Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Electric Motorcycles topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council holds first reading on ordinance to regulate high-powered electric motorcycles
Summary
On first reading, staff described an ordinance that would define and regulate high-powered electric motorcycles—restricting sidewalks and trails, requiring helmets and lighting, setting operator age and licensing rules, and authorizing enforcement—citing public safety and state-level regulatory gaps.
The Enumclaw City Council heard the first reading of Ordinance No. 2839 on June 22, a proposed municipal code chapter to regulate electric motorcycles, including high-powered electric dirt bikes that staff said are increasingly operated on city streets, sidewalks and trails.
At the first reading, the city clerk read the ordinance title by staff request. The police chief gave the staff report and said the municipal code does not currently treat electric motorcycles as a distinct vehicle class, creating ambiguity for riders, law enforcement and the public. The chief said staff have received resident complaints about unsafe speeds, operations on sidewalks and multiuse trails, noise, and near-miss incidents with pedestrians.
“Without clear municipal regulations, enforcement is inconsistent and public safety risks increase,” the chief said, recommending the council adopt a new code chapter that would: define electric motorcycles (distinguishing them from e-bikes and mopeds by power and speed), restrict their use in parks, trails and sidewalks unless authorized, require helmets and lighting consistent with state law, set operator requirements including valid driver’s license and age limits for roadway use, and establish equipment standards and enforcement options up to impoundment for repeat or egregious violations.
The staff report referenced recent state-level activity and a Department of Licensing work group (a state-mandated effort with an October 2027 due date noted in staff comments) as reasons the ordinance is intended to complement state action rather than conflict with it.
This was a first reading; council did not vote to adopt the ordinance at the meeting. Council members were reminded that additional comment and amendments are allowed at second reading.
The ordinance was discussed in committee prior to the meeting and committee approval to move forward was reported in committee updates.
