Waymos are multiplying across the city faster than candidates can print campaign flyers, and the public's relationship with them is... complicated. Most people seem to genuinely like the service. The rides are clean, the cars don't rage at you, and statistically they're safer than human drivers. But the edge cases are legitimately alarming.

As one local put it, "The risk of an individual accident is lower; the risk of causing delays in bigger emergencies is greater." That's a sharp observation. When a Waymo freezes in front of a firehouse — which has happened — there's no one behind the wheel to yell at. A former ambulance driver noted that while "Waymos did some dumb shit, wayyyyy less dumb shit compared to the actual humans in the Bay," the problem is that "when they DO freeze, I don't have anyone to yell at to move the damn car."

Then there's the earthquake scenario that should keep every city planner up at night: hundreds of autonomous vehicles simultaneously bricking themselves across every major artery during The Big One, with no steering wheels and no way for first responders to move them.

This isn't anti-technology. This is basic governance. There is, as one SF resident argued, "zero reason a Waymo should block a firehouse more than one time. That should provoke a strong regulatory response and a rapid and permanent fix by the company."

District 4 candidates: the war-on-cars schtick plays well at town halls. But your constituents are already navigating a world where autonomous vehicles stop in bike lanes for no discernible reason and overtake minivans mid-intersection. The question isn't whether San Francisco hates cars. It's whether anyone at City Hall is prepared to regulate the ones that drive themselves — before a real emergency proves they weren't.