The Brief

Self-driving cars seem to be taking over the streets of Los Angeles as Waymo continues to expand throughout the county, including in Santa Monica, West Hollywood, and Culver City.

More than 150,000 people signed up for the waitlist this past March for a chance to catch one of the autonomous rides, according to Waymo. The app is still invite only, so you’ll need to secure a special code from the company to cut in line. Otherwise, you’ll be notified when they’re ready to welcome new riders.

According to Waymo, the cars have more than 20 billion miles of simulated driving experience, using detailed custom maps and its advanced suite of sensors to get you to your destination. But there are reports noting the self-driving cars sometimes run into issues with unprotected left turns and rain-soaked roads.

The current Waymo operating area as of September 5, 2024.

(

Screenshot from Waymo website

)

So is the unique, futuristic concept all it's cracked up to be? Well, my colleague Kevin Tidmarsh and I put it to the test — the good, the bad, and the ugly.

The set-up

We teamed up to go roundtrip from downtown L.A. to Koreatown using Waymo. The idea was to give the cars relatively challenging routes full of potential obstacles — one-way streets, unprotected lefts and all, right during rush hour.

The first ride was called shortly after 3 p.m. on a Friday from South Spring Street to Hobart Boulevard. The Waymo took about 17 minutes to arrive and cost us just under $20. That was about the same price as other rideshare options, but a much longer wait.

We jumped in the second ride back to downtown shortly after 4 p.m. This one took five minutes to arrive, mostly because it was the exact same car, and also cost us about $20. That was about $6 cheaper than Uber or Lyft.

The positives

Both the pick-ups and drop-offs were convenient. We were able to find the cars, and the cars were able to find us — in public parking lots that were mostly empty. For our first ride, that meant we had to walk a bit farther than originally intended, but the car accounted for the distance and gave us a few extra minutes to get there.

The door handles are only accessible after you hit an unlock button in the app, which can be a bit confusing for first-time riders, but is helpful from a safety standpoint.

Now, the car was quite nice. It was spotless, there were two easily accessible charging ports, a pair of screens in the back and front, as well as several curated playlists to choose from for the roughly 15 minute ride.

Waymo uses a fleet of Jaguar electric cars, so yes, compared to my hand-me-down Honda CR-V, it’s a big upgrade.

As you approach your Waymo for a ride, your initials are displayed on the rotating object on top of the car.

(

Makenna Sievertson

/

LAist

)

A robotic voice welcomed us as we slid in the seats, and Kevin, my partner in crime, said it “smells like a Macy’s.” The crisp, clean, and noticeably inoffensive business casual clothes section though, not the mid-priced perfume department.

While the driving wasn’t always so smooth (we’ll get to this, trust me) there were a few notable positives.

The Waymo always used its blinker, which is better than some drivers in the city.

It also stopped slowly and gently at most stop lights, leaving an appropriate amount of space between us and the crosswalk.

The screens mapped every single vehicle, scooter, bike, and person in the car’s immediate vicinity, tracking them like little video game characters so we knew what was going on around us.

It was very responsive to obstacles, almost too responsive, and it would regularly readjust the wheel to avoid anything even remotely in our way, making for an occasionally rough ride.

The negatives

The car was comfortable, but the driving didn’t start out strong. Let’s just say it did things the DMV wouldn’t want a human driver to do.

As we were leaving the downtown L.A. area, we almost immediately ran a stop light. To the car’s credit, it was yellow when we entered the intersection, but it clearly didn’t intend to slow down or stop. It also didn’t speed up from our consistent 25 mph cruise to try and beat the yellow.

“It was, like, barely legal, if it was legal,” Kevin said as we passed.

“That definitely felt ticket worthy,” I replied.

Kevin Tidmarsh taps the "start ride" button in a self-driving Waymo car in Koreatown on Friday, August 30.

(

Makenna Sievertson

/

LAist

)

While Waymo did use its blinker, we noticed that it sometimes was signaling in the wrong direction. The car also seemed to prefer to change lanes in the middle of an intersection, which isn’t illegal, but also isn’t recommended.

It regularly drove in dedicated bus lanes and struggled to respond to someone attempting to parallel park, inching closer and closer to the car while they tried to reverse into the spot. It also casually drove down the middle of two lanes at one point.

Again, the car was responsive to potential obstacles, which meant we had some jarring and sudden stops along the way. If a pedestrian stepped into the street on the opposite end of traffic, or a mail delivery vehicle was parked slightly in the lane, the Waymo seemed to slam on the brakes.

And it did feel a little strange to be in the backseat of a car that so many people were staring at. We got enthusiastic waves from small children and many lingering looks from people around us. But we’ll never really know whether they were annoyed with, or amused by, the self-driving set-up.

A driver looks at a Waymo autonomous self-driving Jaguar driving along a street near Venice Beach on March 14, 2024 in Los Angeles, California.

