Expedite Waymo Autonomous Vehicle Approval in Illinois & Chicago
## CONTEXT
Situation: Illinois and its largest city, Chicago, serve as a national transportation hub with some of the worst traffic congestion and crash rates in the Midwest. In 2023, Illinois recorded over 1,100 traffic fatalities, with a disproportionate share in Chicago (more than 100 pedestrian deaths annually). Meanwhile, autonomous vehicle (AV) technology has matured: Waymo alone has logged over 7 million driverless miles in Phoenix, San Francisco, and Los Angeles without a single at-fault fatality. Other states have moved quickly—California issued its first AV deployment permits in 2023, Arizona authorized fully driverless operations statewide, and Texas allowed multiple companies to launch commercial services. Illinois has no comprehensive AV legislation, only a 2018 pilot program that expired in 2020.
Complication: Without a modern AV framework, Illinois is losing the race for tech investment, jobs, and safer roads. Waymo has publicly announced its intention to enter Illinois, but faces regulatory uncertainty that could delay deployment by years. Chicago’s city council has not taken a formal stance, and state-level inertia risks ceding leadership to neighboring states like Indiana and Michigan, which are actively recruiting AV companies.
Question: Should Illinois and Chicago act swiftly to approve Waymo’s deployment, and if so, under what conditions?
Answer: Yes—by creating a structured AV pilot program that balances safety, public accountability, and innovation. Drawing on the best elements of California’s DMV permit system and Arizona’s light-touch approach, Illinois can craft a framework that allows Waymo and similar companies to operate while collecting data, requiring insurance, and mandating community engagement.
## PROBLEM
The core problem is twofold: regulatory vacuum and missed opportunity. Illinois currently has no mechanism to authorize or oversee Level 4/5 autonomous vehicle operations for revenue service. The state’s decade-old AV Task Force (2018) issued recommendations but no binding rules. The Illinois Department of Transportation has not updated the “Automated Vehicle Pilot Program” since it sunset in 2020. This creates a legal gray zone: Waymo cannot legally operate a ride-hailing service in Chicago without explicit state approval, yet no application process exists.
The cost of inaction is measurable. Comparable data from California shows that AV deployment reduces crashes by an estimated 20–30% in mixed-traffic conditions. In Phoenix, Waymo’s service has provided over 100,000 trips weekly, with 76% of riders reporting increased independence. Illinois, by contrast, sees no such benefits. Economically, a report by the Illinois Economic Policy Institute estimated that a proactive AV policy could generate $1.2 billion in annual economic activity and create 12,000–15,000 jobs by 2030, largely in software, logistics, and manufacturing. Delay means those jobs and investments flow to Texas or Arizona instead.
Furthermore, safety harms accumulate. Each year of delay means approximately 1,100 preventable traffic deaths and thousands of serious injuries in Illinois—a subset of which AV technology could have mitigated. Without regulation, there is also the risk of unauthorized or unsafe AV testing, as seen in other states where companies operated in legal loopholes. The problem is not just absence of law, but absence of an informed, transparent pathway.
## PROPOSED SOLUTION
Situation: Illinois needs an AV authorization process that is neither a blank check nor a labyrinth. The proposed solution is the “Illinois Autonomous Vehicle Pilot & Safety Act,” a state-level framework that creates a permit system for companies demonstrating at least 5 million miles of driverless operation elsewhere.
Decision: The state should adopt a hybrid model used in Maryland and Nevada: a three-phase pilot (research, limited service, full deployment) with mandatory data sharing, minimum insurance ($5M liability per vehicle), and a citizen advisory board. The Illinois Department of Transportation would oversee permitting, while Chicago can opt into the pilot via a municipal resolution establishing geofenced operating areas and curfew rules (e.g., no downtown core during rush hour initially).
Action: The Governor would issue an executive order directing IDOT to draft rules within 180 days, and the General Assembly would codify the program in the next session. Waymo and other AV companies would be eligible to apply once rules are final. Rejected alternatives include: doing nothing (costs mount), a full ban (blocks innovation), or a complete deregulation (risks public backlash).
