News
As OK’s anti-Tesla bill moves forward, its author believes a compromise is possible
The electric vehicle community in the United States took a collective gasp earlier this month when a proposed House Bill in Oklahoma unanimously passed a committee vote. The bill in question, HB 3994, aims to update and change parts of existing Oklahoma statutes related to the state’s auto industry. Now, this may sound harmless enough, but a look at the 70-page bill shows that companies like Tesla could lose out heavily if HB 3994 becomes law.
Tesla is already not allowed to directly sell its cars to consumers in Oklahoma, but HB 3994 could give the company even more headaches. What is particularly alarming with HB 3994’s language is the fact that it could be interpreted as a means to prevent automakers like Tesla from delivering and servicing vehicles in the state. This may result in Oklahoma-based Tesla owners being required to travel out of state just to have their vehicles serviced.
Tesla takes the bill very seriously, with the company urging owners on its Engage page to vote “No” to HB 3994. “If passed, this bill could force Tesla to close its existing locations in Oklahoma and prevent Tesla from shipping cars to anyone in the state, which would force locals to travel out-of-state to service their cars or pick up their new Tesla vehicles. Oklahoma should focus on increasing revenue and jobs in the state, not stifling competition and limiting consumer choice,” Tesla noted on its Engage page.
Oppositions and Risks
To state that Oklahoma-based Tesla owners are passionately trying to prevent HB 3994 from progressing further would be an understatement. Tesla owners are currently lobbying against the bill, with some even heading to the capitol last week to speak with the bill’s author, Representative Mike Dobrinski, who has an extensive background in the state’s auto sector. As per Dobrinski’s LinkedIn page, he was the Owner/Dealer of Dobrinski Chevrolet, Inc. until March 2017, and he was the Dealer/Owner of Dobrinski of Kingfisher, Inc., a Chevrolet-Buick-GMC dealership, until October 2018.
The Tesla owners’ talk with the Representative at the capitol last week was brief, according to information shared with Teslarati. Dobrinski highlighted the idea that HB 3994 is a way to protect Tesla owners in Oklahoma because if the EV maker refuses to cover its customers under warranty, then consumers will have no backup. Such a scenario seems unlikely, however.
Senator Mary B. Boren (Credit: Oklahoma Senate)
It’s not just Tesla owners in the state who are against HB 3994. Oklahoma Senator Mary B. Boren, who drives a Tesla Model 3 herself, has openly criticized the bill. In a short conversation with Teslarati, Senator Boren noted that Oklahoma must let the product and the market decide if the state wants innovation to flourish. Initiatives such as HB 3994, which could result in automakers with no dealerships getting the short end of the stick, are counterproductive.
The Senator’s statements could very well ring true. Just recently, reports emerged that Tesla battery partner Panasonic has decided to acquire a factory site in the United States for the production of high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. Panasonic has reportedly shortlisted its preferred US locations to Oklahoma and Kansas. Senator Boren remarked that the presence of bills like HB 3994 could potentially discourage companies like Panasonic from investing in Oklahoma.
“If you have capitalistic laws being passed to protect a particular industry and their business model and to insulate them from the market demands that require them to adjust, then any innovative industry related to EVs will notice that — and they will notice that cronyism is at play. They will find friendlier environments,” Sen. Boren said.
Insights from HB 3994’s Author
The fact that HB 3994 unanimously passed a committee vote earlier this month shows that the bill is also seeing substantial support, despite its harsh repercussions on companies like Tesla and its local electric vehicle owners. When asked by Teslarati about the rationale behind the controversial bill, Rep. Dobrinski explained that HB 3994 is a request bill from the Oklahoma Auto Dealer Association.
“A request bill from the Oklahoma Auto Dealer Association, it seeks to strengthen the position of franchised dealers from the ever-increasing demands and requirements of their legacy manufacturers. Doing so requires addressing Direct Shippers, including Tesla, that are not currently regulated by the Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Commission like franchised dealers are. Proper legislation and regulation will ensure that existing service facilities may remain open and consumers will have additional protections,” Dobrinski noted.
Representative Mike Dobrinski (Credit: Oklahoma State Legislature)
Interestingly enough, the Representative admitted that while HB 3994 includes provisions that may be used to force Tesla into closing its service centers in the state, he does not expect that part of the bill to make it to HB 3994’s final iteration. “I do not expect that provision to be included in the (bill’s) final language,” Dobrinski later stated.
