HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-12-02; City Council; 10; E-bike Safety Strategy OptionsCA Review JRT
Meeting Date: Dec. 2, 2025
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Geoff Patnoe, City Manager
Staff Contact: Jason Arnotti, Police Lieutenant
jason.arnotti@carlsabdca.gov, 442-339-5554
Jennifer True, Senior Assistant City Attorney
jennifer.true@carlsbadca.gov, 442-339-5198
Subject: E-bike Safety Strategy Options
Districts: All
Recommended Action
Receive an update on e-bike safety strategies and provide direction to staff as desired.
Executive Summary
Citing a 233% increase in collisions involving bikes and e-bikes between 2019 and 2022, the City
of Carlsbad declared a local state of emergency in August 2022. This action increased attention
and resources on a range of safety strategies including infrastructure, enforcement and safe
driving behavior education. This initiative also positioned Carlsbad as the first city in the region
to adopt a local e-bike safety ordinance. Notably, these efforts focused on enhancing safety for
all roadway users and were formalized by the City Council through the adoption of the Safer
Streets Together Plan on Sept. 27, 2022.
Since the end of the local state of emergency in 2023, use of e-bikes and e-motorcycles in the
city has continued to rise, mirroring trends throughout the state. With this increase, the city
continues to receive a substantial amount of input from community members concerned about
unsafe riding, including e-bike use on sidewalks and in parks, reckless group riding, excessive
speeds and transporting more passengers than the device was designed to accommodate.
When the city asked for community input before launching the Safer Streets Together Plan in
2022, one of the top requests was to require licenses or establish a minimum age for riding
e-bikes. This request remains a consistent theme in community feedback. However, state law
limits the extent to which municipalities may regulate these requirements.
Despite these limitations, the city collaborated with State Assemblymember Tasha Boerner last
year to co-sponsor State Assembly Bill 2234 (AB 2234), which established a minimum age of 12
for operating Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes. This bill is an optional pilot program, unique to San
Diego County, that became available on Jan. 1, 2025. In the past year several cities throughout
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 1 of 27
the county have adopted AB 2234’s minimum age provisions. (A complete copy of the law is
provided as Exhibit 1.)
City Council direction
• On March 25, 2025, the City Council approved a minute motion directing the Traffic
Safety & Mobility Commission to solicit community feedback and make a
recommendation on whether the city should adopt measures related to AB 2234. The
commission convened a special meeting on Sep. 16, 2025, to carry out this directive and
forward its recommendations to the City Council. More than 550 comments were
received in advance of the meeting, with approximately 85% of respondents supporting
an age limit of 12 or higher. An attachment summarizing the commission’s
recommendations and community feedback is included as Exhibit 2.
• On July 29, 2025, the City Council approved a minute motion directing the City Manager
to work with the Police Chief and City Attorney to develop recommendations for the
City Council’s consideration to enhance enforcement tools supporting law enforcement
efforts to maintain public safety and address aggressive e-bike riding behavior,
particularly among youth. The City Council directed staff to return to the City Council
with these recommendations at the same meeting when the Traffic Safety & Mobility
Commission feedback on AB 2234 was to be considered.
This staff report provides an overview of existing e-bike regulations and strategies, recent data
on e-bike enforcement and collisions, recommendations from the Traffic Safety & Mobility
Commission and additional staff recommendations to promote the safe operation of e-bikes in
the community.
Explanation & Analysis
Background
E-bikes are regulated by the California Vehicle Code as bicycles and must comply with most of
the same regulations as non-motorized bicycles. This statewide framework for e-bike regulation
was created by Assembly Bill 1096 in 2015. Under this law, e-bikes are classified into three
categories:
Class 1 - Provide pedal-assistance only and motor stops assisting at 20 mph
Class 2 - Can operate via throttle or pedal-assist, and motor also stops assisting at 20 mph
Class 3 - Provide pedal-assist up to 28 mph, must be equipped with a speedometer. Existing
laws prohibit people under 16 from operating Class 3 e-bikes.
Because the Vehicle Code applies throughout the state, local governments generally cannot
create their own regulations on matters already covered by the Vehicle Code unless specifically
authorized by law. However, cities and counties do have limited authority to adopt local rules
related to where and when e-bikes may be operated, such as on bike paths, trails or parks
under their jurisdiction. Any local regulation must be consistent with state law and cannot
conflict with the classifications, definitions or fundamental rights established under the Vehicle
Code. A local ordinance that conflicts with the Vehicle Code may be void, and conflicts exist if
the ordinance duplicates or contradicts the Vehicle Code or addresses topics for which the
Vehicle Code expressly or impliedly prohibits supplemental local regulation.
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 2 of 27
In 2024, in response to increasing collision trends and safety concerns associated with youth
ridership, the State Legislature authorized different pilot programs in San Diego County and
Marin County to evaluate stronger local e-bike safety regulations focused on age restrictions.
Additional discussion of these pilot program options is provided later in this report.
Current Carlsbad e-bike regulations
As part of the Safer Streets Together campaign, the City Council amended Municipal Code
Chapter 10.56, Operation of Regulated Mobility Devices, which applies to e-bikes, motorized
scooters and similar devices. The amendments were intended to close gaps left by state law by
integrating education and enforcement within a single, locally controlled framework.
Under these provisions, riders must comply with all applicable California Vehicle Code
requirements, as well as these additional local regulations:
• Operate with due care and reduce speed to avoid collisions or endangering others
• Ride with the flow of traffic, in the same direction as motor vehicles
• Obey traffic control devices, including stop signs and traffic signals
• Refrain from operating on a sidewalk
• Helmets are required for riders under 18 and all riders on Class 3 e-bikes, regardless of
age
Enforcement is carried out by the Police Department, and violations may result in fines or
citations that are consistent with state and local laws. Violators may have the option to
complete a department-approved safety course in lieu of a fine. (A complete copy of Municipal
Code Chapter 10.56 is provided as Exhibit 5.)
Following the adoption of these provisions, the city adopted a comprehensive approach to
e-bike safety, built on education, engineering and enforcement. This strategy was implemented
through coordinated efforts across the Police Department, Transportation Department, Parks &
Recreation and other city partners to address unsafe behaviors, improve infrastructure and
expand community outreach.
Current measures
The following sections provide an overview of education, engineering, outreach and
enforcement measures currently underway.
E-bike enforcement
Since 2022, the Police Department has conducted over 430 traffic stops involving an e-bike or
e-motorcycle,1 issuing more than 180 citations and 250 warnings for various violations,
including red-light and stop-sign violations, riding on a sidewalk and other hazardous riding.
During the department's most recent summer enforcement effort, between May and August
2025, officers conducted 179 proactive e-bike stops and towed 28 illegal e-motorcycles.
E-bike diversion program
Riders cited for violating the city’s Municipal Code’s regulations on the operation of mobility
devices may complete a department-approved safety course instead of paying a fine. Carlsbad’s
diversion program prioritizes education over punishment by promoting participation in e-bike
1 E-motorcycles are not considered e-bikes and require a Class M1 motorcycle license, state registration, a license
plate and insurance.
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 3 of 27
safety classes. More than 60 juveniles have chosen to participate in the program, which focuses
on education and skill-building to foster safer habits and promote personal accountability.
Public outreach
Carlsbad’s citywide approach to bicycle and e-bike safety emphasizes education, community
partnerships and ongoing public outreach. Since 2022, the Police Department has arranged for
several officers to become certified bike safety instructors by the American League of Bicyclists.
The officers have facilitated over 20 safety courses, reaching more than 1,500 students and
parents. Additionally, helmet distribution events funded by the California Office of Traffic Safety
provided more than 100 helmets, and a separate event held in partnership with the Scripps
Health Injury Prevention Team further expanded community participation and awareness.
