# Senate bill, other measures, look to solve problematic Bay Area e-bike use > Source: > Published: 2026-08-16 11:30:35+00:00 **Getting your** [Trinity Audio](//trinityaudio.ai)player ready...Electric bicycles have been lauded as climate-friendly alternatives to gas-powered cars, but as more and more e-bikes appear in public spaces, local and state officials are grappling with how to regulate devices that reach far greater speeds than those powered only by humans. A proposed senate bill and other local measures hope to usher in greater accountability. Pleasant Hill Vice Mayor Andrei Obolenskiy, a former member of the Iron Horse Trail Commission, has long known both the benefits and concerns that come with e-bikes and scooters. He and his family are avid riders who, like many Bay Area residents, have replaced many car trips with their e-bikes. Standing along the Iron Horse Trail on a weekday in June, Obolenskiy counted numerous people commuting on e-bikes, possibly to and from work or school. Some of the electric bikes the public sees aren’t defined as such by state law. Some are classified as electric motorcycles with the capacity to reach greater speeds than e-bikes can and [the ability to cause a lot of damage if not safely operated](https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/04/28/e-bikes-e-motos-public-safety-challenges-intense-vehicles-child-abuse-charges/), Obolenskiy said. The issue is personal, Obolenskiy said. He’s lost a close friend and nephew to motorcycle crashes, and his 15-year-old son crashed his class 1 e-bike around last Christmas that he said “could have been a lot worse” had he not been wearing a helmet. “My biggest concern is making sure kids are safe,” Obolenskiy said. “Just because it has a battery and doesn’t make a lot of noise doesn’t mean it’s not dangerous.” California law breaks e-bikes into three categories: class 1 are pedal-assisted bikes that go up to 20 miles per hour, class 2 are throttle-assisted and go up to 20 miles per hour, and class 3 are pedal-assisted bikes that go up to 28 miles per hour and can only be ridden with a helmet by people ages 16 and older. All e-bikes sold in the state are required to have a permanent label displaying the bike’s classification number, top assisted speed, and motor wattage. Throttle bikes that go over 20 miles per hour or pedal bikes that go over 28 miles per hour are considered mopeds or motorcycles, requiring licensing and age thresholds to be legally operated in California. [An April consumer alert issued by Attorney General Rob Bonta](https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/too-fast-too-furious-attorney-general-bonta-california-district-attorneys-issue) and cosigned by three Bay Area district attorneys – San Francisco’s Brooke Jenkins, San Mateo County’s Steve Wagstaffe, and Marin’s Lori Frugoli – warned parents and riders, “If it’s too fast, it’s not an e-bike — you might be riding illegally.” [A December 2025 study by San Jose State University’s Mineta Transportation Institute](https://transweb.sjsu.edu/sites/default/files/2423-Agrawal-Electric-Bicycle-Safety-Data-Policy.pdf), commissioned by the state, found that to be true for many children. While only about 30% of bikes ridden by Bay Area children are electric, only 12% of those devices fell into one of the three e-bike categories. The other 88% were higher power and higher speed, according to the study report. Rather than putting the onus on kids, their parents and local police departments to figure out whether their bike is legal, Obolenskiy said more pressure should be applied to manufactures who flood the market with improperly labeled bikes. “People want to see results right now but unfortunately there is no right now. Any type of mechanism that we’re going to use to regulate or enforce these is going to have to be a stairstepper approach,” Obolenskiy said, raising concerns that policies could have unforeseen impacts on working-class people opting for e-bikes over new cars. One of those possible solutions, Obolenskiy said, is [Senate Bill 1167](https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260sb1167). The bill clarifies that high-powered e-motorcycles cannot be designated as e-bikes and businesses would be in violation of false advertising laws if they market devices as e-bikes that don’t meet the necessary criteria. The bill was authored by State Sen. Catherine Blakespear, a Southern California Democrat, and co-authored by the pro-bike advocacy group California Bicycle Coalition and numerous state representatives and senators, including Tim Grayson, D-Orinda; Damon Connolly, D-San Rafael; Buffy Wicks, D-Oakland; and Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco. “E-bikes are something we need to manage, not something we need to ban,” Blakespear said. [Bay Area representatives have proposed legislation of their