As e-bikes surge in popularity across California, so do the concerns surrounding their safety. In response, lawmakers are introducing a series of bills aimed at balancing the growth of e-bike usage with the need for road safety. With four key bills advancing through the legislature, the state is taking significant steps to address the challenges posed by these motorized bicycles.
The recent legislative session has seen a flurry of activity around e-bike regulations. Four bills have successfully passed their house of origin and are now moving to the next chamber. These proposals range from clarifying the distinctions between e-bikes and similar vehicles to setting age limits for riders under 16, a measure that has sparked debate among critics.
Key Findings from the 2026 Report
A pivotal 2026 report by San Jose State University’s Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI) has informed much of the current legislation. Co-authored by Asha Weinstein Agrawal and Kevin Fang, the report provides a comprehensive look at e-bike regulations and safety data. “We looked for data on e-bike injuries, EMS reports, fatalities, crashes, where we could find that, there’s not a lot,” Agrawal noted. The report highlights the need for better data collection to inform future regulations.
The findings reveal that while e-bike crashes are less frequent than those involving conventional bicycles, they tend to result in more severe outcomes. In 2026, there were 961 reported e-bike crashes compared to 10,372 crashes involving traditional bicycles. The report emphasizes the importance of encouraging better data collection to gain a clearer understanding of e-bike-related incidents.
The Role of Data in Shaping Policy
Agrawal and Fang relied on news articles to gather data on e-bike-related fatalities due to the lack of comprehensive records. The report recommends improving data collection to provide better insights into how e-bikes can be regulated effectively. “We don’t actually have very good data on e-bike crashes, injuries, and fatalities,” Agrawal stated, underscoring the need for more robust reporting mechanisms.
Legislative Initiatives in 2026
Several bills are currently under consideration in the California legislature, each addressing different aspects of e-bike safety and regulation.
SB 1167: Clarifying E-Bike Definitions
Sen. Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) introduced SB 1167, co-sponsored by biking advocacy groups such as Streets For All, CalBike, Streets Are For Everyone, and People for Bikes. This bill aims to amend what vehicles can legally be advertised, sold, and labeled as e-bikes. “There are all kinds of devices that the general public would call an e-bike,” Agrawal explained, noting that these devices could even be referred to as e-bikes in police or patient care reports.
Under current California law, e-bikes are categorized into three classes: Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes have a speed limit of 20 mph when powered by an electric motor. Class 3 e-bikes can reach 28 mph and require riders to be at least 16 years old. Damian Kevitt, founder of SAFE, emphasized the importance of the MTI report in providing hard numbers to support legislative efforts. Assemblymember Laurie Davies (R-Laguna Niguel), a co-author of the bill, highlighted the need for clarity in consumer purchases, especially for parents. “Parents need to understand what the difference is and what’s legal and what’s not legal,” Davies said.
AB 1569: E-Bike Safety Training for Students
Authored by Davies and Assemblymember Phillip Chen (R-Yorba Linda), AB 1569 directs the California Department of Education to collaborate with the California Highway Patrol to develop a standardized e-bike safety and training program for students in grades 7-12. Originally, the bill required K-12 students to complete a training course before riding e-bikes to campus. However, it was amended to avoid placing a burden on schools. “We wanted to make sure that wouldn’t be a burden,” Davies explained, noting the lack of funding and resources in many schools.
The bill aims to establish a statewide certification for e-bike safety training, ensuring consistency across the state. “This bill allows the California Department of Education and CHP to work together on putting together certification for training and for safety,” Davies stated.
AB 2346: Speed Limits and Safety Features
Assemblymember Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City) introduced AB 2346, sponsored by the California Medical Association. This bill proposes requiring speedometers on Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes and running lights on all e-bikes. It also sets a speed limit of 15 mph for riders under the age of 16. Local authorities would have the flexibility to set speed limits of 15 or 20 mph for bike paths and as low as 10 mph for multiuse trails. A statewide speed limit of 10 mph on sidewalks would also be established.
Angela Hill, a Legislative Advocate at CMA, highlighted the bill’s response to the alarming increase in e-bike injuries reported by trauma physicians. “Our physicians are really troubled when they’re sending someone home with lifelong injuries,” Hill said, emphasizing the need for safer practices.
AB 2595: Minimum Age Pilot Program
Assemblymember Diane Papan (D-San Mateo) introduced AB 2595, which proposes a pilot program in San Mateo County to allow local cities to prohibit children under 12 from riding Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes until January 1, 2031. The county must submit a report to the legislature by January 1, 2030, detailing the results of any ordinances or resolutions. Similar pilot programs are already active in San Diego and Marin Counties.
David Burruto, Papan’s district director, stated that the measure aims to address growing public safety concerns surrounding young riders operating powerful e-bikes. “Local governments participating in the pilot program would be required to conduct community outreach and report enforcement activity, collisions, injuries, and other safety outcomes back to the Legislature,” Burruto said.
The Bills That Didn’t Make It
While several bills have advanced, others have been met with opposition from biking advocacy groups. “Two of the worst bills both died; those bills are now dead, they’re not moving forward,” Kevitt said, referencing AB 1557 and AB 1942. These bills aimed to lower the speed and wattage of e-bikes and require registration with the Department of Motor Vehicles, respectively. Kevitt emphasized the goal of protecting the right of legal e-bike riders.
As California continues to grapple with the challenges posed by e-bike usage, these legislative efforts represent a significant step toward enhancing safety and clarity for all road users.