Staff have also collaborated to raise awareness about safe riding practices through social media
campaigns, public service announcement videos and school-based outreach in collaboration
with school administrators. In partnership with city staff, the Carlsbad Unified School District
has implemented an on-campus e-bike parking permit program that requires students to
complete a safety training course before receiving a permit. These media campaigns and
educational programs are ongoing, reflecting a sustained commitment to safer streets
throughout the city.
Engineering
Engineering improvements have been a central component of the city’s Safer Streets Together
campaign. Since 2022, Carlsbad has implemented more than 20 high-visibility green car-bike
conflict zone markings, expanded bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects and Safe
Routes to School improvements near schools. These efforts are guided by the city’s Vision Zero
framework2 and Sustainable Mobility Plan, with additional improvements planned through its
Residential Traffic Management Program. Together, these measures are designed to slow
vehicle speeds, increase visibility and expand safe travel options, complementing enforcement
and education initiatives.
Legislative advocacy
In addition to supporting AB 2234, which would establish a minimum age requirement for
e-bike operation and create a diversion pathway for youth violators, the city has also engaged
in broader statewide efforts to advance e-bike safety policy. As part of this work, the City of
Carlsbad expressed formal support for Senate Bill 381 (SB 381), which directs the Mineta
Transportation Institute at San José State University to conduct a comprehensive study on
electric bicycles by Jan. 1, 2026.
SB 381 is intended to provide legislators and local governments with the data needed to make
informed policy decisions. The study will compile and compare statewide information on
injuries, collisions, emergency room visits and fatalities involving e-bikes and conventional
bicycles. It will also evaluate California’s current e-bike laws alongside the policies of countries
with high levels of e-bike usage to identify approaches that promote safer riding behaviors. A
complete copy of SB 381 is provided as Exhibit 6.
2 Vision Zero is a public commitment to try to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries by adopting a data-
driven, multi-faceted strategy for improving road safety,
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 4 of 27
Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission recommendations
As detailed in Exhibit 2, the Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission conducted a comprehensive
review of collision data, enforcement activities and extensive community input gathered
through school networks, city newsletters and social media. In its discussions, the commission
weighed safety against mobility, considered enforcement and examined the importance of
regional consistency. Based on this analysis, the commission made the following
recommendations to the City Council:
1. Adopt AB 2234, prohibiting e-bike use by those under 12 years old.
This bill, which became effective Jan. 1, 2025, established a “San Diego Electric Bicycle Safety
Pilot Program” until Jan. 1, 2029, that authorizes a local government in San Diego County to
adopt an ordinance prohibiting individuals under 12 years of age from operating a Class 1 or 2
electric bicycle. (AB 2234 amended California Vehicle Code Section 21214.7.)
• The government agency must administer a public information campaign of the
ordinance for at least 30 days before enactment.
• For the first 60 days after enactment, only warnings of violations may be issued.
• After that, violations may be cited as infractions, punishable by a base fine of $25, plus
approximately $200 in additional fees.
• The fine may be waived if proof is provided within 120 days that the rider completed an
approved e-bike safety and training course.
A review of the city’s collision data for the most recent four-year period shows the following
trends for e-bike riders aged 12 and under:
2022: One collision, resulting in transport to hospital
2023: Four collisions, with one resulting in transport to hospital
2024: Four collisions, with one resulting in transport to hospital
2025: No collisions involving injury3
As of November 2025, five cities in San Diego County have adopted local ordinances banning
children under 12 from riding Class 1 or Class 2 e-bikes, in accordance with AB 2234: Chula
Vista, Coronado, Poway, San Marcos and Santee.
Next steps: If the City Council desires this option, it would direct staff to prepare an ordinance
to prohibit the operation of Class 1 or 2 e-bikes by those under 12, in accordance with the
criteria set forth in AB 2234.
2. Pursue legislation adding the City of Carlsbad to the authority found in State Assembly
Bill 1778 (AB 1778), prohibiting e-bike use by those under 16 years old.
AB 1778 establishes a “Marin Electric Bicycle Safety Pilot Program” that authorizes local
authorities in Marin County to adopt an ordinance or resolution prohibiting anyone under 16
years of age from operating a Class 2 electric bicycle. The local government may also require
that all Class 2 e-bike operators wear a helmet, regardless of age. (AB 1778 amended California
Vehicle Code Section 21214.5 and became effective Jan. 1, 2025.)
3 Data is from Jan. 1, 2025, to Oct. 31, 2025
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 5 of 27
Before such an ordinance or resolution may take effect, the government agency must
administer a public information campaign for at least 30 days.
• For the first 60 days following enactment, only warnings may be issued for violations of
this provision.
• After that period, violations may be cited as infractions punishable by a base fine of $25.
• The fine may be waived if proof is provided within 120 days that the rider completed an
approved e-bike safety and training course.
Next steps: If this option is desired, the City Council would direct staff to pursue legislation that
would include the City of Carlsbad in Marin County’s pilot program under AB 1778. If the city is
included in the pilot, the City Council would then adopt an ordinance prohibiting the operation
of Class 2 e-bikes by those under 16 and requiring Class 2 e-bike riders to wear helmets. (A copy
of AB 1778 is provided as Exhibit 7.)
3. Adopt an ordinance prohibiting e-bike riders under 16 from carrying passengers.
Existing law (California Vehicle Code Section 21204(a)) states that a person operating a bicycle,
including an e-bike, may not ride or carry another person on the bicycle unless that bicycle is
equipped with a separate seat or saddle for each person. The Traffic Safety & Mobility
Commission recommends strengthening this provision locally by prohibiting e-bike riders under
16 from carrying passengers, even if the bicycle is designed to accommodate an additional
rider.
Because California Vehicle Code Section 21204(a) already regulates when bicycles and e-bikes
may carry passengers, California Vehicle Code Section 21 prohibits local authorities from
adopting additional regulations on this matter without a state law authorizing it. However, the
city can pursue legislation providing this authorization.
Next steps: If this option is desired, the City Council would direct staff to work with the
Legislative Subcommittee to pursue legislation authorizing local authorities to prohibit e-bike
operators under 16 from transporting passengers.
Additional staff recommendations
The City of Carlsbad continues to demonstrate regional leadership in advancing e-bike safety
through its early and coordinated implementation of the Safer Streets Together initiative. The
regulations on mobility devices in Municipal Code Chapter 10.56 align with, and in some cases
exceed prohibitions and safety requirements adopted by neighboring jurisdictions. As shown in
Exhibit 8, several cities have implemented measures similar to the recommendations presented
in this report, while others maintain more limited or narrowly tailored rules. This regional
comparison helps illustrate where gaps and opportunities exist for Carlsbad to refine and
strengthen its approach.
Carlsbad’s proactive efforts have also drawn statewide recognition. Earlier this year, the city’s
e-bike and e-motorcycle safety strategies were highlighted at the 2025 California Office of
Traffic Safety Law Enforcement Forum for their coordinated mix of enforcement, education and
engineering practices.
In response to the City Council’s direction, staff have reviewed current data, community
feedback and regional practices to identify potential additional measures to address e-bike
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 6 of 27
safety. While the city’s existing ordinance provides a strong foundation for e-bike safety, the
City Council’s direction and ongoing public input indicate areas where further targeted
measures could enhance safety and address specific community concerns.
The following staff recommendations represent measures intended to address public safety
concerns, while complementing the commission’s work and maintaining consistency with both
local and state frameworks.
4. Make comprehensive updates to Municipal Code Chapter 10.56: Unsafe riding standards,
equipment requirements and parent and guardian accountability.
Staff recommend that the City Council consider amending Municipal Code Chapter 10.56 to
provide clear, enforceable standards related to unsafe riding behavior, equipment
requirements and the responsibilities of parents and guardians. These updates respond to
community concerns, collision trends and observed enforcement challenges, and would
modernize the ordinance to better align with current e-bike usage patterns and statewide
safety expectations.
