Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the E Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Woodbury updates e-transportation ordinances; parks commission urges helmet requirement for riders under 18
Summary
Council adopted ordinance amendments clarifying definitions and permitted uses for electric-assisted bicycles and motorized foot scooters on trails, and agreed to revisit a parks commission proposal to require helmets for riders under 18 after monitoring state action.
The Woodbury City Council adopted Ordinance 2076 amending city code chapters 16 (parks and recreation) and 14 (motor vehicle and traffic) to clarify definitions and permitted uses for electric-assisted bicycles, motorized foot scooters and other motorized devices on city trails and public sites.
Staff explained the changes posted for public review: expanded definitions to align with state statute (including the three classes of electric-assisted bicycles), explicit examples of prohibited motor vehicle modes on trails, an express exemption for motorized foot scooters where state law permits them, the authority to temporarily restrict devices during large events or tournaments, and clarifications about rental operations and unlawful sales in parks.
The council discussed but did not adopt a helmet mandate tonight. Parks and Natural Resources Commission Chair Rev. Anna Doughty urged the council to require helmets for riders under 18 using electric-assisted bicycles, saying the commission unanimously recommended the change and arguing a local requirement would help educate younger riders and set safety expectations. “The commission feels the benefits of this helmet requirement for our community far outweigh the challenges,” Doughty said.
State Sen. Amanda Hamming Sennegar told the council that related bills are under discussion in the Legislature but that slim majorities in the Senate have made passage difficult this session; she suggested Woodbury could pilot model language for broader adoption. Council members said they prefer to await state action or band with neighboring cities to ensure consistent enforcement across borders, but directed staff to return with the helmet proposal for further workshop consideration if state action stalls.
Council voted unanimously to adopt the ordinance amendments. Staff and commissioners said they will continue outreach and monitoring of state and neighboring-city activity before taking any local helmet mandate.
