Mercer Island boards begin e‑bike study, signal preference for 'prohibit unless excepted' approach in parks

Mercer Island officials spent a Nov. 12 special joint meeting mapping policy options for electric bicycles, scooters and electric motorcycles in parks and open space, with residents urging clearer rules, signage and enforcement and staff promising a menu of options for follow‑up meetings.

Management analyst Amelia James opened the staff presentation by distinguishing electric motorcycles from e‑bikes and summarizing recently adopted city motorcycle regulations. She told the boards the council adopted "ordinance number 25 c dash 2 door" in September to regulate electric motorcycles, which staff said are defined in part by motor power above 750 watts or the ability to provide assistance past 28 miles per hour; those vehicles will be prohibited from sidewalks, pedestrian paths and parks except on parking areas or roads, and staff said the ordinance’s requirements for licensing and registration take effect Jan. 1.

James and recreation manager Ryan Daley then reviewed Washington state definitions for e‑bikes: vehicles with pedals and a motor of up to 750 watts separated into class 1 and 2 (assist to 20 mph) and class 3 (assist to 28 mph). Staff noted legal distinctions between assisted speed and actual top speed (for example, going downhill), explained the city’s 1991 park code’s current restrictions on motorized vehicles, and summarized resident complaints that prompted the study: reported e‑bikes and scooters on soft‑surface trails, riders on sidewalks and athletic fields, and incidents on Mercerdale Park paths.

Two in‑person public speakers urged action. Resident Debbie Grisell said unclear rules and missing signage put people and pets at risk and called for three steps: adopt clear rules, install signage and provide enforcement. "We need rules, signage and education — and we need enforcement," she told the boards, adding that she had experienced a near‑miss with riders she estimated traveling at very high speed. Norma Vertquist echoed concerns about disrespectful riders and safety for park users.

Commissioners and trustees probed technical and enforcement questions. Staff said electric motorcycles require registration and a driver license with motorcycle endorsement, but lawful e‑bikes (classes 1–3) do not require registration; distinguishing classes in the field can be difficult despite labeling requirements. Board members flagged gaps in on‑the‑ground signage (for instance, at the skate park) and asked that Police Department staff attend a future meeting to speak to enforcement feasibility and tactics such as radar and youth outreach.

Discussion turned to policy options. Several board members favored a simple, easily communicated rule — a default prohibition in park and open‑space areas, with staff creating narrowly tailored exceptions for connectivity on paved, shared‑use corridors (for example, Aubrey Davis Trail) or other specific circumstances. Others cautioned against broad bans that could limit mobility for older residents or students who rely on e‑bikes; some advocates urged treating class 1 and 2 the same as human‑powered bicycles in certain contexts. Multiple members said class 3 bikes present the clearest safety concern.

Staff sought nonbinding guidance. Using a thumbs‑up/online indicator exercise, the boards signaled support for an approach that would prohibit most e‑bike use in parks and trails while establishing defined exceptions for connectivity and designated paved trails. Staff characterized the result as guidance, not a formal vote, and said they would return with a menu of regulatory options, including enforcement implications, and expect two to three additional meetings before bringing regulatory language to the City Council.

Next steps: staff will draft options that specify where and which classes of devices might be allowed, propose signage and education programs, and coordinate with the Police Department on enforceability. The boards adjourned at 7:01 p.m.

Notes: Quotes and attributions in this report come from public speakers and board members who spoke during the Nov. 12 joint meeting. Statements about city ordinances and state law reflect staff presentation and questions from commissioners; technical claims reported by residents (for example, rider speeds) were presented as observations and remain unverified by staff in the meeting.