While the existing ordinance requires operators of regulated mobility devices to exercise due
care and operate at safe speeds, these expectations are expressed broadly, which can limit
consistent field-level enforcement and reduce clarity for riders and families. Current Municipal
Code Section 10.56.020(C)(1) requires operators to reduce speed as necessary, obey traffic
control devices and take reasonable precautions to safeguard themselves and others, and
prohibits certain unsafe passenger practices. However, the code does not provide explicit
examples of unsafe behaviors, address key equipment or parental responsibility components
recognized as important for e-bike safety. To address these gaps, staff recommend a
comprehensive update that includes the following elements:
Clarification of unsafe riding behaviors
Incorporate a non-exhaustive list of behaviors that constitute unsafe operation, including but
not limited to:
• Operating a bicycle or e-conveyance at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent
for existing conditions, taking into account weather, pedestrian and vehicular traffic,
and the surface and width of the sidewalk or roadway.
• Performing acrobatics, tricks or stunts such as wheelies when pedestrians or moving
vehicles are present.
• Engaging in racing, speed or stunt contests.
• Failing to yield to vehicles or pedestrians when required.
• Failing to obey posted traffic or other regulatory signs.
• Carrying any package, bundle or item that prevents the operator from maintaining full
control and forward visibility.
• A person under 18 riding without a properly fitted and fastened helmet.
• A person riding or riding as a passenger of Class 3 electric bicycles without a properly
fitted and fastened helmet, regardless of age.
• Riding on a public street or bikeway against the flow of traffic.
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 7 of 27
These examples would not create new violation categories but would clarify conduct already
encompassed within the city’s due-care requirement, improving voluntary compliance and
supporting education and enforcement.
Parent and guardian accountability provisions
Add provisions establishing that:
• A parent or guardian may not authorize or knowingly permit a minor to violate any
provision of this chapter.
• In cases where a minor commits a violation, the parent or guardian may be held jointly
and severally liable for any associated fines or administrative penalties.
These additions complement the existing diversion option that allows minors to complete a
Police Department-provided safety course in lieu of paying a fine, while ensuring accountability
when necessary.
Next steps: If this is desired, the City Council would direct staff to draft an ordinance amending
Municipal Code Chapter 10.56 to incorporate unsafe-riding examples and parent/guardian
accountability provisions. The ordinance should also include any needed adjustments to
definitions, signage requirement, and enforcement procedures to ensure consistency with state
law and existing local regulations.
5. Adopt an ordinance establishing age requirements for operating e-bikes during hours of
darkness.
Existing law, under the California Vehicle Code, establishes various operational and equipment
requirements for bicycles and e-bikes but does not restrict the operation of e-bikes during
hours of darkness based on rider age.
Staff recommend strengthening local safety requirements by prohibiting anyone under 16 years
of age from operating an electric bicycle during hours of darkness.
Next steps: For this option, the City Council would direct staff to draft an ordinance amending
Municipal Code Chapter 10.56 to restrict e-bike operation during hours of darkness to riders 16
years of age or older.
6. Prohibit the operation of regulated mobility devices at Poinsettia and Pine Avenue
Community Parks.
Based on increasing calls for service and community complaints regarding unsafe or disruptive
e-bike activity, particularly at Poinsettia Community Park and Pine Avenue Community Park, the
City Council may wish to consider prohibiting the operation of electric bicycles and other
regulated mobility devices within these city-owned parks.
Between Jan. 1 and Oct. 31, 2025, a total of 102 e-bike-related calls for service were reported
across six city-owned parks, with more than 66% of the calls being at Poinsettia Community
Park and Pine Avenue Community Park.
Under the city’s existing ordinance (Municipal Code Section 10.56.020(A)), the operation or
riding of regulated mobility devices is prohibited on any public athletic or sports court or
gymnasium. Use of these devices in other areas of city-owned parks, such as concrete walkways
and paths, is permitted, so long as operators exercise due regard.
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 8 of 27
In addition to this existing provision, Municipal Code Section 10.56.020(A) grants the city
authority to prohibit the operation or riding of regulated mobility devices in other public areas
where such prohibitions are posted by signs. This authority has not been exercised to
implement a comprehensive ban on e-bikes in any city-owned park. The City Council may
amend the code by ordinance to implement such restrictions, if desired.
Next steps: If this option is desired, the City Council would direct staff to draft an ordinance
prohibiting the operation of regulated mobility devices within Poinsettia Community Park and
Pine Avenue Community Park, consistent with existing prohibitions on skateboards. The
ordinance should include appropriate signage requirements, enforcement provisions, and a
process for designating any limited exceptions (e.g., authorized for maintenance or public
safety staff).
7. Exercise E-bike and micromobility impound authority (California Vehicle Code Section
22651.08, AB 875).
Based on the city’s ongoing efforts to address unsafe or unlicensed operation of high-speed
e-bikes and other micromobility vehicles, staff recommend that the City Council consider
adopting a local ordinance to exercise authority provided under newly chaptered Vehicle Code
Section 22651.08 (effective January 1, 2026, through Assembly Bill 875). This law authorizes
peace officers to remove certain vehicles under two circumstances:
1. Vehicles with fewer than four wheels powered by an electric motor capable of
exceeding 20 miles per hour and operated by an unlicensed person
2. Class 3 e-bikes operated in violation of Section 21213(a) of the Vehicle Code, which
states that a person must be at least 16 years old to operate a Class 3 electric bicycle
and that anyone operating or riding as a passenger on a Class 3 e-bike, regardless of
age, must wear a properly fitted and fastened bicycle helmet.
Under AB 875, local jurisdictions may establish regulations or ordinances to recover
administrative costs associated with the removal, seizure, and storage of impounded vehicles.
Governments must post any applicable fee schedule publicly on their website.
• The law also allows agencies to release vehicles after a minimum 48-hour period,
provided that costs are paid and requests are made during normal business hours.
• For certain violations, local authorities may condition release on proof that the operator
or their parent/guardian has completed an approved e-bike or bicycle safety course.
While the state law provides the underlying authority, Carlsbad does not have a local ordinance
establishing administrative procedures, fees or release requirements specific to high-risk
e-bikes or other noncompliant micromobility vehicles. Adopting a corresponding ordinance
would allow the city to formalize impound, release and safety training procedures tailored to
local needs, consistent with the authority granted by Vehicle Code Section 22651.08.
Next steps: If this option is desired, the City Council would direct staff to draft a local ordinance
implementing California Vehicle Code Section 22651.08. The ordinance should include
procedures for impoundment and release, administrative cost recovery, posting of fee
schedules, and safety training requirements, and allow flexibility for any limited exceptions.
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 9 of 27
Fiscal Analysis
The fiscal impact will depend on the specific actions and recommendations adopted by the City
Council.
The overall fiscal impact associated with publicizing and enforcing Assembly Bill 2234, which
prohibits e-bike operation by individuals under 12 years of age, is expected to be minimal.
Outreach and education efforts can be supported within the existing departmental budget.
Enforcement of the ordinance and administration of the associated diversion program will
require staff oversight. The Juvenile Justice Coordinator will be responsible for verifying course
attendance, maintaining records and processing violations upon completion of diversion
requirements. While these duties can initially be absorbed within existing workloads, ongoing
monitoring or an increase in program participation may result in additional staffing or
administrative costs that would need to be evaluated as part of future budget considerations.
Enforcement of any additional measures adopted by the City Council can also be
accommodated within the existing budget at this time. Staff anticipate that implementing
signage and additional bike racks at the two community park locations will cost approximately
$15,000.
