Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the E Motorcycles topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City hears first reading of proposed electric-motorcycle regulations

Enumclaw City Council · June 22, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council received a staff report and first reading of Ordinance No. 2839 to define and regulate electric motorcycles in Enumclaw, including restrictions on sidewalk and trail use, equipment and operator requirements, and enforcement options; the measure was discussed but not voted on.

The Enumclaw City Council held the first reading on Ordinance No. 2839 on June 22, a proposed municipal-code chapter intended to define and regulate electric motorcycles.

The city clerk read the ordinance title. The Police Chief presented the staff report, saying high-powered electric motorcycles — often marketed as recreational or off-road devices — are increasingly operated on public streets, sidewalks and multiuse trails and that current municipal code does not clearly distinguish electric motorcycles from e-bikes or mopeds. The chief said staff have received resident complaints about unsafe speeds, sidewalk operation and near-miss incidents.

The proposed ordinance would define electric motorcycles by power output and speed capability, prohibit operation on sidewalks, parks and multiuse trails unless expressly authorized, require compliance with applicable vehicle laws when used on roadways, and set equipment and operator requirements including helmets and lighting. It would also create enforcement options including warnings, citations and impoundment for repeat or egregious violations. The chief said the draft is intended to complement, not conflict with, pending state rulemaking and that the state Department of Licensing work group has an Oct. 2027 due date.

City staff recommended the council move forward to additional review and potential revision before a second reading; council members were reminded this was the first reading and could add comments at the second reading.

No formal vote on the ordinance occurred at the meeting; the item will return for further consideration.