Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council holds first reading of ordinance to regulate high‑powered electric motorcycles
Summary
The Enumclaw City Council held a first reading of Ordinance No. 2839, which would define and restrict use of high‑powered electric motorcycles on sidewalks, parks and trails, set operator and equipment requirements and provide enforcement tools aimed at reducing neighborhood safety risks.
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Enumclaw City Council held the first reading of Ordinance No. 2839 on June 22, 2026, a proposal to create a new municipal chapter regulating electric motorcycles.
Police Chief (staff report) said the city has received resident complaints about high‑powered electric dirt bikes and similar vehicles being operated on public streets, sidewalks and multi‑use trails. "These vehicles are often marketed as recreational or off‑road use devices, but are frequently operated on public streets, sidewalks, and multi use trails within city limits," the Chief said, urging clearer local definitions to aid enforcement.
The staff report said the draft ordinance would distinguish electric motorcycles from e‑bikes and mopeds by power output and speed capability, prohibit operation on sidewalks, parks and trails unless specifically authorized, and require helmets, lighting and minimum safety equipment when operated on roadways. It also recommends age and licensing requirements for roadway operation, and a menu of enforcement options including warnings, citations, impoundment and misdemeanor classifications in egregious cases.
The report cited recent state legislation establishing a Department of Licensing work group and a due date of October 2027 for state regulatory guidance; staff noted the municipal language is intended to complement, not conflict with, forthcoming state rules. The Chief told council the ordinance is intended to reduce inconsistent enforcement and public‑safety risk where state classifications do not clearly apply.
Council members were reminded this was a first reading and may propose amendments before a second reading and final vote. No council action on adoption was taken at the meeting.
The ordinance text was read by the city clerk and the Police Chief answered council questions and recommended moving the ordinance forward for further consideration at a subsequent meeting.
