PAcific Grove Questions E-Bikes
Pacific Grove Is Rethinking Its E-Bike Rules, But Zero Citations Raise a Bigger Question
Pacific Grove is taking another look at its e-bike and electric mobility rules. On February 4, the City Council received a presentation on the current regulatory landscape and may give new direction to staff and police on how e-bikes, scooters, and other electric devices should be regulated going forward.
On the surface, this sounds like a city responding to real public safety concerns. E-bikes are faster, more common, and often ridden by younger users. Residents have raised complaints about speed on the coastal recreation trail. The city’s Traffic Safety Commission listed excessive e-bike speed as one of the most frequent public concerns.
But there is an uncomfortable fact sitting right in the middle of this conversation.
Over a three-year period, from January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025, Pacific Grove police issued zero citations under the city’s existing e-bike ordinance.
Not one.
So the question becomes whether the problem is the ordinance itself, enforcement priorities, limited staffing, or something deeper about how we regulate new transportation technology in shared public spaces.
As lawyers who represent injured riders, cyclists, and pedestrians throughout California, we think this discussion matters. Not just for Pacific Grove, but for every coastal community trying to balance safety, access, and reality on the ground.
What Pacific Grove’s Current E-Bike Rules Actually Say
Pacific Grove already has rules on the books. They are not new, and they are not vague.
Under the municipal code, bicycles and e-bikes are prohibited entirely in certain sensitive areas, including Perkins’ Park and Lovers Point Park. E-bikes are further prohibited from the Pacific Grove Golf Links, El Carmelo Cemetery, and coastal property leeward of Ocean View Boulevard, except for paved portions of the recreational trail.
On the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreational Trail, which runs along the waterfront through the city, Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes are allowed. When they are allowed, they are subject to a 12 mile per hour speed limit and must always be operated at a speed that is reasonable and safe given pedestrians, visibility, and trail conditions.
Pedicabs and motorized scooters are prohibited entirely on the trail, as well as in parks, the golf links, and the cemetery. Pedestrians are required to use the paved section of the trail so as not to impede bicycle traffic.
In other words, the city already has a framework that attempts to separate uses, limit speeds, and protect pedestrians in high traffic areas.
Yet enforcement data shows those rules have not resulted in a single citation in three years.
Zero Citations Does Not Mean Zero Risk
It is tempting for cities to look at zero citations and assume that means there is no real problem. That would be a mistake.
Lack of enforcement does not equal lack of danger. It often means lack of clarity, lack of resources, or lack of political will.
Pacific Grove’s own police department is operating with four sworn officer vacancies, roughly 17 percent of its staffing. The department’s annual report notes a goal of increasing bicycle patrols in future years. That suggests the department knows enforcement presence matters, but may not currently have the capacity to do it consistently.
From an injury lawyer’s perspective, we often see the consequences of under-enforcement after someone gets seriously hurt. A pedestrian struck by a fast moving e-bike. A cyclist sideswiped by a rider who does not understand trail etiquette. A child on a rental scooter colliding with an elderly walker.
Those cases rarely start with malicious intent. They start with confusion, inconsistent rules, and the assumption that nobody is really watching.
State Law Sets Limits on What Cities Can Do
One important piece of this conversation is understanding what Pacific Grove can and cannot regulate under California law.
Electric bicycles are defined under the Vehicle Code and divided into three classes. Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes have a top assisted speed of 20 miles per hour. Class 3 e-bikes can reach up to 28 miles per hour.
Local governments have authority to regulate bicycles and e-bikes on sidewalks, bike paths, and recreational trails, so long as those regulations do not conflict with state law. Cities can prohibit certain classes of e-bikes on trails and can impose speed limits in those areas.
However, cities cannot prohibit e-bikes from bike paths that run along or adjacent to roadways. They also cannot regulate how e-bikes operate on public streets and highways. That authority belongs to the state.
Seeing the issue through that lens, Pacific Grove’s options are more limited than some residents might expect. The city cannot simply ban e-bikes everywhere. It has to work within a framework that balances local control with statewide consistency.
