University Heights reviews shared e-bike/scooter data and debates helmet rule

At a University Heights safety committee meeting, staff reviewed six months to multi-year metrics for the regional shared e-bike and scooter program and councilmembers discussed proposed changes to the city’s ordinance on electric bicycles and scooters.

Chief of staff Brianna Bremer Fisher told the committee the city participates in a county-run shared mobility program that includes the cities of Cleveland, East Cleveland, Cleveland Heights and South Euclid and that two vendors — Bird and Veo — operate across the five cities. Bremer Fisher said Bird bikes in the program are class 1 and Veo bikes class 2; bike top speeds are under 20 mph and the scooters used by vendors are limited to about 15 mph. She said University Heights recorded 542 rides in 2025 through the county’s third-quarter report, that there are four bike‑share parking stations in the city (two at Cedar and Taylor, one by the library and one near Whole Foods) and that rides cluster along Cedar Road and around John Carroll University. Bremer Fisher said no demographic data on riders is available from the vendors.

“Each of these mobile devices has a unique ID and there is also a 24 hour customer service line for these,” Bremer Fisher said while describing the county packet provided to council.

Police Chief Rogers presented enforcement and crash data from the department’s CAD system covering the period since the city allowed shared devices to operate citywide after a change to geofencing in June 2023. Rogers said the department logged 28 CAD entries involving e-bikes and e-scooters across roughly two years and three months: six complaints about devices left on sidewalks or walkways, three traffic stops initiated by officers for devices, seven complaints about how devices were being operated, six incidents where a rider fell (all classified as minor or possible injuries) and five traffic crashes involving a device (two with a minor injury and one possible injury). Rogers said five of the six fall incidents involved juveniles.

“Yes. So since then, over the past, again, 2 years and 3 months, we've had 6 total complaints where e bikes or an e scooter was left on sidewalks, parking lots, or walkways,” Rogers said while summarizing the CAD memo.

Committee members discussed two draft ordinance options circulated by the law director and the chief of staff. Version 1 would require helmets for persons under a specified age or for certain classes of e-bikes; version 2 would extend a helmet requirement to all Class 1, 2 and 3 electric bicycles. Law Director Bridal cautioned that state law limits what a municipality can require for adults, noting existing parallels with motorcycle and moped helmet rules and with the Ohio Revised Code. Council members raised practical concerns that most rental users do not carry helmets and that rental accounts require users to be at least 18 years old, which could make a blanket adult helmet requirement effectively bar rentals.

“There is a fine line with our service and our police department … issuing gift cards for people wearing helmets versus citations to youngsters and juveniles for not wearing it,” Rogers said, describing enforcement challenges.

After discussion the committee agreed not to advance version 2 (the broad universal helmet mandate) and directed staff and the law director to rewrite and return a single draft that can also consider scooters and better device definitions. The committee also agreed to keep the issue in the safety committee for more drafting rather than moving a version to the full council that evening.

Next steps: law director Bridal and staff will revise the ordinance language to clarify definitions (including different classes of shared mobility devices and whether rental devices and privately owned devices are covered) and to consider how scooter language should be included. The item was left in committee for further work and was not adopted.

Councilmembers and staff emphasized public education and police outreach — the department’s helmet-reward and community-policing efforts were cited as ongoing tools to increase helmet use without immediate citation-based enforcement.