own](https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/meetings/attachments/6568/3dii_26_0434_Attachment_A_E_bike_State_Legislation.pdf?cb=c6700057) that are either still making their way through the legislature or have died. State Rep. Diane Papan, a Democrat from San Mateo, authored [Assembly Bill 2595](https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab2595) which would give San Mateo County or authorities in the county the ability to operate a pilot program banning 12 year olds from riding class 1 and class 2 e-bikes until 2031. “AB 2595 gives local communities the ability to respond thoughtfully and responsibly while emphasizing education, public awareness, and data-driven policymaking,” Papan said in a May press release after the bill was passed by the Assembly and sent to the Senate. Another Papan bill, Assembly Bill 1557, aimed to limit the speed and abilities of class 1 and class 2 e-bikes. Assembly Bill 1942, authored by Rep. Rebecca Bauer-Kahan from San Ramon, would have required class 2 and class 3 e-bikes to be registered with the Department of Motor Vehicles and to have license plates. Both have stalled out, according to a [legislative watch page by the California Bicycle Coalition](https://www.calbike.org/legislative-watch/). Meanwhile, local governments have taken steps to curb what some have described as reckless behavior. [Contra Costa County prosecutors charged parents of a teenager](https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/03/26/parents-charged-with-child-abuse-in-east-bay-e-moto-crash/) with child abuse in March after the teen was seriously injured in an electric motorcycle crash in Walnut Creek in 2025. In Danville, where residents have raised concerns about local youths riding dangerously on e-bikes, [a police deparment enforcement operation](https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2026/05/22/12-year-old-boy-parents-cited-after-youth-stopped-in-danville-riding-electronic-motorcycle/) earlier this year resulted in 30 students being stopped for behaviors like excessive speeds, running stop signs, or riding through people’s lawns. Of those stops, five citations were issued. To have the citation written off, both the child and their parent are required to attend a rider safety course. [The Town Council then approved an ordinance in June](https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/06/21/danville-takes-stand-against-reckless-e-bike-use-with-ban-in-parks/) prohibiting electric bike and scooter riding in public parks. The policy took effect Aug. 6. Bans on riding e-bikes and motorized scooters on sidewalks in the business district and playgrounds were approved in 2024. The council is expected to take up a broader discussion on riding on city sidewalks sometime in the fall. Governing bodies in neighboring San Ramon, San Anselmo in Marin County, and Burlingame in San Mateo County have adopted similar policies requiring people to dismount e-bikes when traveling through public parks. City and county leaders should also be making greater investments into biking infrastructure, said Justin Hu-Nguyen, co-executive director of Mobility Justice with Bike East Bay, a nonprofit focused on bike advocacy and mobility justice. Complaints are loudest in cities with the least amount of multimodal infrastructure, Hu-Nguyen argued. “People are going to bike or ride where they feel safest,” Hu-Nguyen said. “The situation isn’t to ban bikes or ban wheels but to build more space for people to meet their mobility needs.” The built environment is only one part of the triangle though, said East Bay Parks District Police Captain Terrence Cotcher. Local approaches also require robust public education campaigns followed by enforcement, noting the agency prioritizes “behavior over batteries,” when deploying its staff and hundreds of volunteer safety patrollers out to monitor the park’s 1,330 miles of trails. In addition to ticketing when necessary, Cotcher said the Park District leads discussions in problem areas and tries to reiterate park rules and decorum with parents, children and others using trails. But that work is only possible if park users report behavior to the department, Cotcher said. Recognizing that the Park District is only a piece of a larger regional puzzle, Cotcher said he’d like to see more interagency and jurisdictional collaboration. It’s an approach six jurisdictions — the Parks District, Dublin, Danville, Walnut Creek, Concord and the Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office — are putting into practice as students prepare to return to school, Cotcher said. The agencies met Thursday to discuss a coordinated effort and goals “for making sure people can move safely.” “This is a problem for our trails,” Cotcher said. “But it’s also a community issue, a regional issue, if not a state issue, in how we are designing the spaces in which we live and how we’re trying to inform the public to make appropriate decisions with their pocket book and minds.”