Phoenix e-bike Ordinance (Class 3 Banned!)

City of Phoenix passed an ebike law recently; I was unaware.

Arizona’s state ebike laws, which were passed in 2018, are essentially mum on ebikes vis a vis sidewalks, leaving them in the same somewhat strange boat as bicycles; “what is not prohibited is allowed”. And leads to a lot of confusion as local regulations, if any, regulate sidewalk cycling. See this long discussion of Arizona’s sidewalk laws including selected municipalities.

In any event, the state ebike law has “default” regulations for what they call “bicycle and multiuse paths”; Class 1/2 (“20mph”) allowed, and Class 3 (“28mph”) prohibited. But nothing about sidewalks.

I would have preferred that the city (and all cities) simply treat Class 1/2 in every way as bicycles; Phoenix already has/had bicycle sidewalk regulations. But for whatever reason, they went another way, specifically with regard to sidewalks. So as of 2022 in Phoenix:

PCC Sec. 36-504. Motorized electric bicycles are prohibited on sidewalks.

It is a violation for a person to operate a motorized electric bicycle upon a sidewalk.

Phoenix Ordinance No. G-6967, adopted 3/2/2022

It’s pretty annoying that they, after all these years, decades really, still have the 50 cent bicycle license plate requirement on the books; 36-98.

Here’s the (added) definition:

Sec. 36-1. Definitions
"Motorized electric bicycle" means a bicycle or tricycle that is equipped with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts and that meets the requirements of one of the following classes:
1. "Class 1 motorized electric bicycle" means a bicycle or tricycle that is equipped with an electric motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle or tricycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour.
2. "Class 2 motorized electric bicycle" means a bicycle or tricycle that is equipped with an electric motor that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle or tricycle and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle or tricycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour.
(class 3 continues to be omitted from PCC at this time, see below)

This begs the question, what about Class 3 ebikes? I can’t find any definition that fits, e.g. they are not “motorized play vehicles” because they are defined in ARS Note that the topic of “motorized play vehicle” (MPV) comes up from time-to-time. MPV ordinances are common, longstanding (predating the motorized bike, and ebike state laws) and meant to be a catch-all.

Class 1 (and 3) are most certainly not MPVs because the def’n in PCC 36-1 specifically calls out “self-propelled”; it would also beg the question if a Class 2 (or a motorized bicycle) is an MPV when it’s motor (or engine) is switched off; See more at is-your-motorized-bike-a-play-vehicle?

By the way, the same definition of ebikes in 36-1 also appears in in 23-120 (that’s the chapter on ‘morals and conduct’!). I assume, but did not check, that it’s word-for-word. What’s up with that?

UPDATE: the Ebike ordinance was tweaked in 2023 (ord G-7113), and now does include a definition of class 3, see below #2023

“Stealth” ebike?

It’s not likely police will enforce this law on a routine basis, for a number of reasons, but most obviously is that many many ebikes don’t look motorized; these so-called stealth ebikes have a battery integrated inside the frame, are nearly silent, are pedal-assist (must be pedaled to keep going, no throttle), and the only tell-tale would be a slightly enlarged hub (if a hub motor, or a blob around the crank if a mid-drive). See pic above.

These bikes are being sold in huge quantities.

The real problem (for ebicyclists riding on sidewalks in Phoenix) would come when they — for any reason — are contacted by police, whether that’s because they look “suspicious”, or become involved in a crash. And if it’s a crash, expect trouble collecting from the motorist’s insurance regardless of fault.

The 2023 Update Ordinance (#2023)

There were some tweaks to the original 2022 ordinance.
G-7113 was passed sometime in May 2023. Here’s a handy comparison tool., which shows the changes from 2022 ord at a glance… The most obvious change was to eliminate the word motorized in the phrase ‘motorized electric bicycle’ (although I see the code writers screwed up and didn’t remove it from the MPV definition in 36-1); and a few other, I presume, conforming changes, e.g. ‘head lamp’ is now headlamp; multiuse is now ‘multi-use’.

