was -- I was -- if the stores -- this weekend, and I can't tell you the number of stores that I went into that no longer have cashiers. Everything is self- checkout, self -- and, I have nothing -- for all of those tech folks, I have nothing against technology, right? But I do have something against the fact that we are losing these entry level jobs, and then government is saying, You have to go to work. Well, what do we want? We want people to get -- go to work, or we want people -- we want computers to do the work. Which one is it? Have we done that? Have we analyzed the impact that it will have on jobs and wages and opportunities for everyday folks?
So, yeah, I'll say we share your concerns, absolutely. You know, the Parker Administration is a pro worker administration, and as the Office of Transportation and Infrastructure Systems, that's been -- we've been focused on the safety implications. But I can absolutely take this back to, whether it's our working group or the conversations we're having with peer cities. We are staying updated with peer cities and the impacts they're seeing, you know, some cities are quite far -- farther down the road than we are. We can definitely get that together and get that back to you.
And I recognize that you guys are the Office of Transportation, and you have a certain lane, but you also, as a -- as a office of the city of Philadelphia, we have a responsibility to look at this holistically, right?
And so in the Office of Transportation, we need to figure out how many of those jobs are going to be lost in the transportation field that will impact our citizens?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you, Councilwoman Lozada, for that. That's exactly what I'm talking about. There's not enough information. You haven't answered one question; no disrespect. But, you know, I would think that when you're coming in front of us and you knew we were going to be asking, I mean, just the normal questions; who, what, when, where, how. That's the information that we would want and need. The fact of the matter is, these things are driving on our streets, and we have no say. And we're worried about safety. We're worried about jobs. There are 60,000 jobs, that's the number. That's what we're in jeopardy of. Councilwoman Rue Landau.
One more time. CHAIR HARRITY: Oh, yes. I'm sorry. Councilwoman Lozada.
I apologize. You mentioned in your testimony that other cities have had issues as it relates to these Waymo vehicles interfering with emergency response and road closures.
Can you talk to us a little bit about that. What were some of those interferences and how have those cities responded to those?
Yeah, definitely. So what we've seen in other cities is -- I will use San Francisco as an example, when there are power outages, sometimes when the traffic lights and signals go down, especially if there's a lot of them in a row, the vehicles freeze and don't know how to react. So they'll stop in the middle of the roadway. So in conversations with other cities, you know, they've developed trainings for their first responders to understand how to actually interact with the vehicles. Because one of the challenges is that if there's no one in the driver's seat, it's difficult to direct the vehicle where you need it to go as a first responder. So we've been having a lot of conversations with these cities and how they've effectively trained their first responders to react in these situations. And yeah, just say we absolutely share your concerns and we're doing the best that we can to get our first responders prepared in a situation where we're completely preempted and the timeline for all of this. So just want to say, sure.
That's extremely dangerous. People have died as a result of traffic accidents with a person behind the wheel, right? Can you imagine what could potentially happen if a vehicle doesn't stop in an event of an -- in the event of an emergency? We have to -- I mean, all of these things are things that we need to think about. And how many cities have these vehicles actively operating in their -- in their spaces?
So I believe they're commercially licensed in around nine cities, and are testing in more cities at this point.
I believe it's nine. yeah. But I would -- I would defer to whatever Waymo submitted in their most recent --
And do we know the percentage or the number of accidents or emergencies that have occurred that we've not been able to, or that they have not been able to respond to?
In terms of -- we can -- I can look into that and get back to you. There's some -- the studies are quite new since this technology is quite new. But we can absolutely look into that and get back to you.
Mr. Chair, the -- these are, I think, questions that, you know, the Office of Transportation should be prepared to discuss. I mean, they are -- they are everyday conversations, they are common sense questions that we're asking. There's nothing that we're asking here that it's not a question that should have been asked at the beginning of this process. And so it's a little bit frustrating. I understand that Waymo should have been here, right? It's a little frustrating that we don't have those answers, and they're asking us to consider these types of opportunities. And so I'd like to request that, you know, within the -- at least within the next 30 days, we get a response regarding, you know, emergencies, jobs, you know, permitting processes. Who is using this? What cities are using this? How is it operating and functioning in their -- in their towns? So that we can better assess the requests that is being made of us. CHAIR HARRITY: Absolutely. And just a follow up question would be for me, are the first responders being trained right now?
Not yet. We're hoping to -- CHAIR HARRITY: But they're already on the road driving. So before -- apples before the cart, right?
Uh-huh. CHAIR HARRITY: All right. Councilwoman Landau, please.
They should never have been allowed to. CHAIR HARRITY: Right.
Good morning. Thank you for being here. I think you're hearing our frustration that Waymo is not here.
Waymo was invited to this Joint Committee Hearing to come and explain itself to us, and did not show up. And because of that, we're left with a lot of questions that are unanswered. This was our moment. This is -- we gave them a request, they're saying -- and they did exactly what they are doing. They hide behind the non-human response of submitting some paperwork. You got all these workers here who might be out of a job, who might get cut wages. You've got all of us who have very serious questions to ask, and Waymo is not here to answer. And that is -- that is shameful. And we will try to ask our questions through other avenues; you, and some of the experts we have today. And if we can't get answers, we are absolutely submitting our questions in writing to Waymo, and they need to respond and/or we're going to pull them right back here. You know, this -- everything with rideshare started in Philadelphia as you might recall. For those of us who remember, we had taxis driving on our streets, doing great. They're -- they've got standards, they've got regulations. And suddenly Uber showed up, started driving, and didn't yet have the permission to drive, but they came to our streets and drove first and got permission later. And that was outrageous, and we were very disturbed about that. And then we got Lyft, and we've got more rideshares, and they did create these wonderful jobs. But to have autonomous vehicles come to our city to try this -- try this again, you know, while they're already showed up here. They're taking video of every single aspect of our city of Philadelphia, because they're driving first, starting first, and getting permission as they're going along is absolutely outrageous. And it is a huge violation of our privacy. I'm the head of the Tech Committee. I want to know what are -- where are you -- what are you doing with this video that you are -- that you are collecting 24/7 every single day? Where are you storing it? Who are you going to share it with? What do you do in case of emergencies? We've seen problems in Philadelphia where across all of our communications airways, we tell people there is a -- you know, there's been a horrifying plane crash in the Northeast, keep away from that area. Are these autonomous vehicles going to keep away from an emergency area? Are they going to be able to protect us? Are they going to keep us safe? There are so many questions to ask, and they are not here to answer them. I'm not going to torture you with these questions. I do want to know, though, when did they start talking to you? Are you talking to real humans? And what is the timeline and the plan for them?
Yeah. I just want to say again, and we share your concerns and our, you know, also, you know, having, you know, challenges reacting to this new reality and are doing our best to get these agencies together to build a response. So they -- Waymo started testing in the summer of 2025, as I mentioned, and we heard from them then. We have spoken with them, I believe two times at the -- at this stage. So, yeah. And I guess the other thing I would mention is PennDOT does have much more regular contact with them as they are the permitting agency. So as your questions are recorded and we go looking for them, I'd be happy to refer them to PennDOT. They will have a much more detailed log of the status of their permit application.
Okay. Want to just double down on this request though. Philadelphia has the chance right now to stand up and be strong in these negotiations. We do not have to sit back and let this happen to us in a way. You don't get a pass, no pass here. They are going to listen to us and what we need in Philadelphia, and I think we need to stand strong. This isn't some tsunami that is happening to us right now. We have power and control here, and we also need to tell PennDOT that this is our city, and we're taking care of our city. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you, Councilwoman Landau. Councilwoman Brooks.
Thank you so much. So my question is, is there a plan for incidents that were created -- that can be created by rideshare cars? And where do we report these problems? I'm a little disappointed to hear that all of this is happening. We're being very reactive where we've seen across the country, people have been ahead of this before it even happened, and we've kind of been silent until now. So I want to thank Councilmember Harrity and the -- and the committee for bringing this up. So that's one of my questions. And the other one is, I know that the funds from PPA are delivered to our School District. I remember firsthand working with the taxi drivers when their medallion program money was going to the School District. So how would the increase in this driverless impact the funding available to our School District, regardless of the tax rate changes?
So the -- your second question I'll need to touch base with finance and budget and get a response. In terms of incidents, because PennDOT regulates these vehicles, the formal incident report will all go through them. We are --
So it'll be reported to -- so if there's a -- if there's like a traffic incident, we can ticket and enforce rules against these vehicles in the same way that we do with any other vehicle. We're just not allowed to treat them any differently than we would any other car on the road, according to the -- to the regulations. So there will be like a ticketing and enforcement, as you would any other vehicle. And then PennDOT has a -- an incident report process that the incidents will go through. We are also recording incidents that we see as they're piloting and testing, and have been compiling a list of those incidents that we've seen with the piloting and testing so far.
Okay. And the second question, I should submit in writing as well, so we can get a clear answer from finance?
I'm good. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: I would also ask the -- who's liable? Who's liable insurance-wise? They are doing this pilot now driving around, smacking in the cars, smacking into this. Who's going to pay for it? The city or Waymo? Councilwoman Lozada.
I just have -- I just want to know, can you share with us what is the current commitment that the city of Philadelphia has with Waymo? What do you guys agree on?