The Representative deserves praise for his honesty with HB 3994, though one may wonder why the controversial bill’s most heavy-handed provisions were included in the first place. When confronted by Tesla owners online, Dobrinski has maintained that HB 3994 is far from finished, but it has already opened the doors for communication among automotive businesses in the state.
“This bill, as introduced, is far from the finished product. It is forcing engagement from franchise auto dealers, legacy manufacturers, and new EV manufacturers, including Tesla. These folks are all talking now for the first time ever to work on a plan of regulation going forward that ensures competition and improves customer satisfaction under the purview of the Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Commission,” Dobrinski wrote.
A Price for Compromise?
Considering the statements of HB 3994’s author, it appears that the bill could partly be seen as a way to achieve a compromise of sorts between companies like Tesla, electric vehicle owners, and the state’s franchised auto dealerships. However, existing Tesla owners in Oklahoma fear that if HB 3994 passes into law, it could adversely affect not only their ownership experience but also their daily lives.
Cristen Winter Huber, a Tesla owner and a foster mother, is one of them. Being a foster mother, Huber is unable to take her foster children outside Oklahoma without a judge’s permission. According to Huber, the harsher portions of HB 3994 could effectively disrupt her family dynamic, and it might motivate her to leave the state.
“It’s not feasible for my family to drive out of state frequently. I’m a parent and foster parent. I have to get approval from a judge to take my foster child out of state. If I have to leave the state to service my car, I might as well move to a state that welcomes growth and innovation,” Huber said.
Jochen Hoppert, the President of the Tesla Owners Club of Oklahoma, noted that HB 3994 is not only a step in the wrong direction — it can have repercussions far beyond Tesla. The Tesla Club President also stated that so far, the EV maker’s service centers in Oklahoma City and Tulsa are proving that Tesla is serious about supporting its customers.
“Tesla is still not permitted to sell or deliver vehicles from those locations. We hope that will change in the future, yet this anti-competitive bill is clearly a step in the opposite direction. It’s worth noting that this move would not only negatively affect Tesla and the local Tesla community but other up-and-coming electric vehicle manufacturers wishing to do business in the state.
“Rep. Mike Dobrinski, the creator of this bill… has shared his perspective, which includes the notion that this bill would provide benefit to the consumer by allowing the state to manage the presence of warranty, service, and other such things for the consumer as required features of the electric vehicle marketplace. The Tesla service centers in Oklahoma City and Tulsa already demonstrate Tesla’s desire to provide its customers with such services,” Hoppert said.
Following its unanimous committee approval, House Bill 3994 has now advanced to the House Floor. But before the bill could become a law, the Oklahoma Governor would have to approve it first. With this in mind, Tesla owners and electric vehicle advocates still have some time to fight against the bill, or at least lobby for significant changes. Rep. Mike Dobrinski himself has been consistent with the idea that HB 3994 is still open for edits, so it may be a good idea for Tesla owners in the state to push their efforts even more from this point forward.
Those interested in speaking up and supporting Tesla’s efforts against Oklahoma’s HB 3994 could click here.
A copy of Oklahoma HB 3994 could be viewed below.
Hb3994 Int by Simon Alvarez on Scribd
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Tesla Diner to transition to full-service restaurant as Chef heads for new venture
“I am leaving the Tesla Diner project to focus on the opening of Mish, my long-desired Jewish deli. Projects like Mish and the Tesla Diner require a sharpness of focus and attention, and my focus and attention is now squarely on Mish.”
Tesla Diner, the all-in-one Supercharging and dining experience located in Los Angeles, will transition to a full-service restaurant in January, staff said, as Chef Eric Greenspan said he would take on a new project.
A report from the Los Angeles Times says Greenspan confirmed through a text that he would leave the Diner and focus on the opening of his new Jewish deli, Mish.
Greenspan confirmed to the paper:
“I am leaving the Tesla Diner project to focus on the opening of Mish, my long-desired Jewish deli. Projects like Mish and the Tesla Diner require a sharpness of focus and attention, and my focus and attention is now squarely on Mish.”
Greenspan took on the job at the Tesla Diner and curated the menu back in March, focusing on locally-sourced ingredients and items that would play on various company products, like Cybertruck-shaped boxes that hold burgers.
