These kids would be in violation of Oregon law if a bill in the legislature passed. (Photos: Megan Ramey)
“I am frustrated by the short-sightedness. HB 4103 is a one-sided, incomplete bill that will focus solely on rider enforcement as a deterrent”
A bill that would change the legal status of electric bicycles in Oregon is up for its first public hearing in Salem later today, and cycling and road safety advocates disagree on whether or not it’s the right path forward.
There are two e-bike bills up for consideration in the Oregon Legislature this session: House Bill 4067 and House Bill 4103. HB 4067 would create a task force on “electric micromobility,” a catch-all term that includes e-bikes and other small, battery-powered vehicles. That bill has broad support and is likely to pass.
But the more substantive of the two, HB 4103, has created a bit of a stir in advocacy circles. Some say it could hinder e-bike adoption, adds too much regulation too soon, and is overly punitive; while others say it’s a step forward for safety. Most notably, the bill is being opposed by Portland-based nonprofit, The Street Trust.
Here’s what’s going on…
HB 4103 is championed by Representative Emerson Levy, a Bend lawmaker who dedicated herself to the issue following a traffic collision last summer that killed a teen who was riding an e-bike. Dubbed “Trenton’s Law” in memory of 15-year-old Bend High School student Trenton Burger, if the bill became a law, it would do four things:
Change current definition of “electric assisted bicycle” and add Oregon to the list of 39 states that have a three-class system of e-bike classifications: Class 1, 20 mph max with no throttle; Class 2, 20 mph max with throttle; and Class 3, 28 mph max without throttle.Allow anyone 15 and under to ride Class 1 e-bikes. (Current Oregon law makes e-bikes illegal to that age group.)Prohibit anyone 15 and under from riding an e-bike with a throttle (Class 2 and Class 3). (Already technically illegal, but not enforced.)Create a new Class D misdemeanor traffic violation of “unsafe electric assisted bicycle riding” punishable by $115 maximum fine. (Note: Bill was introduced as a Class E misdemeanor but amendment filed Wednesday would raise it to Class D.)The bill comes in response to concerns that arose long before Burger’s death around the rise of “throttle kids” in several Oregon cities. Burger’s bike was equipped with a throttle, but it’s unclear if that led to the crash. The collision happened when a driver turned into Burger as she attempted to pull her minivan onto a busy arterial highway from a slip lane. Burger was on the sidewalk prior to the collision.
In an email to Rep. Levy Thursday, The Street Trust Executive Director Sarah Iannarone said she appreciated the intent behind HB 4103 and was glad to see the provision opening up Class 1 bikes to young riders, but was, “apprehensive about the imposition of Class D Traffic Violations for parents, as this could create unwarranted obstacles for low-income and BIPOC individuals.” (The Street Trust launched an e-bike program last fall that expands access for low-income and BIPOC individuals.) Iannarone also expressed that many of the most affordable e-bike models are Class 2 and she feels Oregon should align its laws with the 42 other states that currently allow these bikes to be ridden by people under 16.
“We want parents, children and community to know that this law can’t change what has already happened, but could serve in adjusting the culture and awareness around e-bike risks.”
The Street Trust recently took over leadership (from electric vehicle advocacy group Forth) of an ad hoc group known as the E-Bikes for All Working Group (EB4A). EB4A has been meeting monthly since 2019 and includes about 80 people from a wide variety of people on its invite list with several dozen regulars who attend the meetings. The Street Trust recently installed a contracted staffer (through a partnership with Portland State University) to lead the meetings.
In a statement to BikePortland this morning, Iannarone said,
“The E-Bikes for All Working Group has not been able to get traction from Rep. Levy on our proposed amendments, despite the breadth and expertise of people assembled, which is a shame given the high caliber of business, public policy, and academic achievements among that group. Further, we have seen time and again how the transportation needs of teens in particular are regarded as a nuisance or PR problem in the public discourse, especially in more affluent communities – whether it’s scooting, or skateboarding, or now e-bikes. Our hope is that the true threat on our streets – motor vehicle operators behaving dangerously – can be the focus of transportation conversations and that we are educating and empowering our youth to move independently and safely through the world without needing access to a private automobile, which we know is hugely regressive for our lowest-income Oregonians. We also hope that these policy discussions can be undertaken more systematically in the future via the Electric MIcromobility Task Force (HB 4067).”
The EB4A group released a statement and petition this week opposing the bill that has already garnered support from 275 individuals and organizations.
The Street Trust Mobility Programs and Policy Fellow Frank Stevens (the aforementioned staffer who leads EB4A meetings) submitted testimony of his own to the Joint Committee on Transportation where the bill currently resides. “I am frustrated by the short sightedness exhibited by HB 4103,” Stevens wrote. “[The bill is] a one-sided incomplete bill that will focus solely on rider enforcement as a deterrent” and it, “does not in any way address the need for youth education.” “Teens getting around town by e-bike instead of a car builds on the potential for a generation of kids to envision a life getting around in something other than single occupancy cars,” Stevens added.
Cameron Bennett, a Portland State University graduate who wrote his Civil Engineering masters thesis on e-bike use in North America is neutral on the bill. In written testimony, he shared the same concerns as The Street Trust and said the bill as written leaves out a key provision: that Class 2 e-bikes should be required by to have pedals. Bennett also thinks if e-bikes are going to be classified, there needs to be a cargo bike class for freight delivery vehicles.
Iannarone, Stevens, and Bennett want to further discuss these and other issues in the new task force that HB 4067 would create, and then make any necessary changes to e-bike laws at subsequent legislative sessions.
But others want change now and feel HB 4103 should pass.
Brian Potwin, executive director of Commute Options, a nonprofit that promotes alternatives to driving, said in written testimony, “HB 4103 increases student access to e-bikes for their travel needs. We believe these bills will support our community’s efforts to encourage bike riding by adding enforcement to our engineering, education, and encouragement programs.”
And testimony submitted to the legislature ahead of tonight’s hearing from Bend Mayor Melanie Kebler, states that she supports HB 4103 because it, “limits acceleration rates,” of young riders and “simplifies operations.”
Trenton Burger’s father David Burger has also shared his support of the bill. In a letter to transportation committee chairs, he wrote, “Regulating e-bikes in a way that makes sense age-wise is an appropriate next step… We want parents, children and community to know that this law can’t change what has already happened, but could serve in adjusting the culture and awareness around e-bike risks and contribute to safer use of e-bikes.”
The bill is up for a public hearing today at 5:00 pm.
— Note: I’ve asked Rep. Levy for comment and will update this post when/if I hear back.