So because we're entirely preempted by the state, we don't have any ability to enter into a -- any kind of agreement with them. We are basically speaking with them as much as we can to get the information that we can get. But because we're entirely preempted, there -- we cannot have a regulating or any other kind of relationship with them at this stage.
So the city hasn't said to them, before we consider this, or if we consider this, we are going to commit to X number of jobs, X number of investments, X number -- we've done none of that? We've not said any of that? Or we've not asked them for any of that? That's not been part of the conversation?
So unfortunately, because we are preempted by the state legislature, we cannot -- we have -- we don't have leverage to be able to request any of those things.
Okay. I think, you know, considering that we are in a position right now where government is trying to find money to save our schools and invest in a lot of other needs that we have as a city, when we have corporations like this coming into our city to say that they want to do something like this --
-- we have to use it as leverage, right? We have to be able to take advantage of these opportunities. And again, I don't understand how we continue to allow people to come into our city, and we're just going to say, here, open our -- here's our road. How much are the permits?
How much are the permits? How much is Waymo paying per permit to do their testing on our streets?
Is that -- is that -- are they paying it to the city of Philadelphia, or are they getting their permit through per -- through PennDOT?
Through PennDOT, yeah, exactly. And the -- and the public -- the State Public Utilities Commission as well.
Thank you. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Are you good? Councilman Phillips, anything?
No. I'm good. CHAIR HARRITY: All right. And listen, I think you see our frustrations here --
Absolutely. CHAIR HARRITY: This is not you, right? You're just the person that they sent the -- I don't know even what you would call it. It's not answering questions, but, you know, I get it. You're thrown in here. We will be calling PennDOT to find out what's going on. I am definitely -- this is, again, just another thing of the city of Philadelphia being dictated by the state of what we can and what we cannot do in our neighborhoods. That's not fair to anyone. So again, I apologize that you had to sit here and take this, but that's where we're at. Yeah.
I understand your frustration and appreciate the questions and we will get the -- get them back to you as quickly as we can.
Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Yeah, because we're going to be calling back anyway, so just so you know, be prepared. Thank you. So thank you. Mr. Kunkel, will you please call the next panel to testify?
Dr. Sorelle Friedler, professor of Computer Science, Haverford College, nonresident senior fellow, the Brookings Institution. Dr. Matthew Stamm, Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Drexel University. CHAIR HARRITY: Okay. Good morning. How are you? Thank you for coming today. Please state your name and begin with your testimony.
Hi. It's good to be here today. I'm Sorelle Friedler. I'm a Philly resident. And so I wanted to start by just thanking you all for doing this important work. I'm a Computer Science professor at Haverford College. I was formerly the assistant director for Data and Democracy at the White House Office of Science and Technology under the Biden administration where I worked on AI policy. I've had the opportunity to speak with some of you at a previous hearing about AI, and I wanted to start by delivering the same message that I had for you then; which is that AI is not designed to work all the time. What I mean by that is that the guarantees we make about AI are statistical, so if a company has a system that works 99 percent of the time, they'll say, Great, and roll it out. AI governance, the important work that you all are doing here today is about figuring what to do -- figuring out what to do when it doesn't work, right? What are the safeguards that we need in place to prevent extreme failures when they happen? Self-driving cars have been stopped in the street by puddles, gone the wrong way down a one-way street, stopped on rail tracks when there was an oncoming train, and gone right past school buses while they stopped to drop off children. These are just a small number of the ways self-driving cars have been unable to handle normal road conditions. Emergency first responders have called self-driving cars a safety issue since they blocked the streets and don't respond to hand signal directions. When a self-driving car gets stuck, the car or rider places a call to an off-site call center, potentially across the country or the world. Those call center workers, in some cases, then remote control the car even though they might not be licensed to drive in the us. There needs to be a clear plan for how companies handle when a self-driving vehicle encounters an unexpected problem. And it should, at a minimum, include local employees and a public record of incidents. Before these vehicles are released onto our streets, there should be an independent audit to determine whether they'll be able to successfully drive in Philadelphia. Sidewalk delivery bots should also be considered in this conversation. A recent Philly Inquirer article describes a woman being bumped into from behind by a delivery bot at 15th and Locust. When she tried to determine who to report this to, she faced a bureaucratic morass. Philly residents should be able to easily report incidents and concerns to the city about self-driving cars and sidewalk delivery bots. In closing, I want to be clear about where the technology for self-driving cars is at this point. These cars cannot yet handle all road conditions that humans can. Human drivers are not brought to a standstill by a puddle. What that means is that self-driving car companies are asking to train and test their products based on our city and our data. They'll take video of our streets, often with us in the video, and save it to add to their bank of training data as they continue to try to make their products work. The key question confronting the city is whether we want to be live test subjects for these companies for free and without oversight. Thanks for inviting me here today. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your testimony. Sir, please state your name and begin with your testimony.
Good morning. My name is Matthew Stamm of Drexel University. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today regarding Resolution 260091 introduced by Councilmember Harrity. I'm a professor at Drexel University. My primary appointment is in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, and I also hold an affiliate appointment in the Department of Computer Science. I'm providing testimony to lend my expertise and help answer -- excuse me, help answer the Council's questions related to artificial intelligence and autonomous vehicles. My specific sub-field within AI is not autonomous vehicles, though I do a familiarity with the broader area. By way of background, I earned my PhD in electrical and computer engineering from the University of Maryland in 2012, and I've been a professor at Drexel University since 2013, where I direct a research lab that actively conducts research in AI, machine learning, signal processing, and media authenticity. To provide information regarding my credibility as an AI researcher, I'm the recipient of an NSF Career award and have been funded under multiple DARPA programs aimed at developing advanced AI systems. My research has received several recognitions, including being named to Stanford University's annual list of top two percent scientists worldwide, being selected for Popular Science magazine's Brilliant list, et cetera. 4 I do not have a specific 5 opinion about Waymo. More 6 generally, I believe that autonomous 7 vehicles have the long-term 8 potential to substantially improve 9 vehicular safety. However, 10 decisions about adopting and expanding the use of autonomous vehicles should depend on accurately assessing their performance and conducting rigorous safety evaluations. I would be happy to answer any questions to the best of my knowledge given my expertise. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you so much for your testimony. I am - Rue, do you have questions? I'm sure -- I'm going to pass it over to my technologically advanced colleague, Rue Landau. Quetcy, do you have questions after?
I do. CHAIR HARRITY: Rue, Quetcy, Nina, Brooks. Okay. And then -- yeah.
Thank you both so much for being here and I've worked with both of you. And thank you for sharing your insights in Philadelphia of what you've been learning about AI, its uses, and the concerns we should all have. Since Waymo is not here, any autonomous driving vehicle companies are not here, I was hoping you could answer some of our questions, at least from maybe a national perspective of what you know. And so my questions really have to do with the light detection and ranging technology that it uses with these laser pulses to measure distance and create 3D maps. Can you -- do you have -can you detail for us the specifics around the system? What it records? Where it is storing any of this information? Is there any safeguards in place for data security? And do you know if any of these companies have undergone independent cyber security audits of its vehicle symptoms -- systems, and rider data infrastructure if they're publicly available? And then do you know anything about whether these companies have any data sharing policies with federal agencies like ICE? How are we going to keep our data secure? So that's a -- that's a good start. I thought that one of the things -- one of the most important things I've heard today, other than, you know, the pain of seeing Waymo submit written testimony without even somebody's name on it, Doc, was you said, Are we going to be live test subjects for these companies for free and without oversight?" And so I would like to start with where -- what data are they collecting? Where is it stored and how long is it stored and who are they sharing it with?
I am not an employee of Waymo, nor have I ever worked with them, so I can't answer that specifically. In general, what they would likely collect is LiDAR data, which is a laser sensor that's going to create -- it'll send out a little pulse and watch it bounce back and use this to create a 3D map of their environment. Additionally, these often incorporate something called navigate by vision, though typically that means exclusively navigate by vision. This is using a video camera to record the scene or to analyze it live and identify what objects or other important phenomenon are in the road. This is almost certainly analyzed locally on the vehicle, but is potentially sent off to a central station to monitor things like position, road conditions, et cetera. There is a substantial possibility that some amount of this is stored and subsequently used for analysis, which may also potentially be shared with others. I cannot speak specifically to Waymo's policies.
I would add that I absolutely agree with you that they should do an independent cyber security audit. I can't say whether they have, right?
But I absolutely agree that they should. I would also just, you know, add texture to what my colleague said, which is that, you know, when they have been talking about the process that they're undergoing right now, right, of mapping the city, I think it's important to understand that they don't mean mapping like a flat map you might unfold, right? Or read on your phone. They mean a like live 3D map of the city, right? Understanding where all of the buildings are, using, you know, the LiDAR and those sorts of computer vision systems to sort of understand in 3D and with images what our city looks like.
We've been -- there's been a lot of stories coming out recently that AI is moving so fast that it has -- is surpassing -- it's training itself almost, and that it is -- there are more instances where it is avoiding human commands to tell it to not use AI. It overrides that. It does it anyway. What do -- with all the work and the studies that you do, are we -- what happens if we get to this world where AI is so far ahead of humans that even for the absolute emergency, let's assume for argument's sake, there is some emergency command centers somewhere in America where they can, you know, shut off OEMO. And we don't even know that because they didn't show up today. But assuming that moment, what happens if the AI technology just gets to the point of ignoring the humans? What can we imagine happens then?