Next Steps
If directed, staff will return with a draft ordinance further regulating e-bikes in the City of
Carlsbad. The City Council may also provide direction on adjustments to enforcement or
educational strategies based on 2025 operational outcomes and community feedback.
Broader issues related to licensing, education and testing standards, insurance requirements
and uniform age restrictions remain under consideration at the state level. These are essential
areas for long-term improvement that fall outside local authority.
The forthcoming population-level study required under SB 381 is expected to inform the
statewide understanding of e-bike safety by examining a broader and more diverse set of data
than any single jurisdiction can independently compile. This large-scale, comparative analysis
will provide a means for evaluating which interventions are most effective across different
communities.
Staff will continue to monitor these developments and adjust local strategies as appropriate to
ensure Carlsbad remains aligned with best practices and evolving state policy. Additionally, the
city’s Intergovernmental Affairs Director will continue to monitor opportunities to promote
legislative actions that address local concerns about e-bike safety.
Environmental Evaluation
The proposed action is not a “project” as defined by California Environmental Quality Act, or
CEQA, Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5) and does not require
environment review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) and 15061(b)(3), because the
proposed action to report on enforcement efforts is an organizational or administrative
government activity that does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may
result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. Any subsequent action or
direction stemming from the proposed action may require preparation of an environmental
document in accordance with CEQA or the CEQA Guidelines.
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 10 of 27
Exhibits
1. Assembly Bill 2234 – San Diego Electric Bicycle Safety Pilot Program
2. Recommendations from the Sept. 16, 2025, Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Special
Meeting
3. Staff Report from the Sept. 16, 2025, Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Special Meeting
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
4. Minutes of the Sept. 16, 2025, Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission Special Meeting (on file
in the Office of the City Clerk)
5. Carlsbad Municipal Code – Chapter 10.56, Operation of Regulated Mobility Devices
6. Senate Bill 381 – Electric Bicycles: Study
7. Assembly Bill 1778 – Marin Electric Bicycle Safety Pilot Program
8. Comparison of e-bike regulations adopted by other cities in the region
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 11 of 27
Exhibit 1
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 12 of 27
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 13 of 27
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 14 of 27
1
Summary of Public Outreach and Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission (TSMC)
Recommendations
Background
In 2022, community feedback for the Safer Streets Together program identified strong interest
in establishing licensing or minimum age requirements for e-bike riders. At the time, state law
prevented cities from adopting such rules.
In 2024–2025, the City worked with Assemblymember Boerner to sponsor AB 2234, which now
authorizes cities in San Diego County to establish a minimum age of 12 for Class 1 and Class 2 e-
bike operation.
On March 25, 2025, the City Council directed staff to gather public input on a potential
minimum age requirement and bring the feedback and any recommendations from the Traffic
Safety & Mobility Commission (TSMC) back to the City Council. The TSMC heard the item on
September 16, 2025.
Public Outreach Summary
Leading up to the TSMC meeting, the city conducted a comprehensive outreach effort to notify
the community and gather input. Outreach methods included:
•Notifications distributed to school parent networks through platform channels (e.g.,
ParentSquare, PeachJar)
•City Manager’s Update newsletter, city news releases and direct email lists
•Social media posts, Nextdoor updates and posters placed at city libraries and
community centers
•Information shared during Carlsbad Police Department bicycle and e-bike safety classes
•A dedicated webpage providing background information and an email comment
submission link
•Local and regional print, online, radio, and television outlets provided extensive
coverage before and after the TSMC meeting, helping inform the community about the
input process and the Commission’s recommendation.
Public Feedback Summary1
In advance of the TSMC meeting, the city received approximately 550 written comments as
summarized below:
1 The data collection methods were not scientific, and the data may not proportionately reflect the sentiments of
the larger Carlsbad community.
Exhibit 2
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 15 of 27
2
•Approximately 85% expressed support for establishing a minimum age of 12 or higher
•Approximately 8% opposed the proposal, citing a variety of concerns including
transportation independence for students and families
•Approximately 7% provided additional suggestions or comments, with themes including
further safety education, licensing for e-bikes, increased enforcement and passenger
limitations
Among those who provided additional feedback, several recurring themes were identified:
•Support for requiring safety education or certification for riders (~ 29%)
•Support for additional regulatory measures beyond age limits (~ 21%), such as further
restrictions on equipment, speed or where e-bikes may be ridden
•Preference for considering a minimum age higher than 12 (~ 35%) based on maturity
concerns and roadway conditions
•Other topics raised included the importance of safe driving behaviors, street and
infrastructure improvements, enforcement feasibility and questions regarding
alternative travel options if a minimum age were adopted
Public feedback themes are summarized in the outreach slides presented to the TSMC.
Summary of TSMC Discussion
At the meeting on September 16, 2025, staff from the Transportation and Police departments
presented background on AB 2234, existing e-bike regulations, enforcement practices, collision
trends and community feedback. Commissioners discussed the balance between supporting
youth mobility, promoting safe riding behaviors and ensuring enforceable and effective rules.
Commissioner discussion topics included:
•The continued prioritization of education-first enforcement, particularly for youth
•Use of school resource officers and campus-based outreach efforts
•Enforcement resource considerations and observed positive behavior change after
citations
•Collision trends concentrated near arterials, schools, parks and coastal areas
•Interest in enhanced safety education, coordination with the Carlsbad Unified School
District, and exploring voluntary rider safety certification
•Broader concerns around unsafe riding behaviors among older teens and adults, outside
the direct scope of AB 2234
Public speakers expressed a range of viewpoints, including strong support for establishing a
minimum age and requests for additional education. The details of the discussion at the
meeting can be found in the meeting minutes from Sept. 16, 2025.
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 16 of 27
3
TSMC Recommendations
Following discussion, the TSMC approved the following motions:
1.Recommend the City Council adopt a minimum age requirement of 12 for Class 1 and
Class 2 e-bike operation under AB 2234
2.Recommend prohibiting riders under age 16 from carrying passengers
3.Recommend staff research feasibility of participating in the AB 1778 pilot program,
which established a different e-bike pilot program in Marin County. The law allows local
agencies in Marin County to prohibit anyone under age 16 from riding Class 2 e-bikes
and require helmet use for anyone, regardless of age, riding a Class 2 e-bike.
4.Recommend that the City Council advocate for state legislation that would give cities
more flexibility to adopt stricter rules, including options for licensing, registration and
insurance requirements, and higher age limits
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 17 of 27
Exhibit 3
Staff Report from the Sept. 16, 2025, Traffic Safety &
Mobility Commission Special Meeting
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 18 of 27
Exhibit 4
Minutes of the Sept. 16, 2025, Traffic Safety & Mobility
Commission Special Meeting
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 19 of 27
CHAPTER 10.56
OPERATION OF REGULATED MOBILITY DEVICES
§10.56.010. Definitions.
"Bicycle" has the same meaning as in California Vehicle Code Section 231, as it may be amended
from time to time.
"Electric bicycle" has the same meaning as in California Vehicle Code Section 312.5, as it may be
amended from time to time.
"Electric personal assistive mobility device" has the same meaning as in California Vehicle Code
Section 313, as it may be amended from time to time.
"Electrically motorized boards" has the same meaning as in California Vehicle Code Section
313.5, as it may be amended from time to time.
"Low speed vehicle" has the same meaning as in California Vehicle Code Section 385.5, as it may
be amended from time to time.
"Motorized scooter" has the same meaning as in California Vehicle Code Section 407.5, as it may
be amended from time to time.
"Operator" means a person who owns, operates, and/or controls a regulated mobility device.
"Public area" means any outdoor area that is open to the members of the public for public use,
whether owned or operated by the city or a private party.
"Regulated mobility device" means a bicycle, electric bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility
device, electrically motorized board, low-speed vehicle, motorized scooter, shared mobility
device, and any other similar vehicle.
"Rider" means a traveler riding in or on a regulated mobility device who is not operating it.
