Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council moves to educate and study local rules after HB 381 reclassified fast 'e' devices; police urge tools for enforcement
Summary
Following state law changes that classify devices capable of more than 21 mph as motorcycles, the council directed staff to prepare a legal memo and options for local rules on parks and trails; police emphasized education first but said officers need ordinance tools to address egregious evasion and high‑speed e‑motorcycles.
Councilmembers, police and staff spent extended time on July 8 reviewing the new state statute (HB 381) and its implications for Washington City parks, trails and streets. The law tightened helmet and age requirements and set a speed‑based rule: devices capable of more than 21 miles per hour are treated as motorcycles and require a driver license, registration and street‑legal equipment if operated on roadways.
Councilman Kurt Ivy summarized the statute’s core points: riders 8 and younger cannot operate on streets; ages 8–14 require adult supervision; devices capable of faster than 21 mph fall under motorcycle rules. Police said the statute gives officers authority on roadways and allows local governments to adopt different rules for parks and trails, but enforcement is complicated by device diversity and rider behavior.
Officer Scott Ray and Lieutenant Klotz described enforcement practice: e‑motorcycles (Siran‑type vehicles) that operate above the threshold are illegal to ride on streets unless licensed and insured and are subject to seizure; e‑bicycles under the state definitions can operate where bicycles operate, making local restrictions or signage necessary if the city wants to limit them in parks or on specific trails. Police stressed education first and offered a pamphlet and social‑media push; they also said officers need an ordinance to give them clear enforcement tools if people repeatedly violate park rules or engage in dangerous behavior.
Council consensus was to pursue a three‑part approach: ramp up resident education (pamphlet, utility bill or newsletter insert and social media), have the city attorney and staff prepare a legal memo and an ordinance framework for park‑specific rules (e.g., motorized vs non‑motorized trail designations, no‑motor zones), and return to council with options. Staff also will consult parks staff to identify which park features should be motor‑free (for example, skate/BMX bowls).
Police will continue education and limited enforcement steps in the near term and provide the council an outreach pamphlet that explains device classes and legal obligations.