However, more substantively, there were two major changes regarding ebikes; the first being raising the minimum age from 16 to 18 for any ebike, and second there’s a new section that bans all Class 3 from anywhere in Phoenix. Hmm. well We’ll have to look into that; what is a ‘public rights-of-way’ (isn’t that a street or highway?), why would you want to ban them from alleys (cars and trucks can be operated in alleys, no?)… Class 3 ebikes are now banned everywhere in Phoenix except for private property; this is the first I — or anyone I talked to — have heard about it.

Here’s the age thing, and the only thing I have to say is that we do allow 16 and 17 year olds to get a license to operate any motor vehicle, including, um, motorcycles; and as mentioned above, it applies to any/all ebikes. (side note: electric scooters already had a minimum 18 y.o. age limit, Ord. 6602 from 2019, which also seems strange)

Sec. 36-510.
Electric bicycle age requirements.
No person may operate an electric bicycle who is under the age of 18.

The Class 3 ban begs the question about what has become a common ebike feature: user-programmable ebikes, e.g. the Lectric bikes “XP and XP Step-Thru 2.0 ship as a class 2 eBike but they have the capability to change to a class 1 or class 3 eBike”. Other brands have similar capabilities.

Also note that the ban is absolute; You may not simply switch off the motor and keep going. Just stay out of Phoenix altogether.

Sec. 36-29. Restrictions upon use of street.
B. Class 3 electric bicycles or tricycles are prohibited on public rights-of-way including sidewalks, roadways and alleys.
Sec. 36-514.
Prohibition of Class 3 electric bicycles or tricycles.
Class 3 electric bicycles or tricycles are prohibited on sidewalks, alleys and public rights-of-way. (Ord. No. G-7113, § 41, 2023)

Side note is ebikes are already all banned from sidewalk per the existing 36-504, so what is the point of also putting it here. Also not sure why the mention of tricycle, the term doesn’t appear anywhere in the rest of the ebike ordinance, and it’s already covered in the definition, 36-1. And on the topic of strangely drafted provisions, the definitions in 23-120 (that’s the chapter on ‘morals and conduct’!). Were NOT updated to include class 3; I still have not idea why ebikes are defined there. Other drafting notes: why are there two very similar (wording is slightly different) code sections, 36-29, and 514?

I am unaware of ANY other Arizona city that has banned class 3 ebikes (though it’s more or less impossible to check the dozens and dozens of individual jurisdictions.).  Likewise the age thing, most jurisdictions say something about age, but typically it’s 16. The 2023 rules appear dramatically out-of-step with every other community in Arizona.

For a good model see City of Tucson (passed years ago, what has City of Phoenix been doing in the meantime?); they limit the operating speed of all ebikes when on bike infra, and have

It appears Phoenix PD has wisely distanced themselves from the whole Class thing; only the new age restriction (min. 18 years old)  is mentioned in both these official communications from PPD. Not a word about “Class” anything; which makes sense as it’s either difficult or impossible to establish Class; especially now that multi-class ebikes are widely available (see Lectric bike, above). The question is was there ever any plan to enforce the Class ban; or is this just another ordinance that doesn’t get enforced? Or worse, enforced selectively? Those most hurt by the ban are (otherwise) legally operating ebicyclists who are injured or killed by a negligent motorist; the driver, or their insurance, will disclaim any liability.

It really appears to me this whole thing was slid thru the law-making process thru some sort of backdoor; the (seems to me too brief) staff report to committee and to the full council doesn’t mention either of these two substantive changes — why not?

There’s one other odd, recurring red herring floating around… city staff continues to tell me — as though saying so makes it so — that Class 3 (and 1) ebikes were always illegal in Phoenix because prior to the new ordinance which explicitly bans them, they would have been a “motorized play vehicle” per 36-1. This is false, and I don’t understand why they keep repeating this — go read the definition of MPV. Class 3 (and 1) ebikes are most certainly not self-propelled and therefore cannot be MPV.