"Shared mobility device" has the same meaning as in California Civil Code Section 2505, as it
may be amended from time to time.
"Vehicle" has the same meaning as in California Vehicle Code Section 670, as it may be amended
from time to time.
(Ord. CS-419 § 2, 2022)
§10.56.020. Operation of regulated mobility devices.
A.Prohibition of Regulated Mobility Devices Where Posted. It is prohibited to operate or ride
on a regulated mobility device in public areas where such prohibition is posted by signs or as
otherwise set forth in this chapter. A list of public locations where regulated mobility devices
are prohibited shall be on file in the City Clerk's office. The list may be amended from time
to time by resolution of the City Council.
B.No Operating or Riding on Sidewalks and Public Facilities. No person shall operate or ride a
regulated mobility device upon any sidewalk, in any public drainage facility, culvert, ditch,
channel, or any other public athletic/sports court, or gymnasium in the city.
C.Duty to Operate with Due Care, Reduce Speed.
City of Carlsbad, CA
§ 10.56.010 § 10.56.020
Downloaded from https://ecode360.com/CA4913 on 2025-08-14
Exhibit 5
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 20 of 27
(Ord. 3062 § 8; Ord. NS-151 § 1, 1991; Ord. CS-139 § 1, 2011; Ord. CS-419 § 2, 2022)
§ 10.56.030. Enforcement.
In lieu of a fine or administrative citation as authorized by this code, and in lieu of filing charges in
any court having jurisdiction over a violation, the Police Chief or designee may allow a violator of
this chapter to complete a police department provided safety course for regulated mobility devices.
(Ord. 3062 § 11; Ord. 3064 § 3; Ord. CS-419 § 2, 2022)
§ 10.56.040. Exemptions.
(Ord. CS-419 § 2, 2022)
§ 10.56.050. Severability.
If any portion of this chapter, or its application to particular persons or circumstances, is held to
be invalid or unconstitutional by a final decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, the decision
will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter or the application of the
chapter to persons or circumstances not similarly situated.
(Ord. CS-419 § 2, 2022)
1. The operator of a regulated mobility device shall exercise all due care and shall reduce
the speed of the device, obey all traffic control devices, and take all other action relating
to operation of the device as necessary to safeguard the operator, passengers, and any
persons or other vehicles or devices in the immediate area. It shall also be unlawful to
transport any other person upon the bar, handle bars, floorboard or other area of
regulated mobility device not designed for passenger riding or designed for a single
person, or cling to or attach oneself or one's regulated mobility device with an operator
or rider on board to any moving vehicle or motorized or non-motorized wheeled device.
2. Persons operating or riding a regulated mobility device on a city trail must dismount the
regulated mobility device where the trail width is less than five feet and a pedestrian or
equine is within a distance of 50 feet from the regulated mobility device.
A. Public Agency Personnel. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, or any other
section of this code, city and public agency personnel may operate regulated mobility devices
or other vehicles at any place in the city in the performance of their official duties.
B. Disability. This chapter is not intended to apply to or otherwise restrict regulated mobility
devices used in a safe manner by physically disabled persons as defined under the Americans
with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. Section 12101 et seq.).
City of Carlsbad, CA
§ 10.56.020 § 10.56.050
Downloaded from https://ecode360.com/CA4913 on 2025-08-14Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 21 of 27
Exhibit 6
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 22 of 27
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 23 of 27
Exhibit 7
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 24 of 27
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 25 of 27
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 26 of 27
Sa
n
D
i
e
g
o
C
o
u
n
t
y
Ci
t
y
Co
d
e
Ag
e
<
1
2
(A
B
2
2
3
4
)
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
Ru
l
e
s
Si
d
e
w
a
l
k
Ri
d
i
n
g
Pa
r
k
s
&
T
r
a
i
l
s
Di
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
Sc
h
o
o
l
Pe
r
m
i
t
CV
C
M
e
t
h
o
d
Ca
r
l
s
b
a
d
CM
C
1
0
.
5
6
TS
M
C
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
TS
M
C
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
Pr
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Va
r
i
e
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ch
u
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
CM
C
1
0
.
7
3
Ye
s
Pr
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
(
<
1
8
)
Va
r
i
e
s
Va
r
i
e
s
Ye
s
No
Hy
b
r
i
d
(
L
o
c
a
l
+
C
V
C
)
Co
r
o
n
a
d
o
CM
C
5
6
.
1
8
Ye
s
St
a
t
e
L
a
w
Pr
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
Va
r
i
e
s
Ye
s
No
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Po
w
a
y
CM
C
1
0
.
5
7
Ye
s
Pr
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
(
<
1
8
)
Va
r
i
e
s
Va
r
i
e
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Hy
b
r
i
d
(
L
o
c
a
l
+
C
V
C
)
Sa
n
M
a
r
c
o
s
CM
C
1
2
.
2
5
Ye
s
St
a
t
e
L
a
w
Va
r
i
e
s
Va
r
i
e
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Sa
n
t
e
e
CM
C
1
0
.
2
2
Ye
s
St
a
t
e
L
a
w
Va
r
i
e
s
Va
r
i
e
s
Ye
s
No
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Or
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
&
O
t
h
e
r
C
i
t
i
e
s
Sa
n
C
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
CM
C
1
0
.
6
2
N/
A
Pr
o
h
i
b
i
t
e
d
(
<
1
6
)
St
a
t
e
L
a
w
Va
r
i
e
s
No
Ye
s
Hy
b
r
i
d
(
L
o
c
a
l
+
C
V
C
)
Hu
n
t
i
n
g
t
o
n
B
e
a
c
h
CM
C
1
0
.
8
4
N/
A
St
a
t
e
L
a
w
Va
r
i
e
s
Va
r
i
e
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Hy
b
r
i
d
(
L
o
c
a
l
+
C
V
C
)
Ne
w
p
o
r
t
B
e
a
c
h
CM
C
1
1
.
0
4
N/
A
St
a
t
e
L
a
w
Va
r
i
e
s
Va
r
i
e
s
No
Ye
s
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
Ir
v
i
n
e
CM
C
4
-7
-
20
7
N/
A
St
a
t
e
L
a
w
Va
r
i
e
s
Va
r
i
e
s
No
Ye
s
Hy
b
r
i
d
(
L
o
c
a
l
+
C
V
C
)
Co
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
M
a
t
r
i
x
o
f
E
-bi
k
e
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
IT
E
M
1
0
:
E
-bi
k
e
S
a
f
e
t
y
S
t
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
,
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
6
Th
i
s
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
w
a
s
c
o
m
p
i
l
e
d
f
r
o
m
p
u
b
l
i
c
l
y
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
m
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
c
o
d
e
s
,
w
h
i
c
h
a
r
e
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
c
h
a
n
g
e
.
Exhibit 8
Dec. 2, 2025 Item #10 Page 27 of 27
Morgen Fry
All Receive - Agenda Item # 10
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Date (1,10,,S CA /CC / z
rvi %,/ ACM t/ DCM (3) V'
From: Sunny Blende <blendehixon@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2025 10:12 AM
To: City Clerk
Subject: Electric Bikes
To the Clerk: Regarding electric bikes and age limits to be discussed at the City Council Meeting Dec. 2,
2025
We are residents of Carlsbad living at Tamarack and Garfield near Agua Hedionda Lagoon and Tamarack
Beach. We strongly support the City Council's Additional Recommendations of:
•Adopt a minimum age of 12 to operate an e-bike
•Pursue legislation prohibiting riders under age 16 from riding with passengers
•Pursue legislation that would allow Carlsbad to join Assembly Bill 1778, a pilot program
in Mann County that allows local agencies to prohibit anyone under age 16 from riding a
class 2 e-bike, which means it is throttle-assisted.