(

Mario Tama

/

Getty Images North America

)

Final thoughts

Overall, although the driving was occasionally questionable, it did feel safe.

Neither of us felt completely at ease during the first trip, analyzing the Waymo’s every move for signs of trouble.

“I’m watching every car that passes with bated breath, just like how is it going to handle it,” Kevin said. “To be honest, sometimes it handles it well, sometimes it doesn’t.”

“I’m watching more intently than I would if it was a human driver,” I said. “Part of it is curiosity, but part of it is [being] scared.”

What the Waymo screens show when you're taking a ride, including a detailed map of every vehicle, person, bike, and scooter around you.

(

Makenna Sievertson

/

LAist

)

But we calmed down by the second round, at least enough to enjoy a Sabrina Carpenter song on the pop preset station (the driverless cars are great for karaoke with EDM, Disney hits, and Bollywood stations — here’s an idea for another late-night talk show segment).

Our verdict: We’d consider calling one of the self-driving cars if we weren’t in a rush to get home and they continued to be a cheaper option. But a share of your payment (plus tips) won’t be going to human drivers, as with most ride-hailing apps.

“There were a couple points that were a little bit hairy,” Kevin said. “There were some decisions it made that I wouldn’t have made as a driver … but there were lots of parts of the experience that definitely did make me feel comfortable.”

However, there’s a notable knock against the service now — Waymo doesn’t have as many cars on the road as other rideshare options, and its routes are limited to nearly 80 square miles of L.A. County.

At least we know our fears were mostly unfounded, Waymo can handle one-way streets or unprotected left turns pretty dang well.

On a tour of Orange County’s voting headquarters on Wednesday, Registrar Bob Page demonstrated the careful, multi-step process through which voters’ ballots are validated and counted.

As the federal government raises the specter of unsubstantiated voter fraud, Page’s message was clear: “ I want voters to know that we're doing everything we can to make sure they can vote safely and securely."

More than 380,000 Orange County ballots have been returned as of Oct. 27, Page said. That’s about 80,000 more ballots than was received around the same time in 2022, the last mid-term elections.

Orange County Registrar of Voters Bob Page addresses the media and other members of the public in attendance as part of a tour of the voting operations on Wednesday, less than one week before Election Day.

(

Kavish Harjai

/

LAist.com

)

The journey of a ballot in Orange County

Collecting, and counting, all those ballots takes time. Page explained that two-person teams are dispatched to collect dropped-off ballots every day during election season.

The ballot drop-off boxes in Orange County are made of steel, weigh more than 1,000 pounds and are bolted to the concrete, Page said.

The ballot retrieval duos are required to follow a strict process to ensure the chain of custody remains secure, including taking photos showing they’ve picked up the ballots, properly locked the retrieval door and that the internal fire suppression canister is intact.

The locations of the two-person teams are GPS-tracked by separate teams, which also review the photo evidence before giving the ballot retrieval duos the green light to go to their next stops.

An overhead camera shows the process that occurs after the signatures on a ballot have been verified and the ballot is then ready to be counted.

(

Kavish Harjai

/

LAist.com

)

Signature verification

Once a ballot reaches the Registrar of Voters’ office, the next step is ensuring the signature on the envelope matches the voter's signatures in their registration file.

“If we do challenge [a signature], we’re required under state law to send a first-class letter notice to that voter,” Page said, adding that state statute affords voters until the day before Thanksgiving this year to correct errant signatures.

Page said three election workers must agree that enough of a discrepancy exists before the decision to challenge a signature is made.

Around 1.9% of the nearly 718,000 vote-by-mail ballots returned in the June primary election in Orange County were rejected, largely due to signature mismatch or because they weren’t received in time, according to the California Secretary of State.

Verified ballots are then separated from their envelopes and sorted before they’re prepared to be scanned and, finally, counted. The equipment used to tally votes isn’t connected to the internet, and access to the room the equipment is housed in is limited, according to Page.

Threats from the federal government

On Wednesday evening, a federal judge denied an emergency request from the Department of Justice to segregate 20,000 ballots across California that the federal government said were sent to “likely” noncitizens.

More than 1,750 of those people identified were in Orange County, according to a letter Bill Essayli, top federal prosecutor for the Central District of California, delivered to the county registrar’s office Monday.

The Department of Justice said it will appeal the ruling from U.S. District Court Judge David Carter, who, in his decision, said the federal government’s attempted move could “wreak havoc and disrupt the election that is already underway.”

California Attorney Gen. Rob Bonta called the ruling an “important victory,” but warned “the fight is not over.”

On Wednesday, before the ruling came down, Bonta released resources about election integrity in the state, including guidance for local election officials if law enforcement attempts to “access election sites where ballots are cast, processed, or counted.”

Page said he’s fielded more questions from the public this year about the potential for law enforcement to interfere in the election. He said he will have open lines of communication with partners with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and  Orange County Intelligence Assessment Center should the threat arise.