So I guess I am not -- I don't even think it is necessary to go to that sort of future-facing concern to be worried, right? I -- for example, especially given the absence of the independent cyber security audit that you described -- am extremely worried that there are off-site call centers that can remote control these vehicles, right? I don't believe that it would require actually serious cyber capabilities in order to hack into that, right? Many of these call centers are, for example, in the Philippines or elsewhere in the world, I think you could simply pay somebody off to remote control the vehicle, right? Perhaps they have protections in place to keep that from happening in some way, right? But again, they're not here to answer those questions, so I don't know. But it strikes me that given that these cars do have that sort of remote control capability already, that we should already be quite worried about exactly who or what is driving these vehicles.
To amplify what my colleague said, completely -- AI systems that can operate completely independently where they're able to maybe think as the way you and I would say, it's not clear if that is possible and when that would arrive. But that does not mean there are not substantial potential risks for these systems. We shouldn't be worried about something like a thinking sentient machine. We should be more realistically concerned about, these are machines that are able to operate on their own, but they don't think. As a result, there's a number of ways that you can inject cyber security attacks or find just ways in which these systems act; there's a bug or a flaw that may have potential real consequences. Because this research is moving very, very fast, and we are identifying new cyber security risks or emerging AI risks, basically by the day.
Thank you so much. Appreciate it. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. Councilwoman Lozada.
Thank you. Thank you for being with us this morning. You've heard us say this morning that we believe there are safety concerns around this. I've read in your testimony that you confirm, right? That sometimes technology is not going to always work. Based on your professional background and your research, I know that you're not Waymo, but I'm sure that in all of the research that you've done, I'm going to assume you could give us a general idea of the impact that it has on jobs. The impact that it has on emergency situations in different cities. Can you share that with us?
Sure. So I think one of the important things to remember about AI systems, that's certainly also true for self-driving cars, is that when they fail, they don't necessarily make the same failures that a human would, right? So, you know, a human, yeah, sometimes we're going to speed, right? But if we see a puddle in the middle of the street, we're not going to slam on the brakes, like, we know it's a puddle and we just keep driving. And that type is sort of strange and unexpected failure mode, right? Because the car is not going to react to things the way a human would and isn't going to make the same mistakes, can cause real problems, right? So one of the fairly common ways as I understand it, that Waymo does get into small accidents is essentially by being rear-ended, perhaps because it slammed on the brakes for a puddle, right? And you can understand why human drivers might be surprised at that.
To echo that, excuse me, some of these systems do have long-term potential to improve safety. So if you have an autonomous system, you can mitigate things like driver fatigue, distraction, or intoxicated driving. However, at the same time, like my colleague did mention, they're capable of making mistakes that would not make sense to a human. We often refer to these in technical parlance as hallucinations. We -- the machine will see something and effectively misinterpret it, sometimes causing it to make very rapid decisions, like it may see a puddle or strange markings on the road that it misinterprets as a person or a sign to - instruct it to speed up. There needs to be significant safety measures to prevent this and redundant systems. I can't speak specifically to how Waymo has done this. I do believe they're using both vision and LiDAR so that redundancy helps. However, this needs to be married with significant policy safety measures and very rigorous testing. With regards to the economic impacts, I should mention that I'm not an economist. We've seen transformational technology make pretty large changes to the economy before. This is probably no different, but that will almost certainly result in loss of jobs, potentially creation of other jobs. And that's something that I think that the City Council should think about with experts in this area.
8 Thank you for that. Is Waymo the 9 only auto -- how many companies do 10 you know of that have these 11 driverless technology products? 12
Oh, I was 15 just going to say, so there are 16 other companies that have driverless 17 capabilities, but that might not be 18 integrated with rideshare, right? 19 So like Tesla has like a self- 20 driving mode where they expect that 21 the person behind the wheel will 22 somehow be able to compensate for 23 the self-driving vehicle if it, you 24 know, makes a mistake, right?
Yeah, I was going to say, Waymo is probably the most prominent autonomous rideshare vehicle. This technology has been researched pretty heavily for a very long time. And there are a number of different companies experimenting with this, both from traditional direct or consumer-oriented vehicles, as well as other autonomous vehicles like Sidewalk food delivery or product delivery that are currently operating.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. Councilwoman Ahmad.
Thank you so much, Chair. Good morning still to both of you. Thank you for your testimony. I wanted to know from the AI perspective of, are there overrides one can do to a Waymo operating? So would the city of Philadelphia be able to have its own override mechanism to, you know, do something to Waymo that we don't like it's doing, right? From the outside, like, is there a way to do that? That's a question for you and you. And another question for you specifically because you mentioned an audit, what kinds of things would we look for in an audit? We would like to know that, so please.
So it's possible to put in an override that really, frankly doesn't have -- doesn't -- the fact that this is an AI enabled technology doesn't impact that. That would be more of how the system is designed and implemented and probably legal restrictions.
And the reason I ask you is because I started off my questions about the legality of making us -- subjecting us to this, right? Without us having any oversight. This is our city, and we get to decide what is going to be on our streets. We get to decide -- we get to decide how our constituents' jobs are going to be impacted. So it's almost like -- so technically speaking, one could come into an environment like the city of -- city limits of Philadelphia and have deactivated the use of a Waymo in our city. We can -- I mean, the state can tell us they can come, and we can say, well, these are -- this is how our streets are going to be policed technologically.
That is different. That would require something being built into the system that would enable a third party to say, I'm deactivating Waymo. To do some -- if Waymo did not design that into, that would be viewed more almost as like an attack on the --
There would be -- that would probably run into FCC compliance issues amongst --
-- other things. But it is possible to engineer in something such that basically a turnoff switch is enabled.
Yeah, I'm just thinking of every available method we could have to slow this down so our city has some agency in deciding what happens in our city. That's really a fundamental question, right? So thank you.
So in terms of an independent audit, I think it's useful to think about these sort of like financial audits, right? In order to do this well, you would need access to the internal company data, simply because they're the ones who have the complete records of all of the miles driven in Philadelphia by these cars, right? And you would want to be able to see those so that you could directly independently, from whatever reports the company is giving you, right, generate your own reports about what the sort of safety incidents were, what the things that were maybe almost safety incidents, right? But didn't quite make it to their ledger sheet. You know, you would want to be able to directly examine all of that data and also, frankly, to get access to the information to answer all of the privacy questions that Councilmember Landau was raising, right? To understand, you know, what are their cyber security practices? What are their data storage practices, right? What information about all of us are they storing regularly? Who are they sharing that with, right? In addition to being able to answer all of these various safety questions, and in addition to answering the questions about, sort of, who has access to these remote- control car capabilities? How are those triggered? What happens when a car gets stopped in the middle of the road by a puddle, right? And you would want to be able to conduct that audit within the bounds of Philadelphia, right? Because one of the things that I think is tricky, and just, sort of, without having direct access to the data, hard to quantify and hard to directly understand, are there various claims about safety, right? Are these claims about safety functionally using many highway miles driven, to make it look like they are safer than they might be? If what we really care about are surface street roads in Philadelphia --
-- right? You know, frankly, right? The safety on the Philadelphia Turnpike is just not really relevant to our city streets --
And so you would want to be able to directly do the safety analyses that you care about, right? Not the ones the company wants to put in front of you.
Has there been any such independent audit in other cities?
I, at least, could not find one that was city specific, right? I was able to find some independent assessments of the publicly released data, but not that was sort of broken down by highway streets versus city streets. There might be one, and I might not have found it, I don't know if you've seen them.
And this is a question that we asked the previous witness from the administration. What is your perspective? What it is -- what are we going -- what does the city gain when we allow Waymo? Like other cities have got Waymo, and what are they getting out of it? What is our benefit to the -- no one has been able to articulate that to me. Do you have any sense of what that might be, like, what are we getting out of this? We didn't ask for it to be here. So what is our cost benefit analysis? What are we getting? And I don't know -- this may be a rhetorical question, since no -- Waymo is not here, the administration should definitely know this cost benefit analysis answer. Whether or not they have the ability to control it, because the state has mandated this through PennDOT, that doesn't matter. Our due diligence is to say something is being forced on us. This is the scenario. What is it -- what is it going to cost us from the perspective of work, from the perspective of safety, from the perspective of our own autonomy. The city of Philadelphia should have put all of this into action and given us a report for us to consider, why would we, you know, for us to say -- and so we have to look at legal ways of slowing this down. And we would love the support of the industry to help us think so we're -- we are not asking obtuse questions, we're asking things that are relevant. That's where I think your expertise comes in. If we were to have a, you know, to do some sort of an audit, even if it's not put to work, we can create our own audit with the own questions, including what benefits do Philadelphians get. We would love your support with the Chairman here to think through this process, so our constituents know that we have done the due diligence, even though they're pushing this on our throats. Thank you so much for your expertise and your testimony. Thank you, Chair. CHAIR HARRITY: Councilwoman Brooks.
Thank you. So what impact do you think increased driverless cars will have on employment in a city like Philadelphia? And how will this impact workers' pay and benefits, even for those who are not directly replaced by automation?
Again, I am not an economist. I'm a technical expert, but I would assume that if this successfully rolled out, you don't have to pay a driverless car to drive. So that would likely reduce the number of employment opportunities for taxi drivers and rideshare drivers, like those driving for Uber and Lyft.
Have you seen in other places or studies -- I know you guys do research in other places, how this has affected employment?