"Motorized play vehicle" means an alternatively fueled device, or other motorized vehicle that is self-propelled by a motor or engine

"Class 3 (or 1) electric bicycle" means a bicycle or tricycle that is equipped with an electric motor that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling...

 

How to search for Phoenix Ordinances and Records

I’ve wasted time on this before, to find the actual ordinance in markup format (e .g.  strikethru for deletions and ALL CAPS for additions); must search public records; then be sure to tick the box and do a global search on the ordinance number (it can’t find it if you only tick ordinances?), in this case 6967… this should lead you to a document called ORD6967 (annoyingly, not searchable).  The newer one, G-7113, also popped right up  — still not searchable —  P.s. these are very long ordinances that have a whole pile of stuff relating to scooters that I haven’t bothered to try to read.

To find city council or committee (e.g. the TIP, Trans & Infra); go here and go page-by-page to find the meeting you are interested in, e.g. I was looking for the May 31, 2023 Formal Council meeting; there were FORTY-TWO pages of prior meetings, and page back to get to the 12th page, where you will find direct links to the agenda packet (always gigantic; but contain the staff reports within), the youtube, etc.

Helpfully, at least at the moment, you can use that as a template to find any formal meeting agenda packet, e.g. the older ordinance was 3-2-22.

Because these documents are so damn hard to find if the links go dead here is a google docs archive of relevent docs:

• • City of Phoenix docs on the ebike topic

Questions

(this needs updating)

what is the deal with phoenix and class 3 ebikes? (so this is at least partially address by the 2023 update ordinance)

what is the deal with ebikes on shared-use paths(but see below for Federal/canal paths)? (still no idea)

Other Cities

Since this is going to be a patchwork; let the patching begin…

Tempe

See Chapter 19. (here’s an archive of entire chapter 19 retrieved Aug 2024)  Background: Here’s an article about Tempe’s old (2017) ebike law which , interestingly , predated the state law:  tempe’s municipal ordinance.  Tempe’s entire bike code was overhauled in 2019 and everything moved around, e.g. bikes used to be Chapter 9, but are now Chapter 19.

• 19-1 “electric bike” is defined, but makes NO class definitions; the 750W limit consistent with ARS, however the 20mph max assistance would only cover what ARS calls Class 1 and 2. However, and confusingly there’s another def’n…
• “non-human powered vehicle” which appear to be permitted to do whatever and electric bike is allowed(?).
  They also seem to have gotten rid of a def’n of “motorized play vehicle” entirely from Chap 19.
• 19-212e allowed on sidewalks where bikes are allowed but must not use the motor
• 19-214c The age limit for ebikes is min 16 y.o. ; or lower if they have “parental approval”.
• 19-214e and f “in a bicycle lane or street, an electric bicycle or non-human powered vehicle may not be operated at speeds in excess of 28mph” ; and
  “on a multi-use path, an electric bicycle or non-human powered vehicle may not be operated at a speed in excess of twenty (20) miles per hour.”

I’m not sure what the deal is with why they don’t have a Class definitions specified for e-bikes, but then turn around and say a “non-human powered vehicle” can go no faster than 28mph on the street. They obviously pulled that number straight out of class 3. ???

Tucson

rules linked here (passed in 2018! kudos to being on top of things) seem to address both safety concerns (an operating limit of 20mph while on bicycle infra) while respecting individual’s right to choose their mode of transportation. Also the 16 y.o. limit seems much more in line

Flagstaff

Rules Chapter 9-05 Bicycles passed 2019 (not too shabby Flagstaff, like a year later than ARS!). Can’t find any age limits(?). They have a helmet rule for < 18. No class restrictions on road, including bike lane. there’s an intricate grid of what’s allowed where; e.g. no ebikes of any class on sidewalks, no class 3 on FUTS, etc.

