After noise complaints, judge orders Waymo to stop overnight charging in Santa Monica 48%

By Cyrus Farivar63%

8/1/2026, 4:30:54 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Anecdotal, Appeal to Emotion, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 29.9% saturation with 146 hits. Analysis detected 797 faulty-reasoning hits from 488 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 43.9% and a BS Rank of 48% (13,272 of 25,472 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 52.10% of the article peer group.

A local judge has ruled that Waymo can no longer use its side-by-side charging facilities overnight in Santa Monica, California, as these may pose a “public nuisance.” 
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Bradley S. 
Phillips <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28527844-19-20260727-minute-order-ruling-granting-preliminary-injunction-vs-waymo/">granted</a> this week the City of Santa Monica’s motion for a preliminary injunction in the city’s ongoing public nuisance lawsuit against the autonomous vehicle giant. 
City officials and neighbors assert that the constant stream of vehicles at the charging stations create light and sound pollution and cause undue traffic congestion on the streets and nearby alleys, creating a collective bother and disruption. 
“The constant ‘beep beep beep’ sound as the autonomous vehicles back out of their spaces (in their own lots) is an incessant disturbance that hinders both our tranquillity during the day and our peace during the night,” <a href="https://www.change.org/p/reduce-noise-pollution-from-waymo-charging-stations-in-santa-monica">wrote</a> Christopher Potter, a man who says he lives right next to the lots. 
Under the new order, Waymo is forbidden from operating the charging lots on Broadway at 12th and Euclid Streets between 11 pm and 6 am. 
The Broadway charging stations sit directly across the street from a private school. 
Apartment buildings and other residences are also nearby, and some residents have complained consistently for over a year. 
With the order in place, neighbors already notice a difference. 
“I took a walk around last night, and gosh, it’s amazing,” Dylan Moore told Ars. 
Moore lives down the block from these Waymo lots and previously created the <a href="http://WaymoProblems.org">WaymoProblems.org</a> website. 
“You can hear the crickets, you can hear your thoughts, it’s not a fleet of locusts descending on the neighborhood, it’s incredible.” 
Another neighbor, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal and described himself as a “night owl,” said that he is thrilled that Waymo has abided by the court order. 
“At 2 am when the bars let out, that’s when [they had been] full bore,” he said. 
“My apartment faces Broadway. 
The sound of the Waymos, yes, but the acceleration and deceleration sound that EVs have, makes it sounds like you have Tron outside your window. 
It [was] one after another!” 
Santa Monica leadership also trumpeted the success. 
“Our residents’ ability to sleep peacefully in their own homes is not negotiable,” Mayor Caroline Torosis said in a <a href="https://www.santamonica.gov/press/2026/07/28/court-grants-city-s-request-for-preliminary-injunction-pausing-overnight-operations-at-waymo-s-broadway-charging-facilities">statement</a>. 
“This ruling affirms what our neighbors have been telling us for more than a year, and it delivers relief while the case moves forward.” 
Waymo did not immediately respond to questions from Ars Technica. 
Waymo began using these facilities in January 2025. 
After numerous complaints and an <a href="https://www.change.org/p/reduce-noise-pollution-from-waymo-charging-stations-in-santa-monica">online petition</a>, the City of Santa Monica ordered the company to halt overnight operations. 
It eventually <a href="https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-11-24/santa-monica-orders-waymo-to-stop-noisy-overnight-operations-at-charging-stations-neighbors-rejoice">sued</a> Waymo over the issue in November 2025 in a case that is still ongoing. 
(Waymo has also counter-sued.) 
The next court hearing in the case is scheduled for October 2026. 
Confirmation Bias
10.5%
Anchoring Bias
2.7%
Availability Heuristic
9.2%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
2%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
7%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
4.1%
Optimism Bias
3.1%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
29.9%
Self-Serving Bias
4.5%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
4.9%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
5.5%
False Dilemma
4.3%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
6.4%
Appeal to Emotion
15.8%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
8.8%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
29.7%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
10.7%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
4.3%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

488 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.