In addition, we also strongly support these additional recommendations:
.Updating the existing local e-bike law to clarify unsafe riding behavior, equipment
requirements and the responsibilities of parents and guardians
•Prohibiting e-bikes at Poinsettia and Pine parks, following review of community feedback
and calls for service received at these locations
•Establishing fees to recover administrative costs related to impounding e-bikes, as
allowed by Assembly Bill 875
.Prohibiting anyone under 16 years of age from operating an e-bike when it's dark outside
We are unable to attend the City Council meeting on Dec. 2nd, but would like our voices to be heard. We
watch a "pack" of six to eight young riders doing "wheelies" riding side saddle, having un-helmeted riders
on their bikes going south on Garfield Street from Tamarack, and doing other stunts as well as "flipping
us off" if we ask them to slow down. While they are doing this, they are now riding looking backwards!
Please pass some regulations for Carlsbad to be in the lead for safety for our younger and older
residents. I am hoping more of my neighbors will also write in their thoughts or attend the City Council
meeting.
Thank you,
Sunny Blende 415-302-2251
Randy Nixon 415-385-0779
4050 Garfield St.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
blendehixon@gmail.com
1
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safgr-
2
Morgen Fry
From: Jennifer True
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2025 8:55 AM
To: City Clerk
Cc: Jason Arnotti
Subject: FW: New E-bike Muni-Code restrictions?
FYI — public comment received.
Jennifer R. True
Senior Assistant City Attorney
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
www.carlsbadca.gov
442-372-86871 iennifer.true@carlsbadca.gov
CONFIDENTIALIrt NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
information protected by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine or other applicable privileges or confidentiality laws
or regulations. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, use, copy, disclose or distribute this message or any of the information
in this message to anyone. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by replying to this email and delete all copies of this
message and any attachments. Unintended transmission is not a waiver of the attorney-client or any other privilege.
From: Pete Penseyres <cyclovet11@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2025 6:44 PM
To: jason.arnotti@carlsabdca.gov; Jennifer True <jennifer.true@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Re: New E-bike Muni-Code restrictions?
Both of you are listed as "sponsors" of Item 10 on the December 2 Carlsbad City Council Agenda,
which includes this new restriction for E-bike riders under 16:
"5. Adopt an ordinance establishing age requirements for operating e-bikes during hours of darkness.
Existing law, under the California Vehicle Code, establishes various operational and equipment
requirements for bicycles and e-bikes but does not restrict the operation of e-bikes during hours of
darkness based on rider age. Staff recommend strengthening local safety requirements by prohibiting
anyone under 16 years of age from operating an electric bicycle during hours of darkness. Next
steps: For this option, the City Council would direct staff to draft an ordinance amending Municipal
Code Chapter 10.56 to restrict e-bike operation during hours of darkness to riders 16 years of age or
older. "
Earlier, these statements were made:
1
"Because the Vehicle Code applies throughout the state, local governments generally cannot create
their own regulations on matters already covered by the Vehicle Code unless specifically authorized
by law. However, cities and counties do have limited authority to adopt local rules related to where
and when e-bikes may be operated, such as on bike paths, trails or parks under their jurisdiction. Any
local regulation must be consistent with state law and cannot conflict with the classifications,
definitions or fundamental rights established under the Vehicle Code. A local ordinance that conflicts
with the Vehicle Code may be void, and conflicts exist if the ordinance duplicates or contradicts the
Vehicle Code or addresses topics for which the Vehicle Code expressly or impliedly prohibits
supplemental local regulation."
How does this proposed Municipal Code NOT conflict with the fundamental rights of E-bike riders
under 16 whose bikes comply with CVC 21201 lighting requirements if they are prohibited from roads
"after dark", while children in the same age group on non-e-bikes can ride "after dark" on the same
roads?
Wouldn't any Municipal Code created to enforce this nighttime age restriction violate CVC 21 (a)?
Shouldn't any proposal for this new restriction be included with others that the City Lobbyists will be
asked to take to the Legislature for Statewide, or at least special San Diego County application?
Respectfully,
Pete Penseyres
League of American Bicyclists Certified Instructor *2020
Vice Chair Traffic Safety and Mobility Commission
760-468-9550
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content i.
safe.
2
INC,GIVG r164I MM. 14,•• • r • 0
For the Information of thePt
CITY COUNCIL
Date ‘7,11116CA t,tC
CM E./ACM i---t1CM (3)
Liana Somepalli
From: Council Internet Email
Sent: Monday, December 1, 2025 1:48 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: FW: E-bikes (Dec. 2 Council Meeting, Item #10)
Dec. 2, Council meeting Item #10
City of
Carlsbad
Ms. Torrey Wolf
Executive Assistant
Office of the City Council
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
www.carlsbadca.gov
office 442-339-2749
mobile 760-802-7779
Torrey.wolf@carlsbadca.gov
From: Debbie Peters <debjpeters1@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 1, 2025 1:43 PM
To: Keith Blackburn <keith.blackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Priya Bhat-Patel <priya.bhat-patel@carlsbadca.gov>; Council
Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: E-bikes
Dear City Council,
I know this topic is on the agenda for an upcoming meeting. Thought I would pass along this NY Times
article in case you haven't seen it. This problem is much bigger than making the age limit 12 years old.
Please give this topic the time and attention it needs. Thank you.
Debbie Peters
Aviara Residents
Carlsbad resident for over 40 years
https://www.n_Zimes.com/2025/11/30/magazine/e-bikes-accidents-safety-legislation-
california.html?smid=nytcore-ios_-sl-we
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.
1
Adriana Trujillo
All Receive - Agenda Item # /0
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Date/44/4-CA 1.7-CC 1.---
CM 1.7-ACM I7-DCM (3) 47-
From: City Clerk
Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 8:43 AM
To: Adriana Trujillo
Subject: FW: Proposed e-bike legislation (Dec. 2, Item #10)
From: Kearney, Lauren MD <11<earneyPrchsd.org>
Sent: Monday, December 1, 2025 3:37 PM
To: Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Proposed e-bike legislation
As a pediatrician and a Carlsbad resident since 2006, I support the electric bicycle regulations adopted
by the Carlsbad city council in September 2025.
I support the recommendation for a minimum age of 12 years for all riders of electric bicycles,
prohibition of riders under the age of 16 riding with passengers and requiring helmets for all class 2 and
higher electric bicycles. I would also urge stricter enforcement of existing laws pertaining to electric
bicycles. I live 1 mile from Carillo Elementary School and witness adults riding e-bikes northbound on the
sidewalk on Melrose between Carillo way and Poinsettia on a daily basis.
Appreciate your attention to these urgent public safety issues.
Sincerely,
Lauren Kearney M.D.F.A.A.P.
6419 Terraza Portico
Carlsbad CA 92009
760-214-1525
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.
1
Adriana Trujillo
From: City Clerk
Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 8:43 AM
To: Adriana Trujillo
Subject: FW: ebikes (Dec. 2, Council meeting — Item # 10)
From: Carol Scurlock <cascurlock@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 1, 2025 6:29 PM
To: Council Internet Email <council@carisbadca.gov>
Subject: ebikes
As a retired 6th grade teacher, I know 12 yr. olds are immature and not worldly. They are too young to be
on fast bikes with no knowledge of how to navigate in traffic. lonly wish the age limit would be raised
from 12 yr. old. Driving is scary and they are making it a nightmare for all. carol scurlock carlsbad
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.
1
Adriana Trujillo
From: Council Internet Email
Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 7:59 AM
To: City Clerk
Subject: FW: City Council Meeting 12-02-2025 Item 10.
Attachments: E- bike Accident.pdf
From: Lam Do <lamdomd@me.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 7:46 AM
To: Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: City Council Meeting 12-02-2025 Item 10.