I got you. I got you. Have you seen other cities take action around riderless cars that you would recommend that we adopt? And what are other cities doing to protect and support around this type of work? Have you seen any of that?
So unfortunately, some of what I've seen is other cities attempting to ask Waymo to address concerns that they found in their city. I believe it was Austin asked Waymo to pause during school hours because the driverless cars kept running right by the school buses when they were letting off kids, like ignoring the stop sign that gets put out. And Waymo claimed to have fixed it and did not -- and did not halt operations during school drop off.
It's interesting -- it's interesting that you mentioned Austin. I was just sharing with my colleagues. I was just in Austin, and every time I tried to call a rideshare, they were trying to send a Waymo. And you have to decline it. That was the first option that you had in Austin. And I -- that's the first time I had the opportunity to see them everywhere; everywhere. And my fear is Austin is not Philadelphia, and how it has taken over what, you know, rideshare looks like, and services look like. And I thank you so much for being here for that, but those are the questions. And I'm glad you mentioned Austin because now I need to double back with my folks in Austin to figure out what's being done there around that, specifically how we can slow this down in Philadelphia. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. And that was a very interesting point there too. Councilman Young, do you have anything? Councilman Young.
Thank you. So my question is on the lines of Councilmember Brooks. Just want to know, like, what type of safeguards you think that if, you know, we should implement around schools, parks, rec centers, things like that. You know, if we're going to have -- if these cars are here, right? If it's not stopping at stop signs and run school zones, is this something we could do as a body to implement some safeguards?
My first reaction would be that current driver safety laws and regulations are designed around a human driver. You would likely need to reconsider how these should be designed, given that there may be a non-human driver navigating these streets. This is something that has moved very, very fast and we have not necessarily -- the legal system moves much slower. It will be important to understand that. I think safety should be the primary concern. However, I do think an important secondary concern should be concerning how data is collected, stored, and used. It may be somewhat impractical to store video of every Waymo that's captured, just due to data size constraints. However, we've seen socially a pretty rapid progression from the ability to collect public data being very, very difficult and expensive to be somewhat ubiquitous. And we have certainly witnessed many companies, technology companies; pivot within their mission. I do not suspect that Waymo intends to do that, but I would think that there would be -- there would be need to be some important investigation into the policy for how that data is stored, shared, and utilized. And it would probably be smart to consider legislation in that area.
Unfortunately, there is some evidence that these self-driving cars are actually worse at detecting pedestrians when they're kids, right? In other words, our kids are especially at risk for being hit by these vehicles, and that has happened, right? Kids have been hit by these vehicles. And so, you know, I think we just need to think about what we can do given, obviously, the non-responsiveness from Waymo, right, and given the situation that we're in with the state, to try to, you know, put in place protections around schools, right? You know, think about trainings with crossing guards. It's an incredibly unsatisfying answer.
And to maybe add one other thing, many of the safety studies around driverless vehicles are centered -- my colleague mentioned this before -- around long-distance drives on highways, where it does seem that that autonomous vehicles can provide some potentially significant safety benefits. There's been fewer studies in dense urban environments, particularly in east coast cities like Philadelphia, where -- whose roadways are not designed initially around cars. I think it probably behooves us to look closely at safety conditions here and around edge conditions such as low light, strange objects that may not be in the training data, and possibility for other conditions that can cause these vehicles to act in ways that the people designing them did not anticipate.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you, Councilman. I thought of something after Councilmember Brooks talk -- spoke about Austin, Texas. Where are all these Waymos going to be parking? Because we have a problem in Philadelphia with parking, and as she said, there's going to be a lot of -- she said they were all over the place. I would imagine when they're not doing rides, they're sitting in a parking spot, taking up a parking spot that could be used for businesses and stuff like that.
Yeah. So there's a number of possible problems there, right? So one is, since these are self-driving cars, they don't necessarily have to park, right? But if they're not parking, then they're, sort of, driving in circles around the street increasing congestion, right? CHAIR HARRITY: Exactly.
So, you know, if they're not parking, then they're potentially adding to traffic. In some cities, when Waymos have instead sort of rented out a Waymo parking lot, right, then what they've found is that when there's a lot of Waymos that are not receiving rides, for example 3:00 a.m 4:00 a.m. in the morning, they've had problems with nuisance from the noise of the Waymos honking at each other in the parking lot. CHAIR HARRITY: They're sensing each other. I get it.
So, you know, essentially these are not human drivers, right, who follow, like, our usual sort of parking expectations. And so you can end up with some strange situations that might be a nuisance for the city. CHAIR HARRITY: I -- that -- to the other thing, has anybody mandated that they must have a driver in there and in the other cities that -- you know what I'm saying? Like, I don't -- I don't even see -- how do we ticket these people? How do we ticket a vehicle if it's of not obeying the traffic laws? Who is doing it? Again, if there's an accident, who is paying the fines? Who's paying for the vehicle damage? Councilwoman Landau, you good? Okay, you're good. Any other questions for this panel? Seeing none, thank you for your testimony.
Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Mr. Kunkel, could you please call the next panel to testify?
Will Vera, president of Transit Workers United and Tim Vinuchin, Pennsylvania, vice president of the SEIU. CHAIR HARRITY: I think it's actually Rob who is speaking. That's -- you have the older testimony thing. The new one is --
Rob Burns. CHAIR HARRITY: Rob Burns will testify for Tim.
Rob Burns will testify for Tim. CHAIR HARRITY. There we go. Welcome my brothers. Thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule serving our members. Could you please state your name and begin with your testimony.
All right. Good morning, everyone. Laborers in the house. AUDIENCE: Yeah.
And I say that proud. My name is Will Vera. I'm actually President of Local 234 Transport Workers Union. You guys heard it, it's United. I always thank God for the ability to be at this platform. I want to thank Councilmember, I have the opportunity to meet some of you and some of you I have not met yet, but I do look forward to building a relationship with you guys. I'm also here in solidarity with all workers. Now, last week we put together something for me to say, it was by my attorney and by my PR guy. To be honest with you, when I read it, I felt robotic. And I just want to come to you and just be real with you guys. And Councilmember Lozada, the reason why they can't answer how many jobs we're going to lose is because they don't know, and they don't care. You know, I'm probably telling my age, but I didn't, never thought that we would be living the age of The Jetsons. And that's where we are right now. Google and every other tech company is making these cartoons into reality. And if you think they're going to stop with this private, you better believe they're going to move to the public. And they're already planning to make it into public transit. This isn't the forum for bus revolution, but SEPTA is laying out lines to go straight, because a bus can't make turns. You need a 8 person behind a bus. 9 The impact of the economy, 10 like the gentleman said, I'm not an 11 economist, but I think we all know 12 that workers and taxes, they go 13 together. The marketing community, 14 they're putting out these real 15 pretty stories, but they're leaving 16 out the real-life stories. 17 Some of the things you've 18 heard from some of the other -- from 19 testimonies, but these vehicles have 20 gotten and stuck in flood waters. 21 These vehicles have driven through 22 active crime scenes. 2023, a car 23 even ran over a person and drag them 24 20 feet. As the other person testified, in Texas they're having a problem with these buses going around school buses that are picking up kids. We even had an ambulance, not here in the city of Philadelphia yet, but an ambulance was blocked by a Waymo vehicle while it was heading on its way to a shooting. A couple years back on Torresdale Avenue, there was a Route 56, it was about three o'clock in the morning, and there was a little toddler somehow got out their house and was standing on the corner. But it took for a bus operator, human being, to pull that bus over, grab this toddler, and save it. A robot isn't going to do that. The robot's either going to drive by or take him to his final destination. We need human oversight and intervention, and there's no question about that. These vehicles will face water main breaks, traffic lights going down, construction. Our bus operators assist ADA. Thankfully it's not here this year, or I don't -- listen, with us pushing back it's never going to get here. But this is one of the biggest tourist cities, our bus drivers supply important information for every tourist that comes in and out of Philadelphia. As I speak with my international union, one of the biggest things that we're concerned about is the ability to hack into these autonomous vehicles. If you guys remember a little while back, one of our three major credit bureau, Equifax, was hacked into. Who would've thought that could happen? 2020 SEPTA got hacked into, why won't they do it again? Just last week, Canvas -- my son's a student, Canvas got hacked into and their finals all got delayed. They have a thing called RAOs, it's Remote Assistance Operators, they're located in the Philippines. So when this Waymo vehicle goes down, they have to wait for someone from the Philippines to reach out to them. And the last thing I'll say is this, three weeks ago I was heading home, driving down Delaware Avenue, and I reach where Penn Treaty Park is on my right side, I believe that's Columbia. And I looked to my left and a Waymo vehicle hit a pedestrian.
There was ambulance, there was police, but there's no public record of the accidents. Still this morning, I'm trying to find where this accident is. Why is that not reported? Is Google the parent company -- one of the big companies that they can just push this down so you can't find it. I don't know what their requirements are to report accidents. I pulled over, I went and talked to the police officer, he said, Can I help you? I said, Yeah, you know they just banned these in New York. These things are no good. And so I want to thank you for your time. And I stand with all workers. These things -- we really need to not allow them to go, because if they come, public transit is next. And they're already in the Navy Yard if you guys don't know this. Thank you, Councilmembers. CHAIR HARRITY: Please state your name and begin with your testimony.