Tesla Cybertruck leftovers are the main course at the Supercharger Diner
The Tesla Diner has operated as somewhat of a self-serve establishment, where Tesla owners can order directly from their vehicles through the center touchscreen. It was not exclusive to Tesla owners. Guests could also enter and order at a counter, and pick up their food, before sitting at a booth or table.
However, the report indicates Tesla is planning to push it toward a sit-down restaurant, full of waiters, waitresses, and servers, all of which will come to a table after you are seated, take your order, and serve your food.
It will be more of a full-featured restaurant experience moving forward, which is an interesting move from the company, but it also sounds as if it could be testing for an expansion.
We know that Tesla is already considering expanding locations, as it will be heading to new areas of the country. CEO Elon Musk has said that Tesla will be considering locations in Palo Alto near the company’s Engineering HQ, and in Austin, where its HQ and Gigafactory Texas are located.
Musk said that the Diner has been very successful in its first few months of operation.
News
Tesla adds new surprising fee to Robotaxi program
“Additional cleaning was required for the vehicle after your trip. A fee has been added to your final cost to cover this service. Please contact us if you have any questions.”
Tesla has added a new and somewhat surprising fee to the Robotaxi program. It’s only surprising because it was never there before.
Tesla shocked everyone when it launched its Robotaxi platform and offered riders the opportunity to tip, only to tell them they do not accept tips. It was one of the company’s attempts at being humorous as it rolled out its driverless platform to people in Austin.
As it has expanded to new cities and been opened to more people, as it was yesterday to iOS users, Tesla has had to tweak some of the minor details of the Robotaxi and ride-hailing platforms it operates.
First Look at Tesla’s Robotaxi App: features, design, and more
With more riders, more vehicles, and more operational jurisdictions, the company has to adjust as things become busier.
Now, it is adjusting the platform by adding “Cleaning Fees” to the Robotaxi platform, but it seems it is only charged if the vehicle requires some additional attention after your ride.
The app will communicate with the rider with the following message (via Not a Tesla App):
“Additional cleaning was required for the vehicle after your trip. A fee has been added to your final cost to cover this service. Please contact us if you have any questions.”
The cost of the cleaning will likely depend on how severe the mess is. If you spill a soda, it will likely cost less than if you lose your lunch in the back of the car because you had a few too many drinks.
This is an expected change, and it seems to be one that is needed, especially considering Tesla is operating a small-scale ride-hailing service at the current time. As it expands to more states and cities and eventually is available everywhere, there will be more situations that will arise.
The messes in vehicles are not a new situation, especially in a rideshare setting. It will be interesting to see if Tesla will enable other fees, like ones for riders who request a ride and do not show up for it.
News
Tesla Model Y sold out in China for 2025
Customers who wish to get their cars by the end of the year would likely need to get an inventory unit.
It appears that the Model Y has been sold out for 2025 in China. This seems to be true for the four variants of the vehicle that are currently offered in the country.
Tesla China’s order page update
A look at Tesla China’s order page for the Model Y shows a message informing customers that those who wish to guarantee delivery by the end of the year should purchase an inventory unit. This was despite the Model Y RWD and Model Y L showing an estimated delivery timeline of 4-8 weeks, and the Model Y Long Range RWD and Model Y Long Range AWD showing 4-13 weeks.
As per industry watchers, these updates on the Model Y’s order page suggest that Tesla China’s sales capacity for the remainder of 2025 has been sold out. The fact that estimated delivery timeframes for the Model Y Long Range RWD and AWD extend up to 13 weeks also bodes well for demand for the vehicle, especially given strong rivals like the Xiaomi YU7, which undercuts the Model Y in price.
Tesla China’s upcoming big updates
What is quite interesting is that Tesla China is still competing in the country with one hand partly tied behind its back. So far, Tesla has only been able to secure partial approval for its flagship self-driving software, FSD, in China. This has resulted in V14 not being rolled out to the country yet. Despite this, Tesla China’s “Autopilot automatic assisted driving on urban roads,” as the system is called locally, has earned positive reviews from users.
As per Elon Musk during the 2025 Annual Shareholder Meeting, however, Tesla is expecting to secure full approval for FSD in China in early 2026. “We have partial approval in China, and we hopefully will have full approval in China around February or March or so. That’s what they’ve told us,” Musk said.
Tesla Diner to transition to full-service restaurant as Chef heads for new venture
Tesla adds new surprising fee to Robotaxi program