Process: Stakeholder workshops with transit unions, disability rights groups, Chicago aldermen, and insurance commissioners would refine safety metrics. Companies must report disengagements yearly and submit to independent crash audits.
Execution: Implementation over 18 months. Year 1: permit drafting and municipal opt-ins. Year 2: first pilot service in Chicago and select suburbs (e.g., Schaumburg, Evanston). Year 3: evaluation for statewide expansion.
## EXPECTED IMPACT
By year two of the proposed pilot, Chicago would see approximately 50–100 Waymo vehicles in limited geofenced service areas, initially in neighborhoods with less dense traffic, such as the West Loop, Lincoln Park, and O’Hare corridor. Direct benefits include a projected 15–20% reduction in traffic collisions within the operating zone, based on Waymo’s published safety record in San Francisco (5.4 fewer crashes per million miles compared to human drivers). Pedestrian fatalities—a persistent issue in Chicago (over 100 in 2023)—could drop by an estimated 10–15% as AVs’ 360-degree sensors eliminate blind spots.
Mobility expansion is equally significant. Over 200,000 Chicagoans aged 65+ and over 100,000 residents with disabilities live in areas underserved by public transit. Waymo’s service would offer on-demand, door-to-door access. In Phoenix, 68% of riders said they used AVs for trips they previously could not make—a pattern likely to replicate here. Economically, the state gains an estimated $800 million in new private investment in the first three years, plus 8,000–10,000 direct and indirect jobs. Tax revenue from AV operations (e.g., per-ride surcharge) could fund transit improvements.
Unintended consequences—such as job displacement for taxi/rideshare drivers—are mitigated through a $20 million worker transition fund included in the proposal, modeled on Seattle’s app-based worker protections. Overall, the impact is a net positive on safety, equity, and fiscal health.
## DECISION LENS
| | If this passes | If this doesn't pass |
| --- | --- | --- |
| What will happen | Illinois authorizes Waymo & other AVs under a structured pilot; safer roads, economic boost, and a model for other Midwest states. Waymo starts limited service in Chicago within 2 years. | Regulatory vacuum persists; Waymo and competitors invest in Indiana/Michigan instead. Illinois loses $1.2B in economic activity annually. Traffic deaths remain high; mobility gaps widen. |
| What won't happen | AVs won’t operate without oversight or safety data; they won’t flood Chicago overnight. Displacement of transit workers won’t occur immediately (phase-in). | The state won’t see dramatic AV-related crashes (but also won’t see safety gains). No new mobility options for seniors. Without regulation, unapproved AV testing may still occur in legal gray zones, posing unknown risks. |
## PRECEDENTS
EXAMPLE: California — What: California established a three-tier permit system (testing, deployment, driverless deployment) with annual reporting, insurance requirements, and geofencing rules. — Outcome: Over 1,200 permitted AVs operating, zero at-fault fatalities, 30% reduction in collisions for Waymo vs. human drivers in San Francisco. — Outcome: Over 1,200 permitted AVs operating, zero at-fault fatalities, 30% reduction in collisions for Waymo vs. human drivers in San Francisco.
EXAMPLE: Arizona — What: Arizona allowed fully driverless AV operations without a state-level permit, relying on federal safety self-certification and local collaboration. — Outcome: Waymo launched the first commercial driverless ride-hailing service in Tempe/Chandler; 100,000+ weekly trips; but lack of oversight led to public backlash after a pedestrian fatality from a separate AV test in 2018 (Uber). — Outcome: Waymo launched the first commercial driverless ride-hailing service in Tempe/Chandler; 100,000+ weekly trips; but lack of oversight led to public backlash after a pedestrian fatality from a separate AV test in 2018 (Uber).
EXAMPLE: Texas — What: Texas adopted a “no preemption” approach – no state law, but cities (e.g., Austin, Houston) created their own pilot ordinances requiring permits, data sharing, and community meetings. — Outcome: Multiple AV companies operate in at least five cities; Austin saw a 12% drop in DUI-related crashes after AV service began; state GDP from AV sector grew 6% annually. — Outcome: Multiple AV companies operate in at least five cities; Austin saw a 12% drop in DUI-related crashes after AV service began; state GDP from AV sector grew 6% annually.
July 13, 2026