Okay. Good morning. Rob Burns, political director for SEIU 32BJ. Here on behalf of Tim Vinuchin, he had to leave after the hearing. First, I just want to thank you all for leading on this issue and inviting us to testify. So 32BJ is the union, along with some of the partners in this room, that are on the cusp of organizing 75,000 gig workers into the union in Massachusetts. This is work that we are doing all over the country, and we see the difference in places like New Jersey, New York, Maryland, and Virginia that have stopped and installed Waymo from being implemented. Before we hand over our streets to commercial autonomous vehicles, we need to fully understand what's at stake for Philadelphia. This isn't theoretical. Thousands of rideshare drivers in our city rely on that income to support their families. That money gets spent right here; gas stations, car washes, mechanics, grocery stores. When those drivers earn, Philadelphia businesses earn. But when you replace those workers with fleets owned by companies like Waymo, backed by Google, that whole model changes. Instead of thousands of local workers circulating money through our neighborhoods, you're talking about revenue leaving the city and going to a handful of massive corporations based thousands of miles away. That means less support for small business here and less money in people's pockets. And we need to be honest about what that means for workers. This is about displacement. It's about telling thousands of people who built their lives around this work that they're no longer needed. Not because the work went away, but because it became more profitable to cut them out. So the real question is, what kind of economy are we building? One where technology makes people's lives better and creates opportunity? Or one where it concentrates wealth and pushes working people out? We can't accept a future where entire groups of workers are pushed aside without a plan, without protections, and without a path forward. Right now, decisions are being shaped in Harrisburg and by tech companies, but it's Philadelphia workers and neighborhoods who will live with the consequences. We're being asked to accept unproven systems on our streets without clear answers. How will these vehicles handle dense city traffic, emergency situations, or construction zones? And when something goes wrong, who is responsible? This city runs on working people. We answer to our neighbors, not Silicon Valley. People deserve to know what this could cost them, not just what it promises. We need to get this right. That means doing a real transparent study of the economic impact, including job loss, small business effects, tax revenue, along with traffic and public safety, before these vehicles are widely allowed on our streets not after the damage is done. Because once those jobs are gone, and once that money leaves our communities, it's not going to come back. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from my colleagues for these witnesses?
Just has a couple. Thank you so much for being here for your incredibly poignant and passionate testimony. It's essential. The workers and our neighbors are the most important peeps here, and they're not disposable. You know, humans are not disposable. We have to keep providing opportunities for people. I am curious in your organizing whether or not you have had conversations with either PennDOT or Waymo?
So we have not begun an organizing process here in Pennsylvania. I know that we've had some conversations in other jurisdictions across the country, but we have not yet began talking to PennDOT.
I have not yet, but I would love to hear that PennDOT's involved because I will have a conversation with PennDOT.
I was going to ask the same question. The only thing I will add is, has the city of Philadelphia Department of Transportation or anyone else reached out to you about, you know, how this could potentially impact the workers? What are some of the concerns that they believe you all have as your people do this every day, and you are the experts, right? We're always talking about subject matter experts, you know, have they had -- has anyone reached out to say, Hey, how would this autonomous car industry impact you and your membership? And how do you believe it's going to have an impact on our city? Has anyone reached out to you?
No. I think it's purposeful that they're silent. Some people don't know, 2019, a trailer -- a tractor, it was a butter, was delivered about 40,000 pounds of butter, 2019. We're seven years later. It went from California to Quakertown in three days. A lot of people don't know about this. So I don't see -- so I just got a contract with SEPTA, and I tried to get autonomous language in there, but they wouldn't give me any. So they're going to remain silent until they can just roll it out. Just like we said here, they're -- how is our first responders not trained? You can't tell me Waymo vehicles are not getting stuck. They are. So, no, they haven't. They haven't spoken to us and because they know there's opposition, they want to paint the pretty picture.
Have you all done an assessment on the impact that this could have on your membership? Have you all done one? And if you haven't, are you considering doing one so that when you're called to the table, I'm not going to say if. I'm hopeful that there are people who are listening that understand that there's an expectation that the subject matter experts need to be brought to the table. And when they call you to the table, I would hope that you all are prepared to have a conversation about the impact that it will have on jobs and your membership. Have you done one? And if not, are you considering having one conducted?
Yeah. Well, that's one of the major things that we will be speaking about when our contract is up in two years; technology. And we've been working with our international union who's based out of Washington D.C. Just -- I was --I was in a meeting, a president's conference in January, and we put a committee together. So I put three people from my local and we are talking, and actually they are coming down in the month of June to do a presentation to my, what we call JEB, which is my section 24 officers as well as my board, so that they can see just where we stand right now with technology. So, no, I don't have an assessment, but I won't go into next rounds of negotiations. There's two things that I'm going into and it's pension and technology.
Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Yeah, thank you. You said it, that you -- we know what's going to happen. You know what I mean? This is the start, eventually they'll come for you guys. I remember, I think it was last year or something, there was a big thing with the longshoremen. They wanted to replace them with robots or something like that. And they actually got it into their contract that there needed to be people there. We see it all over the place. The turn play, they got rid of all those, my son worked there. And they got rid of all them, toll collectors up there, to make it, you know, person-less. So I'm nervous about all this technology because I'm nervous about my neighbors. I'm nervous about them supporting their families. I'm nervous for my grandkids and my son. You know what I'm saying?
Yeah. CHAIR HARRITY: Like, are they going to be replaced at some time --
Yeah. CHAIR HARRITY: You know, I have a lot of concerns. Any other questions for my colleagues? Councilwoman -- Councilman Young and then Councilwoman Brooks.
Thank you. So you cited SEPTA's ransomware attack, what cyber securities should we -- you know, should be required before any of these systems get integrated into our public transit or any cab operations?
-- you know, I wouldn't even want to give you an answer that makes no sense to me, you know. But what's scary though is that, I mean, you guys look around, there's a lot of countries that don't like us. And they're going after everything. And so even when cyber security gets better, hackers get better. So it's an -- it's a back-and-forth game. So for me to say that's not something that I can. But I want to thank all you guys for all these questions because this -- you're giving me homework, so --
No, and I -- and I appreciate it. So -- but what -- can you describe to us what other, like, specific duties will be impossible or unsafe with an autonomous vehicle?
I just think of the whole customer service aspect that we have, again, trying to navigate. You know, yesterday I was taking a walk preparing for this, and I'm driving down -- I'm walking down Dale Avenue, and I don't know if you guys saw on the news. There was a New Jersey State trooper that got into an accident, right? I have two bus routes that go down that bus, so it would be a human driver that would know to take a detour, to get the bus around, to get back on route safety. So that aspect. We may have -- when I think of our trains, our Broad Street line, our Market Street line, right? Those are probably, in my opinion, some of the two most unsafe transportation we have when it comes to unruly passengers, people smoking, people doing everything they want. If we don't have a human being on the bus, it's going to turn to the wild, wild west, even on our buses. So I hate to say it, but we have -- sometimes people get molested on buses. People get bullied on buses, and it is nothing for a bus driver to stop the bus, open up both doors, and call 911. ADA, we assist with -- I don't want to just pick out wheelchairs because we have people with hidden disabilities as well. Little kids, we have children that their safest place is school because their homes are so messed up that they look forward to getting on the bus and saying good morning to the bus driver. So we bring a level of customer service. Language barriers, you know, I'm not going to say I speak every language, but I could stand there and say, can you write this down? So there's just a lot that we need a human being behind the bus to be able to do. And those are just some of my immediate thoughts.
Thank you. Thank you for that. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you Councilman. Councilwoman Brooks?
Nope. I -- they actually answered that. CHAIR HARRITY: All right. Councilwoman Lozada, did you have a follow up?
I just wanted to follow up and ask, I asked you about city conversation, anybody else talking. Have you reached out to any of our state counterparts to have a conversation about your concerns?
No. So it wasn't until last week that somebody approached me about what's my take on Waymo. Because I just got elected in October. So I really went in deep, went right into negotiations, went into ratifications, just went into creating a culture that we have amongst my staff. And, you know, I want to thank them for most of them being behind me right now in support. And so it was just last week that someone approached me and said, what do you take on? And said, Hey, there's a hearing on Tuesday, would you be willing to speak? So this is my first time really speaking besides receiving information from International.
Just two quick ones, when we were talking about job loss and the effects on both of your constituencies, your workers, I want to make sure that we've been clear about what we're going to ask the state for and the city for, and we would love for you to also partner with us. It's not just about job loss, but the full economic impact. Because that's even bigger. That it's, you know -- it -- humans are taking hits; humans lose their jobs, but people pay taxes. You know, there's so many other ways in which what happens when somebody loses the job and then can't do this, the ripple effect that happens with it. And the last thing is, we cannot underscore enough. There has been -- there have been stories on this. The fact that Waymos cannot handle people with disabilities of all types. And we need more ways for folks to get around, to do it safely, to do it compassionately, and to do it in a way that upholds their dignity and respect. We don't want these autonomous vehicles here, just ignoring them and not helping them out at all. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Any further questions from my colleagues? Seeing none, I thank you for your testimony, man. Thank you guys for taking the time to come down here for us today. You know, this is all for me about the workers of Philadelphia and about keeping my neighbors employed. So thank you for your time.
Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Mr. Kunkel, will you please call the next panel to testify?
Stephan Hernandez rideshare driver, member of the SEIU; Alex Kaufman, Phoenix, Arizona Waymo rider; and Mustafa Toure, full-time rideshare driver, People's First Transportation Alliance.
