News
Tesla representative removed from auto dealer’s board by Virginia Senate
Tesla Inc. employee Cody Arnett was relieved of his post in Virginia’s Motor Vehicle Dealer Board earlier this week, amid an ongoing battle over the electric carmaker’s right to sell directly to consumers in the state. Arnett, who was appointed by former Governor Terry McAuliffe before he stepped down from office, raised some eyebrows among other members of the MVDB, many of whom felt that the Tesla employee was not qualified for the post.
His removal from the MVDB seemed to have been caused by strong opposition to Tesla’s dealership-free business model by the Virginia Automobile Dealers Association (VADA), an influential group of legacy auto dealers that holds to the notion that automakers must sell vehicles through franchised dealerships. Arnett, who currently works as a performance coach for Tesla, was set to serve for four years on Virginia’s Motor Vehicle Dealer Board. As one of the MVDB’s 19 members, Arnett was tasked with the regulation and oversight of new and used automobile dealers in the state. On January 15, however, the VADA formally submitted a request to strip the 29-year-old Tesla employee of his appointment.
According to the VADA, Arnett should not be allowed to serve on the MVDB because he was not the owner of a franchised vehicle dealership. In a statement to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the auto group’s president and CEO, Don Hall, asserted that the technicality ultimately disqualifies the Tesla employee from holding one of the board’s 19 seats.
“The seat cannot be held by an employee of a dealer. It must be held by the owner of a dealership. I am sure the young man is a nice guy, and I am sure he has got great intentions, but the fact is he does not qualify,” Hall said, according to the Times-Dispatch.
The Virginia Automobile Dealers Association’s objection to Arnett’s appointment was submitted to Sen. Jill Holtzman Vogel, R-Fauquier, the chairwoman of the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee. Last Tuesday, the Senate committee decided to strip Arnett of his place in the MVDB, in what could only be described as a rare instance when a gubernatorial appointment was relieved from a post, as noted in a Washington Post report. Only one member of the committee, Sen. Adam Ebbin, D-Alexandria, voted to keep Arnett on the Motor Vehicle Dealer Board.
Arnett has been a longtime employee of Tesla, starting his tenure with the Elon Musk-led electric car maker and energy firm back in 2012. In a statement to the Times-Dispatch, Arnett stated that he received a dealer-operator license three years ago. He also revealed that he had already attended an MVDB meeting earlier this month.
In a statement to the Times-Dispatch on Wednesday, Tesla senior policy manager Brooke Kintz expressed the company’s disappointment at Arnett’s removal from the state’s Motor Vehicle Dealer Board.
“Arnett would have brought an important and innovative perspective to the board and to Virginians. Former Governor McAuliffe recognized this in appointing Cody, and as the holder of a license in Virginia, Tesla has just as much of a right to participate on the MVDB as anyone else.
“The decision of a small number of legislators to overturn Cody’s appointment at the urging of VADA is highly unusual if not unprecedented. It raises basic questions of fairness and improper political influence,” Kintz said.
Tesla currently operates one store at 9850 W. Broad St. in western Henrico County, Virginia, that doubles as a showroom and service center.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