Dear City Council Members,
Please find attached a letter pertaining to E-bikes safety.
In 2 sentences:
1.I was hit from behind by a high school student racing his e-bike up College Blvd in front of Sage Creek High
School on Feb 04, 2024.
2.I would recommend more e-bikes safety and enforcement in our shared communities.
Sincerely,
Lam Do, M.D.
Co-founder GoCyclingNow USA
501c(3) non-profit organization
https://urldefense.com/v3/ http://vvvwv,go_cyclingnowusa.org ;HE 4xU6-vwMWK-
Q!uwttIrkih3XVMDGo6Q1woqr8_9Bxgarg1313,9
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.
L 41-0A- 311 "Selpp.4, 4379115~4,4 •7-‘4.7,-. .
Lam Do, MD
4928 Lassen Dr.
Oceanside, CA 92056
(408) 839-2635
drlamdo@gmail.com
February 4th, 2024
Joshua Way, Principal
3900 Bobcat Blvd,
Carlsbad, CA 92010
Dear Principal Way,
On Wednesday Jan 31st, I was riding my bicycle as your students were being
dismissed. One of your students hit me from behind on his e-bike!
I was riding on Cannon Road heading toward your school and had made a left
turn onto College Road and was out of the saddle climbing. There were many
students walking on the sidewalk. There were students on e-bikes ahead of
me. I believe a student on an e-bike had just passed me. Suddenly, I was hit
from behind, and found myself falling to my left side, toward traffic, and landed
on the student and his e-bike. The location was approximately 1/3 to 1/2 way up
toward the first red light. Both of us were wearing helmets and we were
face-to-face! I observed that the student had both earbuds in his ears... He
suffered an abrasion to his left palm and was in some pain and bleeding lightly.
I injured my left 5th proximal interphalangeal joint (likely a small fracture as
there is swelling and ecchymosis)... The student was apologetic as he realized
that he caused the accident by clipping me from behind as he was trying to
pass. I believe he was racing with his friend... We were lucky that we were not
run over by cars traveling at high speed up that
I understand that there are approximately 120 e-bikes at your school. As
co-founder of "GoCyclingNow USA" (https://www.gocyclingnowusa.orgi) we
want to see more students riding to school on bikes instead of cars! I hope
that you will use this opportunity, as principal, to educate and remind your
students of e-bikes and bicycle safety and the sharing of the bike lanes by all
users of our community.
Please feel free to contact me at the info above if you need any additional
information.
,
Yours Truly in Cycling,
Lam Do, MD
Adriana Trujillo
All Receive - Agenda Item # /0
For the Information of the:
_cITY , COUNCIL
Date/40/2r CA e— CC
CM 'CM ACM (3)
From: Robert Berger <oakberger@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2025 5:49 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: Comment on item 10 on tonight's public meeting agenda
My wife and I moved to Carlsbad a year and a half ago. While we feel generally safe living here, we were
shocked at apparent lack of control over the use of e-bikes by our community's youth. We, like many of
our neighbors, have had close calls with kids on e-bikes. Often, they do not wear helmets or don't have
the buckled. They often ride two on a bike. I've even seen three on a bike. Who is liable if a car and e-bike
are involved in an accident? The current situation puts both kids and drivers at serious risk. A
comprehensive policy and education campaign needs to be developed and implemented. Thank you,
Robert Berger and Dr. Lori Kaplan, La Costa Oaks
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
safe.
1
E-bike Safety Strategy Options
Jason Arnotti, Police Lieutenant
Jennifer True, Sr. Assistant City Attorney
Dec. 2, 2025
2
TODAY’S PRESENTATION
•City Council direction
•Current e-bike regulations and laws
•Ongoing efforts
•Legislative advocacy
•Local collision data
•Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission recommendations
•Additional staff recommendations
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
3
COUNCIL DIRECTION
Sep. 16, 2025
The TSMC held a special meeting
and received more than 550
comments from the community.
March 25, 2025
City Council directed the Traffic Safety & Mobility
Commission to seek public input on prohibiting e-
bike riding under age 12 (per AB 2234) and return
to Council with feedback and recommendations.
July 29, 2025
Council directed staff to develop enhanced e-
bike enforcement recommendations and
present them alongside the commission’s
feedback.
Dec. 2, 2025
City Council receives an update on
e-bike safety strategies.
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
4
CURRENT REGULATIONS
In 2022, Carlsbad became the first city in the region to pass local e-bike laws
Ride with due care and reduce
speed when needed
Obey all traffic signs and signals
Obey the rules of the road
applicable to bicycles
Wear a helmet if under 18 and for all
Class 3 e-bike operators
Restrictions applied to trails
Prohibited on sidewalks, athletic fields,
courts and gymnasiums
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
5
E-BIKE CLASSIFICATIONS ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
Feature Pedal bike Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 E-motorcycle*
Pedal assist No Yes Yes Yes No
Throttle No No Yes No Yes
Max speed Speed limit 20 mph 20 mph 28 mph 29 mph+
Minimum age None None None 16 16
Driver's license No No No No Yes
Helmet required Under 18 Under 18 Under 18 All ages All ages
Helmet recommended All ages All ages All ages All ages All ages
Allowed on sidewalks No No No No No
Allowed on trails Yes Yes Yes No No
*E-motorcycles have different requirements than e-bikes and are not street legal.
6
E-BIKE VS. E-MOTORCYCLE
E-bike E-motorcycle
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
7
ENGINEERING EFFORTS ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
•Added conflict zone markings
•Safe Routes to School improvements
•Improvements guided by the Vision
Zero framework and Sustainable
Mobility Plan
•Neighborhood traffic calming projects
8
EDUCATION EFFORTS
•Middle and high school safety and permit programs
•24 bicycle safety courses 1,500+ participants presented by officers certified through the League of American Bicyclists
•Sharing safety reminders and information on e-
bike laws through city channels
•Distributed 100+ helmets through the California Office of Traffic Safety grant
•Partnered with the Scripps Community Outreach Program
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
9
ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY
Enforcement efforts target violations including:
•Red-light and stop sign violations
•Riding on sidewalks
•Unsafe speeds and reckless operation
430 +
Total Traffic Stops
(2022)
250
Warnings Given
64
Completed Diversion
180
Citations Issues
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
10
ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
11
ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
May to August 2025
•287 e-bike calls for service
•179 proactive e-bike stops
•28 e-bike collisions
•28 e-motorcycles towed
LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY
12
•Co-sponsored AB 2234, creating a minimum age for e-bike
operation and a diversion pathway for youth violators
•Provided formal support for SB 381, directing the Mineta
Transportation Institute to conduct a comprehensive e-
bike study by Jan. 1, 2026
–Analyzes statewide e-bike and bicycle injury, collision,
ER, and fatality data
–Reviews California’s e-bike laws and compares them
to high-usage countries
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
13
ASSEMBLY BILL 2234
•Pilot program authorized for all San Diego County agencies
•Prohibits those under 12 from riding Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes
•Requires 30-day public information campaign
•60-day warning period, then implementation
•Diversion opportunity offered in lieu of paying fine
•Parents/guardians liable for violations
•Pilot program sunsets Jan. 1, 2029
ITEM 10: SHORTENED TITLE HERE
E-BIKE COLLISION DATA
14
2 6
20
45
59 55 58
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Yearly E-Bike Injury Collision Totals
2019 – Oct. 31, 2025
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
E-BIKE COLLISION DATA
15
Detailed Yearly E-Bike Injury Breakdown by Age
This chart breaks down 246 collisions by age group for each year through Oct. 31, 2025.
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
16
E-BIKE COLLISION DATA
E-Bike Injury Collisions by Age Group
E-bikes were found at fault in 63% of the 217 collisions from 2022 – 2025*
Of the 136 at-fault e-bike collisions from 2022-2025*, riders ages 12-17 represented the largest share.