Okay. Good morning, everyone. CHAIR HARRITY: Good morning. State your name for the record, and please begin your testimony.
Good morning. My name is Stephan Hernandez. I am a full-time rideshare driver. I'm here to speak for the thousands of hardworking people in our city who rely on driving Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and other rideshare delivery apps. For many of us, this isn't side money, this is rent money. This is food on the table. It is how we take care of our families. For me, I take care of my two nephews and my two nieces. I am their guardian and I provide for them; school supplies, school clothes, and outdoor activities, food, everyday trips. Giving them a good life in general. They are my reasons -- they are my reasons I spend 14 hours a day or more working. I do not need to tell anyone that this is -- life is cheap. You get reminded of that every time you flip up your tank, you rent -- your rent check is due, or you're at a grocery store. For me, I'm looking into going to welding school. My goal was to drive the rideshare app for a little while just to pay for that. I have a plan to build a foundation for myself, my family, and driving for rideshare apps is a part of that. But with it being my primary source of income at the time and having so many people to provide for, losing it to a robot will mess up my entire plan. It is just -- it is not just me, there are thousands of rideshare and delivery drivers working in Philadelphia right now. So that is thousands of families who rely on this income every month. Families like mine's who would be at risk if these jobs disappeared. I was working at the airport for the last few months and was let go from that job, so as of now, driving is my main source of income. While I'm looking for a new 32BJ union job, there are many union members who work full-time and depend on these jobs to make ends meet. Now, companies like Waymo want to bring driverless cars into our community. I recognize that new technology can bring improvements and make life easier in some ways, but at the same time, cars do not need drivers. Cars do not need paychecks. Every ride that goes to a robot is a ride taken away from a real person, someone trying to work an honest job. We need policies to ensure that as technology advances, workers are not left behind. In a city where many people are already struggling, replacing workers with machines does not move us forward. How can we put money back into cities if every penny we earn is going towards surviving? I rent in Philadelphia, I'm from Philadelphia, and I want to stay in Philadelphia. But 2,500 every month for rent alone is impossible long term. Both of my neighbors drive for a rideshare. I'll be willing to bet Everyone here knows someone who is dependent on rideshare X. It pushes our most vulnerable neighbors behind. Philadelphia must stand up for its workers and make sure the future of transportation does not come at the cost of the people who keeps the city moving. I hope you, the City Council, take this seriously and work with your counterparts at the state and federal level to look at the impact bringing driverless vehicles would have on the economy, the safety, and the future of the city of Philadelphia. Thank you for your time. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your testimony. Will the next person please state your name and begin your testimony?
Good morning, Council members. My name is Mustafa Toure. I'm a full-time rideshare driver here in Philadelphia. Every single week, I put gas in my tank, I pay for my own maintenance, I carry my own insurance, and I do it all to keep this city moving. This is not a side hustle for me, this is my job; my only job. And I spend my money here in the region. I eat at restaurants in this city. I am not spending my earning somewhere else; I'm cycling them right back into the community. Drivers like me are small businesses. We are part of this local economy. And when you multiply my situation by the more than 60,000 drivers, many of them full-time operating in the city, that is real economic weight. Now seeing that driverless cars could take my passengers and take my income, and there is nothing stopping that from happening. No 4 warning, no transition, no 5 replacement income. I do not have a second job to fall back on. I have a family depending on what I earn, behind that will in a flexible way that works for us. The companies pushing this vehicle will not feel the loss. I will, my family will, and these cities will too, because drivers who are not earning are not spending. I am grateful that you are all with us. I am asking what happens to the people who will be displaced? Right now, there is no 18 answer to that question. And the green light for robots should not come at the expense of my human drivers. We built our lives around this work. We deserve more than being erased by a software update. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your testimony. Will the next person please state your name and begin your testimony?
Hello. My name is Alex Kaufman, and I have a video as part of my testimony first. (Video played as follows:) MALE REPORTER: Yeah. Chandler woman's first Waymo trip going viral. FEMALE REPORTER: New video tonight shows her vehicle making a bold move while trying to make a turn, forcing some of the traffic around her to stop. Take a look. WOMEN VOICES IN CAR: Oh, my gosh. It's like -- it's like inching slowly. No, no, it's going to go after this car. It's not. It better not because Oh my God! Oh, my God! Holy. Oh, my God! My God, my God! My God! My God! Oh, my God! Oh, my God! Oh, my God! Oh, my God! Sorry. FEMALE REPORTER: Oh, no, that is scary. I would've been saying a few other words along with that, the woman is from -- this is -- this video rather is from a woman -- MALE REPORTER: Did Uber post this? FEMALE REPORTER: Oh, yeah, good point. Josephine -- MALE REPORTER: It's like psyops. FEMALE REPORTER: Yeah. She says that this was her first time ever -- oh, man, using a driverless taxi service. Not a great first time. As you can see, it was a lot more thrilling than she wanted. When the car stopped in the intersection while trying to turn, multiple lanes of traffic were oncoming. And the TikTok post has gone viral with 170,000 likes. We did reach out to Waymo, they say they take incidents like this very seriously, and they are investigating. (End.)
As you can see in the video, this past March, I took a walk --a ride in a Waymo in Phoenix, Arizona with my sister and her friend to a music festival. The Waymo app was offering a first ride credit for first time users, which made it cheaper than Uber and Lyft options. And my friend had taken it many times with no issues. So we decided to take one. The Waymo was parked in a parking lot off the side of a busy road with three lanes of traffic on each side of the median. There was another car at the median waiting to make a left hand turn into the entrance that our car was in. It was also 5:00 p.m. around rush hour. And cars in all three lanes were driving around 50 miles -- 50 to 60 miles per hour. The Waymo failed to yield to the car, waiting to make a left, and started inching out into traffic. We were very panicked as we realized the Waymo was going to attempt to make a left turn across the three lanes of traffic while the cars were too close for it -- for it to be safe. After inching out, the Waymo decided to pump the gas, but then got confused by the situation and decided to stop in the middle of the road perpendicular to oncoming traffic. We thankfully did not get hit, but there were multiple cars that had to slam on their brakes to avoid a fatal collision. In the situation, I believe a safe move would've been made -- would have made a right turn onto the road and then make a U-turn when it was safe to do so. If the other drivers had not been paying attention, my sister, my friend and I would've been seriously injured or worse. We felt very uneasy the rest of the ride to the festival, although it went smoothly after that. We contacted Waymo about the incident. They gave us a $10 ride credit to use for our next ride. Then after contacting them again, refunded us in full and then gave us a $40 credit to use for a future ride. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Okay. Well, thank you all for your testimony. Do my -- any questions? Yeah. Councilwoman Lozada.
How easy was it for you to report to Waymo? What -- I mean -- I don't know. I think I'm a chicken in cars just to begin with, right? I don't like -- I don't -- I hate it. But how easy was the process for you to be able to report your experience? And, okay, they gave you $10, that was -- that's not enough, at least not for me, right? The fear that I -- that you experienced in the car at that moment, not knowing if you're going to even get through it, but what was -- what was their response aside from giving you this coupon or discount?
So it was actually my sister that booked the ride on her app. So she was able to go into the app and then report an issue with the ride. And then she basically wrote what happened and sent it in. But I actually DM'd Waymo on Instagram with the video and that's when they reached out, they said, Hey, we credited $10 to your account. And I said, "Watch the video again, please refund us in full. And they said, Okay, we're going to escalate this to our team. My sister ended up getting a response on her end too. And then Waymo actually asked if she would be available to call because they wanted more details on what happened after reviewing the video. And it was fairly easy to contact them though.
Okay. I was curious. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: A human eventually contacted her.
I'm going to share this. CHAIR HARRITY: No, I was going to call you. Councilwoman Landau.
Thank you all for your testimony, especially for the drivers and machinists. This is -- we -- your jobs are so important for us, and we understand how much this is really about your lives. I'm struck by knowing that there is some emergency joystick user out there somewhere, nationally or internationally, that could jump in in an emergency situation, yet you, in the backseat of this car, didn't have that emergency panic button to just, you know, alert them to some way. Like something is going deeply wrong here, and you're just sitting there like you were trapped. It sounds awful, sorry that happened to you. But we know that our wonderful drivers here would never, ever, ever let that happen to you. CHAIR HARRITY: Yeah. I think I'm back in action here. Yeah, there you go. Thank you again for your testimony. Councilman Young.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Did Waymo ever provide you with information like what went wrong with the incident?
No, we never really gotten any information besides it was a technology issue, and they said they would look into it, but we never got any further information than that.
Okay. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: That would be why they called you and got her to explain what happened. That's their liability. They were covering their rear in other words, by doing that. I appreciate you testifying. Yeah, next time get a lawyer though, because - yeah, that's exactly what they were doing, was prying information so that they can defend themselves when somebody sues them. But thank you. And that was -- I'm okay in cars; I drive fast, right? But I don't know about that, with all those hot -- all those lanes. You know what I mean? Yeah. That was just harrowing, so. And for you guys, thank you for coming in and telling your story. That's what it's about. Safety -- the safety is definitely key, but jobs for me are also a very important part of this. And my neighbors being able to feed their children is another. So thank you all for your testimony. Anybody else have any questions for this panel? Man, I'll tell you what, thank you for taking your time and going viral, I'm sorry it's for that, but I know that's an accomplishment because I've never gone viral in anything. But, you know, so I'm sorry that it was a harrowing experience that happened for, but kudos for actually thinking to take the video in the first place so you would have some evidence of it. So thank you again. Mr. Kunkel, I believe we're now going to transition into public comment. Okay? Yeah. Please do the written testimony first.
