Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ebikes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ferrysburg council weighs e-bike rules, cross-jurisdiction education and enforcement
Summary
At a Jan. 20 work session the Ferrysburg City Council reviewed safety, enforcement and equity questions raised by increasing e-bike use on bike paths; staff said class 1 and 2 e-bikes remain allowed under a 2022 ordinance and the council asked staff to coordinate with neighboring jurisdictions and seek a city-attorney opinion on liability and enforcement.
Ferrysburg — The City Council spent more than an hour Jan. 20 debating how to manage growing e-bike use on the city’s bike paths, balancing safety concerns from walkers and residents with access for older riders and lower-income commuters.
Residents described near-misses and high speeds on paths that in some spots are narrow. "People are ripping around out there," Tracy Starkweather said, adding that some e-bikes she observed can reach speeds she considers unsafe for shared paths. Nicole Larabell urged the council to use visual design, signs and education rather than costly physical interventions: "I think exploring options would be a good idea," she said.
Staff told the council an ordinance adopted in 2022 currently allows class 1 and class 2 e-bikes on bike paths; the city’s traffic engineer said class 1/2 e-bikes are capped at 20 mph. Several speakers asked the council to pursue a public-education campaign and better signage. "Education could go a long way," Lisa Royce said, and suggested marking walking and biking sides of the path and coordinating messages with Spring Lake Township.
Other speakers urged stronger measures. "They need to be on the road if they're gonna go fast," one resident said, arguing that motorized vehicles do not belong on the bike path. Council members noted trade-offs: moving e-bikes to roadways could expose users to faster car traffic and narrow corridors, while leaving them on paths raises conflict concerns at choke points.
Council members directed staff to gather more information before proposing ordinance changes. Staff was asked to review spring-lake-area efforts already under way, research Grand Haven's signage and safety measures, and return with a summary and legal guidance on potential city liability. Craig, the staff lead, said he would coordinate with Spring Lake Village and Spring Lake Township on their safety campaign and report back.
No ordinance change was proposed or voted on at the meeting. The council signaled interest in short-term measures — additional signage, targeted education and possible path markings — and asked for legal and interjurisdictional research to be presented at a future agenda item.