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
COMMUNITY INPUT
17
Social media
Emails & City Manager’s Update
News releases
COMMUNITY INPUT
Webpage
School outreach
Posters at city facilities
18
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
550 emails received
Support a minimum
age of 12 or higher
85%
Opposed
8%
Other suggestion or
comment…
19
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
COMMUNITY INPUT
Several comments also shared support for measures beyond the
scope of AB 2234, including:
Rider licensing or education (29%)
Other additional requirements (21%)
Minimum age higher than 12 (35%)
20
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
COMMUNITY INPUT
Other themes identified in the comments include:
Focusing on safe driving and slowing speeds
Suggestions for street improvements
Consider alternative transportation like
busing if the minimum age is passed
Questions about enforcement
21
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
RECOMMENDATIONS
22
23
COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.Adopt AB 2234, prohibiting e-bike use by those under 12 years old
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
•All San Diego County agencies authorized to adopt the e-bike pilot program
•Riders under 12 prohibited from operating Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes
•30-day public information campaign followed by a 60-day warning period before enforcement
•Parents/guardians liable for violations; riders may take a safety class instead of paying the $25 fine
•The county must report enforcement and crash data to the Legislature by Jan. 1, 2028
•The pilot program sunsets Jan. 1, 2029
Potential path forward:
Direct staff to prepare an ordinance prohibiting Class 1 or 2 e-bike operation by those under
12, consistent with AB 2234 criteria
24
COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATIONS
2.Pursue legislation adding the City of Carlsbad to the authority found in State
Assembly Bill 1778, prohibiting Class 2 e-bike use by those under 16 years old
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
•All Marin County agencies authorized to adopt the Class 2 e-bike pilot program
•Riders under 16 prohibited from operating Class 2 e-bikes; all Class 2 riders must wear a helmet
•30-day public information campaign followed by a 60-day warning period before enforcement
•Parents/guardians liable for violations; riders may take a safety class instead of paying the $25 fine
•The county must report enforcement and crash data to the Legislature by Jan. 1, 2028
•The pilot program sunsets Jan. 1, 2029
Potential path forward:
Direct staff to pursue legislation that would include the City of Carlsbad in Marin County’s pilot
program under AB 1778
25
COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATIONS
3.Adopt an ordinance prohibiting e-bike riders under 16 from carrying passengers
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
•State Law (CVC §21204(a)): Bicycles and e-bikes may not carry passengers unless equipped
with a separate seat or saddle.
•Traffic Safety & Mobility Commission recommended prohibiting e-bike riders under 16 from
carrying passengers, even on bikes designed for multiple riders.
•Preemption Issue: CVC §21 prevents local authorities from adding regulations on passenger
rules without explicit state authorization.
Potential path forward:
Direct staff to pursue state legislation to authorize a local passenger restriction for e-bike riders
under age 16.
26
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
4.Make comprehensive updates to Municipal Code Chapter 10.56: Unsafe riding
standards, equipment requirements, and parent and guardian accountability
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
In response to community concerns, collision trends and enforcement challenges, and to align with current
e-bike safety expectations, this could add explicit examples of unsafe riding behaviors, including:
•Unsafe speeds for conditions
•Stunts/acrobatics near pedestrians or vehicles
•Racing or stunt contests
•Failing to yield when required
•Ignoring posted regulatory signs
•Carrying items that impede control or visibility
•Minors riding without required helmets
•Helmets required for all Class 3 riders and passengers
•Riding against the flow of traffic
•Add parent/guardian accountability, including liability
for violations committed by minors
Potential path forward:
Direct staff to draft amendments to Chapter 10.56, adding unsafe-riding examples, equipment requirements,
parent/guardian accountability and any needed updates to definitions, signage, and enforcement
procedures.
27
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
5.Adopt an ordinance prohibiting those under 16 from operating e-bikes during
hours of darkness
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
•During hours of darkness, electric bicycles shall only be operated by persons 16 years of age or older.
•Definition: "Hours of Darkness" = 30 min after sunset → 30 min before sunrise
•Exceptions may include:
•Medical need (physician’s note required)
•Travel for school or school activities (school note required)
•Travel for work purposes (employer note required)
•Accompanied by an immediate family member
Potential path forward:
Direct staff to draft an ordinance amending Municipal Code Chapter 10.56 to restrict e-bike operation during
hours of darkness to riders 16 years of age or older.
28
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
Other
parks
listed
34
66
E-BIKE COLLISION TIMES
29
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
Other
parks
listed
34
66
E-BIKE VS PEDAL BIKES
30
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
5.Adopt an ordinance prohibiting those under 16 from operating e-bikes during
hours of darkness
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
•During hours of darkness, electric bicycles shall only be operated by persons 16 years of age or older.
•Definition: "Hours of Darkness" = 30 min after sunset → 30 min before sunrise
•Exceptions may include:
•Medical need (physician’s note required)
•Travel for school or school activities (school note required)
•Travel for work purposes (employer note required)
•Accompanied by an immediate family member
Potential path forward:
Direct staff to draft an ordinance amending Municipal Code Chapter 10.56 to restrict e-bike operation during
hours of darkness to riders 16 years of age or older.
31
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
6.Prohibit the operation of e-bikes at Poinsettia and Pine Avenue Community Parks
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
44
24
13 10 7 40
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Pine Park Poinsettia
Park
Alga Norte
Park
Calavera
Park
Stagecoach
Park
Holiday Park
DATA FROM JAN. 1 TO OCT. 31, 2025
E-BIKE INCIDENTS
505
310 276 207 179 173
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Pine Park Alga Norte
Park
Holiday
Park
Poinsettia
Park
Stagecoach
Park
Calavera
Park
DATA FROM JAN. 1 TO OCT. 31, 2025
EXTRA POLICE PATROLS
32
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
7.Exercise e-bike and micromobility impound authority (California Vehicle Code Section 22651.08,
AB 875).
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
•Consider local ordinance under Vehicle Code §22651.08 (AB 875, effective Jan. 1, 2026)
•Removable vehicles: out-of-class operation, including electric motorcycles
•Local authority may:
•Recover impound/storage costs
•Public fee schedules
•Conditional release with safety course completion
•Because this code is new, the city currently has no local procedures for impound, release, or fees.
Potential path forward:
Direct staff to draft a local ordinance implementing California Vehicle Code Section 22651.08. The
ordinance should include procedures for impoundment and release, administrative cost recovery,
posting of fee schedules, and safety training requirements, and allow flexibility for any limited
exceptions.
33
SUMMARY OF
RECOMMENDATIONS
1.Adopt AB 2234, prohibiting e-bike use by those under 12 years old.
2.Pursue legislation allowing Carlsbad to join State Assembly Bill 1778, prohibiting class 2 e-bike use by those
under 16 years old.
3.Pursue legislation prohibiting e-bike riders under 16 from carrying passengers.
4.Make comprehensive updates to Municipal Code Chapter 10.56: Unsafe riding standards, equipment
requirements and parent and guardian accountability.
5.Adopt an ordinance prohibiting those under 16 from operating e-bikes during hours of darkness.
6.Prohibit the operation of e-bikes at Poinsettia and Pine Avenue Community Parks.
7.Exercise e-bike and micromobility impound authority (California Vehicle Code Section 22651.08, AB 875).
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
THANK YOU
34
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
36
STAFF CONSIDERATION
6.Prohibit operation of e-bikes at parks posted under authority of the City Manager
ITEM 10: E-BIKE SAFETY OPTIONS
PROS CONS
Provides for consistency across parks Conveys an anti-recreation message
Reduces potential for riding migration Impacts all riders, not just unsafe riders
Offers same safety precautions to all Relies on riders reading posted signs
Eliminates need for City Council action Incurs cost of signs, bike racks at parks