The written testimony includes Corinne O'Connor, deputy executive director of the PPA; Angeline Jefferson public policy manager at Lyft, Government Relations for Waymo; Senia Lopez, Transit Forward Philadelphia; Paige Carbone, regional executive director of MADD; Denise Brown, written public comment. CHAIR HARRITY: Okay. Mr. Kunkel, that -- we are now going to transition into public comment. I believe we are going to do a two-minute limit, so please adjust your testimony to do it just to accommodate getting it in through time so that we don't have to break and give the stenographer -- so thank you. Mr. Kunkel, please call the first witness to testify in public comment.
Miguel Johnson, Mama Duba, Steven Elliot, Sianna Harris, Yesenia Lopez. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you all for taking the time out of your schedule to come down here and testify today. Could the first person called, please state your name and begin with your testimony.
Hello. My name is Miguel K. Johnson. And I spent with Waymo -- to be -- to be fair. I did give an interview to Technically Philly about Waymo about a year ago -- about a year ago. And my opinion then was that I wouldn't mind testing it in a safe environment. For example, maybe on -- maybe on like the 5K track in fair -- in FDR Park, but on the streets of Philadelphia. We have people who can't drive, so I assume that a machine isn't going to be as helpful. Also in Philly, I think our focus has to be on, yes, protecting the jobs -- the jobs of individuals here who rely on rideshare for their -- for their jobs as well as for public transportation, but also focusing on making sure that our city invests in SEPTA, not Waymo. We are a city that -- if we're going to be a city that's looking at trends of other cities, because that's what Waymo is; Waymo is a trend. It's like -- it's like flying taxis. It looks cool, people think it's okay, it makes the city look modern. You know what else makes the city look modern? Efficient public transit. A city that actually invests in -- we have cities now that are trying to get what Philadelphia already has. Philadelphia has the largest operating trolley network in North America. Why are we not investing more in our trolleys and instead putting something -- perhaps putting something into Waymo. Waymo -- the fact that they're not even here shows us what we already need to know -- need to know. We can't allow for corporations to come into our city regardless of what Harrisburg says. You know, Harrisburg does a whole other issue. Regardless of what any of -- any other entity says, because we, as a city, have our own sovereignty in this matter. And we want to make sure that we as a city do what's necessary for our people and our workers. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. Please state your name and begin with your testimony.
My name is Steven Elliot. Good morning, Council members. I'm a Philadelphia resident living with Parkinson's Disease. For me, transportation is not just about convenience; it's about independence and safety. There are days when my mobility is limited: when getting in and out of a car is difficult, when I rely on a driver to give me a hand to make sure I'm steady and to help me safely reach my destination. With Waymo, that human support matters. With driverless vehicles, that support disappears. There's no driver to help, no one to notice if I'm struggling, no one to assist if something goes wrong. That's not a small change. For people like me, that is a difference between being able to move through the city safely and being put in a vulnerable position. So when we talk about this technology, we have to ask, who is it designed for? Because right now it does not feel like it is designed for people with disabilities and who need assistance, and it does not feel safe. I understand that -- I understand that the city may not have the power to approve or deny these vehicles, but you do have the power to speak for the people who live here. So I'm asking you to do that. Tell PennDOT not to issue licenses for driverless vehicles in Philadelphia. Tell them that this technology is not ready and it does not meet the needs of residents like me. Because safety is not just about avoiding accidents, it is about making sure people are supported, protected, and will not -- not left behind. Right now, driverless vehicles do not meet the standard. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your testimony. Please begin -- state your name and begin with your testimony.
Good morning, Councilmembers. My name is Mamu Duba, and I represent the Muslim Uber Drivers Association here in Philadelphia. For many of us, driving is not just work, it is how we survive. We are immigrants, we are providers. We work long hours to support our families and build a life here. This job gives us stability, flexibility, and dignity. And now we are being told that driverless vehicles could replace us. That means thousands of drivers in the city could lose their income, not in the distant future, but very soon. And there is no plan for what happens to us next; no transition plan, no protections, no guarantee of another job that pays the same. We are being asked to accept that our jobs can disappear while companies experiment with technology that is still not proven to be safe. That's not right. We are against technology -- we are not against technology; we are against being replaced without a plan. We are asking for something very simple; do not move forward until you understand that the impact on the workers. And right now, that means stopping this before it starts. I understand the city does not control the licensing, but you do have a voice, so I'm asking you to use it. And like brother Sam had mentioned, please tell PennDOT not to issue licenses for the driverless vehicles in Philadelphia. Tell them these vehicles are not welcome here, not until workers are protected, and our jobs are secure because once these jobs are gone, they're gone for good. Thank you.
Do I just go? Okay. CHAIR HARRITY: Please state your name and begin with your testimony for the record. Sorry about that.
No, you're good. It's my, you know, long time listener, first time caller. Hello. My name is Senia Lopez. I am a lifelong resident of the Northeast, and I am here as an Organizer with 215 People's Alliance and also as the Northeast Philly Fellow for Transit Forward Philly. While there are so many reasons we heard about today, why my community and I are against the pushing of autonomous vehicles onto us, I want to speak specifically about the implications this has on our already overcrowded roads and are already underfunded and underutilized public transit system. Earlier this year, I was at a conference in Pittsburgh where operators from the Transit Workers Union presented on what other cities are already starting to do with autonomous vehicles. It was truly an eye-opening and terrifying experience. Self-driving buses may sound like it's maybe a step too far or something we're not going to do yet, but this technology is already being tested in over 35 cities worldwide. And Councilmember Lozada talked about the, you know, tractor trailers and those things that are already becoming autonomous too. There are a lot of implications here. If we allow Waymo and similar businesses to set up shop here in Philadelphia, we will be setting a dangerous precedent to allow the rapid expansion of autonomous vehicles. Similarly to other AI technology, I feel like we all blinked and now it's being integrated into every aspect of our lives. We didn't get to opt in, but it feels like we are at a moment where we can opt out. Autonomous vehicles threaten public transit. A University of Michigan study showed that the introduction of these rideshares, nationally reduced public transit use by over five percent. Autonomous vehicles would make this worse. Autonomous vehicles worsen our car-centric transportation system -- Oh, my goodness -- while presented as a solution. We envision a transportation system that connects our communities, improves our quality of life, makes it safer and more affordable to get around, and reduces environmental and community health impacts. Autonomous vehicles only threaten that vision rather than helping achieve it. There's also a very human element of what our transit operators do. I spoke to a long time bus driver recently about how often they have to help in medical emergencies, both minor and absolutely major. Whether it's passengers on their bus or road incidents that they just view from their seat. My long-term bus driver has helped the community countless times with reporting things like traffic light outages, dangerous snow mounds on the curbs. Plus I would be particularly saddened by losing human interaction there. This is absolutely a safety issue and a jobs issue, but this is a quality-of-life issue. I really think about people like my grandmother who already hates to use her phone more than she has to having to deal with this kind of technology. I don't fully understand the legal language here, but I've been told that we could be asking members of Committee to introduce a non-privileged resolution, asking the legislator to amend Act 130 to remove Philadelphia as a participating municipality within this bill. And I want to finish with just adding that, when I was doing some of the research for my points here in this statement, I had the immense displeasure of being hit with Google AI search results about Waymo. And of course they did not highlight the issues mentioned here today. I am very, very concerned about this consolidation of, you know, knowledge and data that the search engines also own the companies they're reporting on. And I think that it's really great that we're actually listening to experts here today. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and begin your testimony.
Hello. I'm Sianna Harris. I'm a recent graduate from Temple University. Hello, Councilmembers. My experience as a college student and also a volunteer in the city of Philadelphia, like many others, includes countless tales of issues with public transit and rideshare services alike. Most recently, I can recall several instances of unexpected delays and cancellations at SEPTA subway stations due to system errors and even being unable to travel certain locations due to limited public transportation. Like most college students, when faced with these problems, I've turned to rideshare services, which are not always reliable due to canceled rides and overall safety concerns about traveling in a stranger's vehicles. And while I believe that Waymo's autonomous vehicles would be extremely beneficial to college students and the greater Philadelphia communities as these self-driving cars have reported significantly lower crash rates than human drivers, along with creating safer travel experiences for women and vulnerable groups. And that in the city of Philadelphia it's crucial to be able to navigate freely and independently. And having a system of transportation that allows for users to not have to rely on others will build confidence, self-reliance, and increase the accessibility of transportation in the city of Philadelphia. I also feel that as members of -- as political officials, we have a choice to make in whether we increase spending in the infrastructure in place, to make our definitive stance on whether we want these autonomous vehicles in our city. And I think without putting in serious money to update a lot of our infrastructure, it is inevitable that people start to turn to these autonomous vehicles. And I think whether that be in supporting Waymo or updating SEPTA systems, we have a choice to make in how we provide our most vulnerable populations with access to safe and reliable transportation. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your testimony.
Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Mr. Kunkel, will you please tell -- please call the next witnesses to testify.
