As autonomous vehicle technology becomes more common around the country, Boston is struggling to determine how driverless cars could fit in on the city’s congested and confusing streets — if it allows them at all.

The City Council postponed a vote Wednesday on an ordinance that would ban commercial autonomous vehicles, which carry passengers similarly to taxis or ride-share services, from operating in Boston until a thorough study is completed on how their introduction would impact the city.

Councilor Gabriela Coletta Zapata, chair of the Committee on Government Operations, said during the weekly council meeting that more work was needed on the ordinance after an hours-long hearing on the matter on Tuesday.

During the hearing, many residents testified passionately on opposite sides of the issue, at times pitting different interest groups against each other.

Much of the worry about commercial autonomous vehicles stems from fears that they could take away jobs from Uber and Lyft drivers and create safety issues on the road.

But disabled residents who spoke said that, on the contrary, it could actually make Boston safer for them.

“I think there is a world in which we can do both,” Councilor Julia Mejia said during Tuesday’s hearing. “There is a way in which we can improve the quality of experience for our disability community while also maintaining the integrity of our workforce and we’re not hurting our low-income workers.”

Earlier this year, Waymo, a leading self-driving car company that operates “robotaxis” in several cities across the country, began deploying its vehicles in Boston to begin mapping the city.

Although the mapping cars were operated by humans and the company has no concrete plans to expand its service to Boston, the initiative sparked conversations at both the city and state levels about how to prepare for the potential impacts of driverless technology.

Members of the union representing ride-share drivers rallied in front of City Hall on Tuesday to oppose Waymo’s plans for Boston, saying it would result in the loss of their jobs and wages that they depend on to support their families, and in turn hurt the local economy.

The brand-new union, which was authorized by a state-wide ballot initiative last year, is still establishing itself, and leaders said autonomous vehicles would do away with all of the progress they had made toward job safety for members.

“We’re not against technology,” App Drivers Union Executive Director Autumn Weintraub said. “We are against technology that benefits billionaires. We need technology that is for the people, that is for workers and that is going to help workers and their families make a better life, not create a dystopian society where people don’t know how to survive.”

• Read more: Driver claims self-driving car didn’t stop for school bus in Mass.

Some drivers said they provide an essential service beyond just driving people around that a driverless car would be unable to perform.

One said he had recently stopped to call an ambulance when he saw someone who had overdosed on the side of the road, while others shared stories of helping riders with bags or simply making a human connection.

Alfred Potter, a ride-share driver for the last 11 years, told MassLive that he drives full-time and it is his main source of income, with which he supports his wife and eight children, four of whom live with him.

He said on a recent ride, he picked up a senior couple at Lawrence General Hospital, getting out of the car to take their belongings and help the couple — one using a walker and the other using a cane — into the vehicle.

During the hour-long drive, the man said he needed to use the bathroom. There wasn’t a rest stop nearby, but Potter pulled over somewhere secluded and helped the man to the woods to relieve himself.

“They were very thankful. I did it because I firmly believe it is the least I would expect if anyone in my family had that need,” Potter said. “I don’t believe any autonomous vehicle I know of would be able to do that.”

Matt Walsh, Waymo’s regional head of state and public policy, said that in other cities where the company has launched, they have not seen any impact on jobs or wages.

He said that in San Francisco in 2024, the number working for taxi and limousine companies grew by 7% and wages in the industry rose by 14%.

“You see a Waymo vehicle without a driver and you automatically equate it with a one-for-one job loss for people that are driving for a living,” Walsh said. “The reality is that a service like Waymo requires a tremendous amount of hardworking people to make that work. Vehicle technicians, dispatchers, fleet managers, people working in our offices cleaning the vehicles. We are very excited about the job growth that we are going to create.”

He added that Waymo is working on partnerships with organizations like the Ben Franklin Institute of Technology and the Clubhouse Network, an after-school STEM program in Roxbury, to develop jobs programs in Boston.

The City Council chamber was packed during Tuesday’s hearing, with most of those present coming directly inside from the labor rally.

But a strong contingent from the disability community also came out to oppose limitations on autonomous vehicles, which they said could provide unprecedented opportunities for freedom and independence.

• Read more: Waymo’s driverless taxis will face some unique obstacles in Boston

Bay State Council of the Blind Director Nora Nagle, who is legally blind and uses a guide dog, said she had often been refused rides by Uber or Lyft drivers who didn’t want a dog in their car, despite laws requiring them to accommodate service animals.

“I’ve been refused politely, I’ve been refused rudely. Some just drive away, some drivers give me excuses,” she said. “Where’s the humanity in leaving a blind person standing in the dark in the rain with no way to get home? … If I could take a safe autonomous car, it would mean that I wouldn’t have to worry about being refused two, three and four times in a row.”

Walsh said Waymo has already introduced features specifically aimed at helping visually impaired riders in response to customer feedback, including cars playing a melody so riders know they are getting into the correct vehicle and audio narration that tells riders what streets they are on as they travel.

The ordinance requiring an impact study, which was originally filed by Councilors Erin Murphy and Henry Santana, was sent back to committee for further discussion.

KILLINGLY, CT — Police on Wednesday identified both the man who was fatally shot Monday night and the woman accused of shooting him.

The victim, Andrew Michael Olson, 39, of Canterbury, was shot in the chest at a residence at 23 Pratt Rd., according to state police.

Police have arrested Michelle Yeagher, 65, of 23 Pratt Rd., Killingly, for the slaying.

Yeagher is charged with murder, carrying a dangerous weapon, risk of injury to a child, and first-degree reckless endangerment.

Police have not yet disclosed the relationship between the victim and the suspect, or any potential motive.

Yeagher remains in custody, held on a $1 million bond. She has been arraigned in Superior Court in Danielson. She has not yet entered a plea, and she is next due in court on Dec. 11, according to the state Judicial Branch website.

State police said they responded to Yeagher’s residence at 23 Pratt Rd. around 9:21 p.m. on Monday for a report of a shooting.

Troopers found the male victim suffering a single gunshot wound to the chest, according to state police. He was rushed to Day Kimball Hospital, where he was pronounced deceased, state police said.

State police arrested Yeagher at the residence.

The homicide investigation remains active and ongoing, according to police. The Eastern District Major Crime Squad is in charge of the investigation.

Read more:
State Police Probe Homicide In Killingly