Different Cities, Different Rules, Same Trail
Another challenge is that the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreational Trail runs through multiple jurisdictions. Each city along the trail has its own rules.
The City of Monterey allows all classes of e-bikes on the trail and does not impose a specific speed limit. The County of Monterey allows e-bikes anywhere bicycles are permitted and requires both to yield to pedestrians and equestrians on county trails.
From a rider’s perspective, that patchwork is confusing. A rider can be compliant in Monterey, noncompliant in Pacific Grove, and compliant again a mile later without ever leaving the same stretch of pavement.
Confusion breeds inconsistency. Inconsistency breeds risk.
If the goal is safety, harmonizing rules across jurisdictions may do more good than tweaking one city’s ordinance in isolation.
The Youth Question and the Reality of E-Bikes
City staff and leadership have repeatedly emphasized concerns about youth riders. That concern is not misplaced.
E-bikes allow younger riders to travel faster and farther than traditional bicycles. Many riders do not fully appreciate stopping distances, blind corners, or pedestrian unpredictability. When you mix speed with inexperience, the margin for error shrinks quickly.
But enforcement focused solely on youth riders can backfire. It can push behavior underground rather than change it. It can also distract from the reality that adults on high powered e-bikes can pose just as much risk when they ride aggressively in crowded spaces.
Education, clear signage, and visible but fair enforcement tend to produce better outcomes than punitive crackdowns after the fact.
From a Safety Perspective, Clarity Matters More Than Symbolism
One of the most telling lines in the reporting is that the city’s efforts may be largely symbolic.
Symbolic ordinances feel good politically, but they rarely prevent injuries. People do not follow rules they do not understand, cannot see, or do not believe will ever be enforced.
If Pacific Grove wants to improve safety on its trails and public spaces, the conversation should focus on a few core questions.
Are the rules easy for a visitor to understand without reading the municipal code?
Are they consistent with neighboring jurisdictions?
Are they being enforced in a way that is predictable and fair?
And are they designed to address actual injury risks rather than abstract complaints?
Where Motorcycle and Bicycle Injury Law Intersects With This Debate
At California’s Motorcycle Law Firm, we represent people who are often blamed simply for the kind of vehicle they were using. Motorcyclists know this feeling well. Cyclists and e-bike riders are increasingly experiencing it too.
Rules that are unclear or unevenly enforced tend to be weaponized after crashes. Insurance companies and defense lawyers look for any technical violation to shift blame away from drivers, cities, or manufacturers.
That is why clear, lawful, and well-communicated regulations matter. They protect pedestrians, yes, but they also protect riders from being unfairly labeled as reckless simply because they were present.
What to Watch For
The City Council has several decisions to make.
Whether to limit which classes of e-bikes are permitted on the trail.
Whether to maintain the 12 mile per hour speed limit.
Whether to expand or reduce prohibitions in parks, sidewalks, and hiking trails.
Whether to seek input from the Traffic Safety Committee before adopting changes.
And whether to separate regulations for human powered bicycles, e-bikes, and other electric devices so the public can actually understand them.
Those choices will shape how people move through Pacific Grove for years to come.
The Bigger Picture for Coastal Communities
Pacific Grove is not alone. Coastal cities across California are wrestling with the same issues. How do you protect pedestrians without criminalizing micromobility. How do you encourage alternatives to cars without creating chaos on shared paths. How do you write rules that reflect how people actually move, not how we wish they would.
From our vantage point, the best outcomes come when cities focus on behavior rather than categories. Speed, yielding, and attentiveness matter more than whether a bike has a motor. Visibility and predictability matter more than signage buried on a city website.
Final Thoughts
Zero citations in three years does not mean there is nothing to fix. It means the fix probably is not just rewriting an ordinance.
Pacific Grove has an opportunity to lead by creating clear, enforceable, and humane rules that protect everyone using its public spaces. That requires honesty about enforcement capacity, coordination with neighboring jurisdictions, and a willingness to prioritize safety over symbolism.
As riders, cyclists, and injury lawyers who know these trails, we will be watching closely. Because when rules fail in the abstract, people get hurt in the real world.
And once that happens, the conversation changes very quickly.