Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ashland board holds public hearing on possible ban of certain electric bicycles in city park
Summary
At a public hearing, the city prosecutor outlined legal steps required to ban certain classes of electric bicycles from park paths; residents and aldermen debated safety anecdotes, enforcement limits and whether to pursue targeted rules or a broader vehicle ban. Council agreed to gather park-board records and revisit the issue at the next meeting.
The Ashland Board of Aldermen opened a public hearing about a proposed ban on certain classifications of electric bicycles from city park paths and other city-owned property.
The city prosecutor told the board that Missouri law permits a city to ban electric bicycles from paths after a public hearing and a formal finding that the vehicles pose a safety risk. "A city in Missouri can ban electric bicycles from paths upon a public hearing and a finding that that kind of prohibition is necessary to address safety issues," the city prosecutor said, describing options that range from a targeted path ban to a broader prohibition with written exemptions for city maintenance vehicles and special events.
Why it matters: the prosecutor said the statute creates specific procedural requirements for electric bicycles that do not apply to many other small motorized vehicles, so the board must decide whether to make the safety finding that would permit a ban on park paths. That determination would affect enforcement options and the scope of any ordinance.
During the hearing, aldermen and members of the public described safety concerns and practical trade-offs. One resident described an episode he said involved two electric bicycles approaching an 80-year-old man using two canes: "Two ebikes came up and almost knocked him on his a**," the resident said, urging caution. Other commenters argued the risk is similar to conventional bicycles and emphasized parental supervision.
Council members asked staff for the park-board minutes and the underlying complaints that prompted the request, and several suggested alternatives to a full ban, including speed limits or an ordinance prohibiting unsafe operation on city property. The prosecutor noted legal distinctions between vehicle classifications and the limited civil remedies available in some cases, saying assault or reckless-operation charges might apply in specific, fact-dependent incidents.
The board did not take immediate action. Instead, members agreed to collect park-board records and schedule further discussion at the next meeting so that staff can draft ordinance language and clarify enforcement mechanics and exemptions.
Next steps: the board asked staff to assemble the park-board minutes and potential ordinance language for a follow-up meeting, where aldermen will consider whether to direct staff to develop a formal ordinance for first reading.
