Committee advances evaluation of personal delivery device program amid liability questions

A joint special meeting of Los Angeles City committees moved to recommend an evaluation of the city’s personal delivery device program, a staff-led review the motion’s sponsors said would clarify operational, safety and liability questions.

Committee members heard two public speakers representing robotics delivery companies before discussion. Kelly Jones, government affairs manager for Kelly Roblox, told the committees her company ‘‘ha adherido a los programas de la ciudad’’ and said the service reduces vehicle miles and emissions by making short deliveries with robotic equipment. Jorge José, who identified himself as “vicepresidente de relaciones para robótica,” praised local collaboration and described the program as a success in removing cars from roadways.

Councilmember Hernández introduced the motion (item 0.2) described in the agenda as an evaluation of the personal delivery device program. Members pressed staff and legal counsel on liability and contract language. Councilmember Nazarian asked whether the city would be held responsible if a delivery device caused injury or property damage; the transcript records Nazarian saying she wanted ‘‘asegurar que la ciudad no sea responsable,’’ and asking municipal counsel to confirm whether existing contracts contain language that shifts liability to contractors.

Crescenita Conejo, identified in the meeting as a department manager, said staff would follow up with counsel and review contract language. The transcript shows staff agreed to return with additional information and to consult disability and civil-rights advocates mentioned during the discussion.

The committee chair directed that the motion be recommended for adoption and the roll call recorded affirmative votes and absences; the transcript records affirmative votes from Councilmember Hot and Councilmember Hernández and absences by others on the committee. The motion was entered as a committee recommendation to the City Council for further action.

The discussion distinguished between a staff evaluation (the motion’s stated purpose), direction to check contracts and outreach to affected stakeholders, and any future regulatory action. No new citywide regulations or contract changes were adopted at the meeting; staff said they would report back with findings and contract-language clarifications.

Why it matters: The PDD program affects curb and sidewalk space, pedestrian safety and city liability exposure. The committee directed staff to compile information that could affect future policy or contract terms, and asked legal counsel to confirm where responsibility lies under existing agreements.