Paradise Valley

Surprisingly has NO bike or ebike operating regulations… just some stuff about parking. See Chapter 11 Traffic under “Town Code”.

Glendale

Oddly, can’t find general bicycle ordinances? In chapter 27, parks, there’s at least a def’n of bicycle; but none for “motorized/electric bicycle” despite being referenced. Hmm. Here’s their municode.com. If anybody knows, please leave a comment.

ebikes on SRP Canal Paths

Although the Arizona state law (ARS) more-or-less treat ebikes as bicycles in a straightforward manner (for example, electric bikes are not motor vehicles in ARS); there’s a confusing patchwork of differing local (city/town) regulations. Unfortunately, there’s yet another layer, federal, to add to the mix…

The entire Phoenix metro area is laced with an extensive system of canals, most (all?) of which are paved and open to the public for use by bicyclists, walkers, and joggers. Motorized vehicles (with specified exceptions, e.g. “authorized” vehicles) are prohibited. Uh oh…

As things turn out — who knew? — SRP only manages the land. It belongs to the federal government, under the jurisdiction of the US Department of Interior,  Bureau of Reclamation. As things further turn out there was new federal rulemaking regarding ebikes that was finalized in 2020. Prior to the new rules, ebikes would have by default fallen into the category of “off road vehicles” and would be broadly prohibited on any Reclamation land “Reclamation lands are closed to off- road vehicle use, except for an area or trail specifically opened to use”. Happily, for ebicyclists, the new rule defines and carves out ebikes from the definition of off-road, and permits their use wherever bicycles (i.e. “mechanized, non-motorized use”) is allowed BUT ONLY IF “the Regional Director has expressly determined” it’s ok. Here are the salient bits from the law CFR Title 43 / Sub B / Chapter I / Part 420:

§420.5(a)(7) Electric bikes as defined by paragraph (h) of this section: While being used on roads and trails upon which mechanized, non-motorized use is allowed, that are not being used in a manner where the motor is being used exclusively to propel the E-bike for an extended period of time, and where the Regional Director has expressly determined, as part of a land-use planning or implementation-level decision, that E-bikes should be treated the same as non-motorized bicycles.

(h) Electric bicycle (also known as an E-bike) means a two- or three-wheeled cycle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of not more than 750 watts (1 horsepower) that meets the requirements of one of the following three classes... [goes on to define the usual 3 classes...

The sign makes reference to two federal  sections, Part 423, and Part 429; and makes no reference to the section 420, where electric bikes are defined, important to our discussion here is the definition of motorized vehicle, which incongruously is called an Off-road vehicle in the CFR even though it includes on-road vehicles!, and is found in this Part 423 definition:

§423.2  Definitions... Off-road vehicle means any motorized vehicle (including the standard automobile) designed for or capable of cross-country travel on or immediately over land, water, sand, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or natural terrain. The term excludes all of the following: ...  
["authorized" vehicles, military vehicles in time of national emergency, etc. Oddly, disability/mobility devices are NOT excluded from the part 423 definition?]

Which begs the question, what does the Regional Director say? yes or no, or he/she is thinking about it? [the current status from what I understand is the RD has not made any determination; thereby effectively prohibiting ebike use]

The Bureau of Reclamation’s Regional Director of the Lower Colorado region is Jacklynn ‘Jaci’ Gould (as of org chart date May 2022). Within the LC region is the Phoenix-area office; which is the local office for these SRP paths.

There are two nearly identical definitions of off-road vehicle; Part 423 ‘Publc Conduct’ and Part 420 ‘Off-road Vehicle Use’. The definition in 423 excludes powered wheelchairs and not ebikes; whereas in 420 it’s reversed: excludes ebikes but not powered wheelchairs. This seems odd, maybe there’s some explanation?? Why are there two definitions?