What’s on your ballot?

Our LAist Voter Game Plan is here to help guide you through the Nov. 3 election with guides to races across Los Angeles and Orange counties — and that long list of state propositions — to help you cast a ballot that’s in line with your own personal beliefs and values.

But the one thing we don’t do? We don’t tell you how to vote. That part is left up to you.

You can find it all at LAist.com/Vote.

The U.S. Justice Department has issued subpoenas to California officials in an escalation of its scrutiny of local election administration.

The Associated Press obtained copies of three subpoenas sent Oct. 21 to employees of the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder, ordering them to appear in court on Nov. 4, the day after the election. The documents request any records, documents and communications related to letters sent in July and October by federal officials to state election officials outlining allegations of noncitizens on the state’s voter rolls. The subpoenas also seek information relating to the office’s “methods for screening for unlawful voting by aliens” and anything about efforts to prevent noncitizen votes from being counted.

The subpoenas were being issued by all four U.S. attorneys in California, according to a person familiar with the matter who insisted on anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.

Dean Logan, the Los Angeles County registrar, said, “threats and intimidated have no place in elections.”

Subpoenas come amid ongoing court battle

The Trump administration has sued to force California to set aside up to 20,000 ballots it suspects went to noncitizens and not count them until citizenship can be verified. A district court judge on Tuesday rejected that request, then on Thursday appointed a special master to evaluate the administration’s claims.

U.S. District Judge David O. Carter did not specify the exact scope of special master Daniel B. Garrie’s responsibilities, but said he would be tasked with “developing the factual record” for the court.

In a Tuesday court hearing, Carter said he wanted to vet the federal government’s list of over 20,000 alleged noncitizen voters since there has been extensive debate over its reliability and both sides have agreed that it includes an unspecified number of citizens.

null

Carter also said at the hearing that a special master could investigate California’s claims that it cannot logistically separate the ballots in time for the county election certification deadline on Dec. 3. The federal government has contested that assertion.

It is not clear what would happen if a special master did find a substantial number of noncitizen voters on the federal government’s list or whether it would affect the certification of California’s election results. The 20,000 people on the DOJ’s list constitute only a small fraction of California’s 23 million voters.

Trump administration appeals to higher court

Meanwhile, the Trump administration asked a federal appeals court to quickly weigh in.

The Justice Department said in a late Wednesday filing that it’s essential the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issue a ruling as soon as possible due to “irreversible ballot processing occurring on an ongoing basis.”

Carter’s decision was the latest legal setback for President Donald Trump in his efforts to expand federal control over state-run elections in the midterms that will decide control of Congress for the rest of his term. The Justice Department has made similar demands in other states, including Washington. Noncitizen voting has been a central focus of Trump’s political messaging for years, although available data indicates it is exceedingly rare.

Trump blasted Carter’s ruling against the federal government on Thursday morning before heading to a campaign rally in South Carolina.

“California is very corrupt. The elections are extremely corrupt. The judge should not have done that but we’ll appeal that, of course,” he told reporters. Trump added without evidence that there are “hundreds of thousands” and then amended it to “millions, in my opinion” of “bad ballots” in California.

Carter, an appointee of Democratic President Bill Clinton, argued that the Justice Department’s demands were a clear violation of the National Voter Registration Act, which prohibits changes to voter rolls or election procedure within 90 days of an election.

A number of US citizens were included in the Justice Department’s list of names

Both sides agree that an unspecified number of citizens were inadvertently included. Carter argued that separating the ballots at this point would risk disenfranchising citizens and “wreak havoc” on the election certification process.

Over 500,000 votes have already been processed in Los Angeles County alone, according to court filings. The system also protects voter privacy: Once a vote is processed, it cannot be traced back to the person who cast it.

Carter is to rule on the government’s renewed request for a preliminary injunction, which would bar the state from counting the ballots until the litigation is resolved. He said he will do so after a Nov. 13 evidentiary hearing with input from the special master.

He said that if the federal government suspected noncitizens were voting, it could continue to prosecute those cases criminally. Federal authorities have charged over two dozen foreign nationals in California as part of a statewide sweep targeting people officials allege have illegally registered or voted in U.S. elections.

Appeals panel judges have said they wouldn’t support setting aside ballots this close to midterms

The appeal will be the second time that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will consider the case.

The first time was just last week when the Justice Department argued before an appeals court panel that a fast ruling on its request was needed to stop any counting of the ballots.

Although the panel ruled it was premature for an appeals court to get involved before a lower-court ruling, two of the three judges wrote separate concurrences making it clear they wouldn’t support setting aside ballots at this late date. They questioned the accuracy of the federal government’s list of alleged noncitizen voters and argued that to set aside votes risks disenfranchising citizens.

One judge dissented, arguing that federal law bars noncitizens from voting and requires California to vet the potentially illegal ballots before counting them. The failure to do so, he wrote, would cause irreparable harm to the election.