Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Electric Motorcycles topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council hears first reading of ordinance to regulate electric motorcycles

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

At first reading, staff described Ordinance 2839 to define and regulate electric motorcycles—distinguishing them from e-bikes and mopeds—and propose equipment, licensing, and enforcement rules to address safety and clarity gaps.

The Enumclaw City Council on June 22 heard the first reading of Ordinance 2839, a proposed municipal code chapter that would define and regulate electric motorcycles within city limits.

The police chief (S11) gave the staff report, saying staff have received complaints about high‑powered electric dirt bikes and similar vehicles being operated on streets, sidewalks and trails. The chief said the ordinance aims to distinguish electric motorcycles from e‑bikes and mopeds by power output, speed capability and design, and to restrict their operation on sidewalks, parks and multiuse trails unless authorized.

The proposed language would establish operator requirements — including a valid driver’s license for roadway operation, age restrictions where appropriate, helmet requirements consistent with state law, required lighting and safety equipment, and minimum vehicle safety standards for road use — and would create penalties ranging from warnings to misdemeanor classifications for repeat or egregious violations. The chief noted that recent state action (Substitute Senate Bill 6110) has directed a Department of Licensing work group on state rules, with a due date of October 2027, and that the ordinance is intended to complement state law rather than conflict with it (Police Chief S11).

This was a first reading; council members were invited to add comments at second reading. No vote on adoption occurred at the June 22 meeting.