Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Legislation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council backs state e-bike bills but takes no action on civil-claims bill after debate
Summary
Calabasas council voted unanimously to support two state bills aimed at clarifying e-bike classifications and safety rules, but declined to act on AB 2529—a civil-claims declaration proposal—after members voiced concerns about staff workload, CJPIA lobbying, and the bills' local impact.
The Calabasas City Council on May 27 voted to support two state bills dealing with e-bike classification and safety but took no action on a separate bill (AB 2529) that would change the requirements for filing government tort claims.
The council voted to support AB 1942 and SB 1167 (as presented on the agenda) by motion; Council member Alicia moved to support the bills and Council member Peter seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
Members asked staff to explain how the state bills interact with local ordinances. The mayor and staff explained that while the city regulates e-bike usage locally, the state has exclusive authority over classifications, licensing and safety rules that affect manufacture and enforcement; supporters said state-level clarity could improve enforcement and safety.
On AB 2529, the city attorney summarized the bill’s evolution: "Originally, it was a bill that would require any employee, current or former, that sues a public agency to file their claim as well as file a lawsuit under penalty of perjury," the city attorney said, and noted the bill had been revised so that declarations of belief and information would be required for anyone filing a government tort claim. City staff and council members said the change is intended to reduce frivolous claims and lower staff and public costs for investigations.
Council members split on whether to provide formal support. Several members warned that the city should reserve its political capital for measures that directly affect Calabasas; others supported extending courtesy to a neighboring jurisdiction that requested the council’s support. Council asked staff to return with more background and to provide any letters or analyses available from the League of California Cities and CJPIA before making further commitments. No motion was made on AB 2529, leaving the item with no action at the meeting.
Next steps: The council tabled a separate CJPIA lobbying request and asked staff to provide a letter and more specifics before any future endorsement decisions.