Reverend Ian Harris, Madison Nardy, Sam Elliot, Nikia Navarro, Virginia Lynn Hogman, Jonathan Lee. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you all. Please state your name and give your testimony. Please keep it brief. We have a hard stop at 12:30.
Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Madison Nardy. I'm the executive director of 215 Peoples Alliance. We organize residents across Northeast Philly. Last week I came before Council to speak about the proposed rideshare tax because working people should not be forced to balance the budget on our backs while corporations like Waymo continue to extract wealth from our communities. The expansion of autonomous vehicles threatens jobs, raises safety concerns, and contributes to the further disinvestment in public transit. Working people are already struggling with rising costs of gas, groceries, rent, and healthcare while wages continue to stagnate, all while trying to survive on a public transit system that has been systemically underfunded for decades. And despite that disinvestment, SEPTA still moves hundreds of thousands of people every single day with a fraction of the funding of other major transit systems. So instead of seriously investing in public infrastructure people actually rely on, we are using public streets and public resources to help usher in another job-stealing tech corporation that gives nothing back to the communities they profit from. What real economic benefit does this bring to our city when the long-term outcomes is job loss, reduced tax revenue, and more strain on already underfunded public services? And let's be honest about what this really is. Autonomous vehicles are not a public necessity for working people. This is a luxury product being pushed by wealthy tech corporations. And while today this is being framed as a rideshare issue, we all know automation will not stop there. Today, it's rideshare drivers, tomorrow it's SEPTA workers, school bus drivers, delivery drivers, truck drivers, and anyone whose livelihood depends on driving for work. When corporations eliminate jobs, entire communities feel the impact; workers lose incomes, neighborhoods lose local spending, cities lose tax revenue, and public services lose funding. Less wage tax revenue means less money for schools, libraries, transits, and services working people rely on every day while corporations continue extracting wealth and leaving the public to deal with the consequences. And honestly, I think it says a lot that Waymo is not here to testify before the people that they claim they want to serve. If they truly care about our communities, they would be willing to answer questions publicly about the real consequences of this technology. We are headed towards a future where more and more of our lives are becoming automated, isolated, and transactional while corporations call it innovation, and working-class communities are left dealing with the social and economic consequences. Stop exploiting our communities in the name of innovation for the rich. This is bigger than rideshare apps -- CHAIR HARRITY: Please --
This is bigger than rideshare apps. It's more -- it's about what kind of economy and city we are building. Philadelphia should be investing in its people, public transit infrastructure, and good union jobs that sustain our communities, not helping corporations replace workers in the name of convenience and profit. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. That was very good, speeded that up. Yeah, I love it. Please state your name and begin your testimony.
My name is Lynn Hogman. I'm a longtime resident of West Philadelphia. I'm here to urge City Council to consider enacting legislation requiring that all vehicles on the city's streets have a driver capable of operating the vehicle. As was testified by the first witness, it is true that the city is preempted from regulating the technology of automated vehicles, but that statute does not prohibit everything. If you look at that statute, you will see that it also expressly permits the city to regulate its streets and traffic, provided that it does not discriminate against highly automated vehicles. It would appear that an ordinance requiring a driver in all vehicles operating on the streets could be permitted under that statute. Moreover, requiring a driver in all vehicles is important in Philadelphia because as this was testified, experience in other cities has shown that automated vehicles cannot operate properly without a driver in many circumstances. For example, in San Francisco, driverless vehicles stopped and blocked traffic when traffic lights were out to a -- due to a power outage and over 60 of the vehicles had to be moved manually. These types of events are not compatible with Philadelphia streets or its mass transit system. We are a city with numerous one-lane streets. Indeed, these one-lane streets are not just single isolated blocks, but also include major three streets, such as 47th Street in West Philadelphia. Without a driver to operate and move the vehicle, stopped automated vehicle on a one-lane street completely blocks all traffic. In addition, trolleys that operate on rails are a key part of SEPTA. These trolleys cannot go around a stopped vehicle, therefore, a vehicle that stops on any of the streets on which the trolleys run blocks that trolley line until there is a -- unless there is a driver to move the vehicle. The risk of shutting down a trolley line is not hypothetical. Power outages that affect traffic lights are common, but do not prevent trolleys from running. In fact, we just had one last month on Baltimore Avenue where the 34 T2 trolley runs, and the trolleys run properly despite the traffic lights being up. If there were driverless vehicles on the streets, they would've stopped when the traffic lights went out and shut down an entire trolley line. Thank you. And I apologize for not having a copy of the preemption statute. I didn't realize I was going to testify about that until the first witness. If any of you need a copy of the preemption statute, I'd be happy to send it to you. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Yes. We would love a copy, please.
Okay. To your office or all offices? CHAIR HARRITY: You can send to me, I'll send to everybody, or everybody if you want.
I'll do that today. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. Please state your name and begin your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is Nikia Navarro, and I am testifying today as a parent of a low vision child. He is my little boy, my youngest son. A few years ago I moved my family from Boston to Philadelphia -- don't judge me -- because of the incredible care at CHOP. Like many parents of children with disabilities, I came here hoping for answers, hoping for treatment, and ultimately hoping for a cure for my son's low vision condition. While I wait and pray for that cure, I also have to prepare for reality. As a parent, one of the hardest things to think about is the fact that I will not be around for ever to ensure my son's safety, mobility, and independence. Technology is not simply convenience for families like mine, it is hope. In the face of this hope, I just want to share truth about bias. Black males experience highly significant rideshare cancellation rates, often double or triple white riders. Studies found Black males with African American surrounding names face cancellation rates up to three times higher than their white counterparts. Particularly in low density suburban areas, especially in suburban areas, and always in cities. With that said, evidence that suggests discrimination based on Black-sounding names, and in some cases, profile pictures, oftentimes have 35 percent longer wait times before the cancellation. Back to that hope. My hope is that my child can one day move through the world safely and not be canceled on. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your comments. Mr. Kunkel, will you please call the next person to testify?
Hi. Thanks for the opportunity to testify. Long time no see Councilmember Driscoll. I'll keep it really brief. My name is Mitch Channon. I'm a member of 215 People's Alliance. I also live in Northeast Philly. I use SEPTA as my main mode of transportation. I also do use Lyft and Uber occasionally, especially for places that aren't easily accessible by SEPTA or if my bus or my train doesn't come, which happens more than I would like. The main thing I wanted to share, I don't know if this has been said during the hearing yet, but a few months ago I saw a social media post from Senator Laughlin from Erie reposting something about cyber cabs and saying, This is the future of transportation. Giving more money to SEPTA would be like funding horse watering stations. And so I just want to speak to -- a little bit more about the potential impact on public transit. So first, it appears to me that the proliferation of this technology is -- the story that's circulating, is that this is the replacement for public transit. And I -- I'm really worried about how that narrative is gaining holds in state capital that's already pretty averse to funding SEPTA. Second, where I live in Northeast Philly, the traffic is terrible. I would like to understand better if there has been any analysis of the potential impact on transit ridership. If the price point for Waymo is lower than the price for Uber and Lyft, do we expect an increase in ridership for Waymo, a reduction in ridership for SEPTA? And then what is the impact on congestion in my neighborhood, in Center City and other neighborhoods across the city? There's no way to solve the problem of basic geometry with autonomous vehicles. Buses, trains, trolleys transport far more people in a given space than cars ever can, and I think that's another reason why this technology is wrong for Philly. And at a minimum there needs to be really serious investigation of the likely impact on public transit of allowing this to happen. And don't be like Senator Laughlin. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you. Thank you. Sir, please state your name and begin with your testimony.
Yes. My name is Jonathan Lee. Today, I represent two organizations. One is called iRISE, and the other one is AI for Philly. I've been pushing STEM in the hood for 33 years, trying to get more of my race of people involved with artificial intelligence, large language models, robotics, et cetera. I see that as a platform to reduce gun violence, recidivism, et cetera. I actually rode in a Waymo out in San Francisco, and it was funky fresh, but I was scared as hell. I said, how do I get out of this thing if this thing malfunctions? How do I get out of it? So that was a learning experience for me. I definitely applaud City Council. I think in the 33 years I've been pushing STEM in the hood, this is the best City Council and mayor that we have ever had. And I'm not saying it to be superficial, I am very much impressed. And Waymo coming into Philadelphia, what are you going to put in the hood to help reroute our children that are addicted to playing video games? What are you going to help us with social media -- how are you going to help us with social media platforms that are kids are utilizing to shoot and kill one another? What are you going to do Waymo or Alphabet or Google? When I looked at the numbers, $16 billion investment round valuing the company at $126 billion. What's coming into inner city to help our folks? They're swimming in digital technology, but we lack on ramps. And this is what they call us the region of Eds and Meds. Come on. So I love you-all. Rue Landau, Nina Ahmad, Quetcy Lozada, I mean, you-all got jiggy with it today. And under your leadership Councilman Jim Harrity. I am very impressed. Thank you. CHAIR HARRITY: Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Kunkel, is there anyone else to testimony -- testify?
There are no more public commentors. CHAIR HARRITY: No more public comment, okay. This concludes the business before the Joint Committee on Labor and Civil Service and Transportation and Public Utilities today. Thank you very much everybody for your attendance. (Joint Committee on Labor and Civil Service and Transportation and Public Utilities public hearing concluded at 12:30 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me of the above case, and this copy is a correct transcript of the same. ______________________ Samanda J. Rios