Two cyclists speed past members of the American River Bike Patrol blasting music from portable speakers.
“Never too late for a helmet,” Vic Massenkoff with the patrol yells as they pass by.
It’s clear to Massenkoff the riders are on electric motorcycles which are illegal on the trail. But the patrol is a volunteer group, not an enforcement agency, so warnings and polite suggestions are often the only tools available along Sacramento’s American River Parkway.
Lately, members say they’ve been seeing more of these higher-powered devices, often referred to as “e-motos.”
“They go so fast that we can’t talk to them,” said John Poimroo, director for the patrol. “We’ll wave, ‘Hey, slow down,’ and they’re just off.”
The speed limit on the trail is 15 mph, which even legal e-bikes can easily exceed. California allows Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes to assist riders up to 20 mph, while Class 3 bikes can assist up to 28 mph.
But electric motorcycles — often referred to as e-motos — can go much faster. Some exceed the state’s limits as sold while others can be modified to do so.
Many of them are referred to as e-bikes despite not meeting the state’s definition. Marketing for these e-motos tends to focus on youth.
That distinction is central to a growing debate at the California Capitol, where lawmakers are considering several bills to improve e-bike safety.
What’s really causing safety concerns?
Marc Piazza is the commander for the Sacramento Regional Park Rangers. He said legal e-bikes haven’t been much of an issue on the trail.
“It’s not the e-bikes, it’s the e-motorcycles,” he said. “Totally different classification.”
Piazza said rangers have seen riders — sometimes teenagers, sometimes adults — traveling at dangerous speeds.
“They’re getting out of school and they’re speeding on the bike trail doing 40 and we had one going 60 mph,” he said.
But much of the available injury data relies on law enforcement and hospital reporting that does not clearly distinguish between legal e-bikes and more powerful devices.
That’s concerning for Asha Weinsteing Agrawal, education director for the Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University. She recently led a state-commissioned study on e-bike safety.
“None of these people are digging into whether this was a legal or illegal e-bike or what class of legal e-bike it might have been,” she said. “Like the general public, they hear the word e-bike and that’s enough. They write it down and they go on.”
That means some injuries and crashes attributed to e-bikes may have involved devices that are not legal e-bikes at all.
“The e-motos are absolutely a key safety concern, there is no doubt about that,” she said. “What unfortunately we don’t have enough data to really know is, ‘Are the legal e-bikes a safety concern?”
Competing proposals at the Capitol
One bill backed by many advocates, SB 1167, would tighten definitions of what qualifies as an e-bike and make it harder for higher-powered devices to be marketed and sold as one. It currently has no formal opposition.
But other proposals are focused on creating restrictions on legal e-bikes or proposing changes that some advocates say would hurt small businesses and manufacturers.
Assemblymember Rebeccca Bauer-Kahan’s bill — AB 1943 — would require Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes to be registered with the DMV and display license plates. During a recent Assembly Transportation Committee hearing, she said her proposal is ultimately about accountability.
“I’m here because our kids are hurting themselves, the safety issue is real and we really want to make sure people are following the rules of the road,” she said.
Supporters say the measure would help law enforcement identify reckless riders and respond to the rise in injuries. Critics argue it targets legal e-bike riders while doing little to stop illegal devices already operating outside the rules.
Also during the recent hearing, Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins raised concerns the proposal could lead to over-policing of Black and Brown communities.
“I strongly have a fear that this bill is going to open up the door for children to be stopped for not having a registered bike,” she said. “Furthermore, there is no way to demonstrate proof of the purchase for the e-bike, which places our children in a difficult situation if they’re stopped by the police because now they cannot show proof that it belongs to them.”
Another measure by Assemblymember Diane Papan would close a loophole that allows manufacturers to sell high-powered devices, but also reduce speed and power limits for some currently legal e-bikes.
Opponents argue that would hurt commuters, families and small businesses by making a large number of currently legal e-bikes illegal.
“The real problem on our streets is illegal e-motos,” Brett Thurber, co-owner of The New Wheel bike shop in San Francisco. “This bill does nothing about them.”
Are e-bikes dangerous, or are our streets?
If passed, those proposals could affect riders like East Sacramento resident Thomas Vaclavek. He uses a cargo e-bike to drop off his kids, run errands and to get around town. He estimates it replaces more than 20 car trips a week.
“I just dropped off the kids, ran over here, grabbed coffee and [there was] just so much less traffic,” Vaclavek said while standing outside of Pachamama Coffee in East Sacramento. “You can be so much safer with pedestrians, especially around the school.”
Vaclavek, a former transportation planner, argued that focusing on e-bikes misses the larger issue of an infrastructure that prioritizes vehicles over pedestrians and cyclists.
“You look at places like the Netherlands where you have infrastructure everywhere,” he said. “Bicycle ridership is up, driving is down, congestion is down.”
Many transportation experts agree.
“For the most part, we have not designed California’s cities to provide a safe place for people to bicycle or use e-scooters or other small wheel devices,” Agrawal with the Mineta Transportation Institute said.
Agrawal said adding protected bike lanes can reduce crashes while discouraging sidewalk riding.
But state investment in these projects has lagged even as state leaders push for more climate-friendly transportation. Roughly $400 million for bike and pedestrian infrastructure was cut from California’s budget in 2024 during a deficit year. Lawmakers said it would be restored, but that hasn’t happened yet.
Meanwhile, cyclists like Damien Gonzalez face the consequences.
The East Sacramento bike shop owner said he was seriously injured when a driver turned into him while he was riding in a Midtown bike lane.
“I broke a vertebra, smashed my ankles,” Gonzalez said. “Police said it was my fault.”
He added that while infrastructure played a role in that, driver behavior matters too.
“I’ve had drivers nick me on purpose just to send a message,” he said. “It’s terrifying because people die that way. Or, like in my case, you break your back or your bones, or you end up in the hospital.”
Back on the trail
Back on the American River Parkway, 67-year-old Carol Griffin is going on a ride on her conventional bicycle. She said e-bikes are a big concern for her when she’s riding the trail.
“We’ve got electric bikes going really, really fast with riders that don’t really know what they’re doing and they’re going too fast for their skill level,” she said. “So, that can be really scary.”
But Poimroo with the bike patrol said he doubts new laws alone will solve the problem.
“Who’s going to enforce it?” he said. “Should a law enforcement officer be diverted for a 15 mph speed issue? No, they’re not going to put manpower that’s very important for the community safety on something that low.”
Instead, Poimroo believes the change must come from the community itself.
“We’re all grandfathers here,” he said. “We’re not going to influence anyone other than our own grandkids, certainly not these kids that are riding out there. I think it’s going to take community effort, not legislation, but a community effort to try and solve this.”
