If the headline didn’t lose you at “MUTCD,” welcome! CalBike often works deep in the weeds, sitting on advisory committees and wrangling with state agencies over policy changes that may seem minor or arcane but have significant impact on our safe biking and walking.
One example of this is an update to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. California’s MUTCD is akin to the Bible for state and local planners and public works departments. It lays out allowable road treatments and can frustrate bicycle advocates when it’s used as a reason not to implement the latest guidance on safe biking and walking infrastructure.
However slowly, the MUTCD does get updated with better practices, such as when CalBike passed a law legalizing protected bikeways. Before the 2014 law, few municipalities were willing to install physically separated bike lanes because they weren’t in the MUTCD and cities feared legal liability.
In 2024, CalBike supported AB 1216, which prohibits the installation of, as well as state funding for, Class III bikeways on high-speed streets. A Class III bikeway is a route featuring a shared lane for bike riders and car drivers, sometimes indicated with sharrow markings. The passage of that law triggered an update to the MUTCD.
As a member of the California Walk and Bike Technical Advisory Committee (known by the lovely acronym CWBTAC), CalBike is helping shape the language for new street design guidance that directs communities not to put shared lane markings on streets with speed limits greater than 30 mph. It’s a small thing and pretty technical. But we hope that removing the option to slap some sharrows in the roadway and call it a bikeway will force local governments and Caltrans to design better, safer routes for people who get around by bike.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CalBike-Insider-Image4.png7201280Kendra Ramseyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKendra Ramsey2025-02-04 17:42:332025-02-04 17:42:33CalBike Insider: Updating the MUTCD to Comply with New Law
A few weeks ago, we wrote about two studies showing bicycle safety stop, or stop-as-yield, laws are safe for all road users. Another study released in December 2024 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has come to the same conclusion. And yet another study from researchers at UC Berkeley’s Institute for Traffic Studies found no correlation between crash risk and the implementation of stop-as-yield laws.
Stop-as-yield allows people riding bikes to treat stop signs as yields and roll through without coming to a complete stop if they have the right of way and there’s no other traffic. Many bike riders already do this because it’s a logical way to conserve momentum on a vehicle powered by human effort. Stop-as-yield laws codify this common way of riding, setting clear expectations for all road users and reducing conflicts at intersections. Since the first such law was passed in Idaho in 1982, stop-as-yield is often called the Idaho stop. Despite this long history elsewhere, stop-as-yield for bike riders remains illegal in California.
Validating the safety of stop-as-yield
The NHTSA study follows a fact sheet released by the agency in 2023 supporting the safety of stop-as-yield laws. The study analyzed crash records in urban areas in eight states where stop-as-yield is legal and used statistical models to estimate monthly crash rates.
The evidence showed that stop-as-yield laws correlated with lower crash rates and didn’t increase the number of crashes involving children. These laws don’t affect the severity of bike rider crash injuries. The study also showed that stop-as-yield laws don’t lead to more reckless behavior by bike riders and could lead to more people getting around by bike.
The researchers found that the built environment was a bigger factor in collisions involving bikes than socioeconomic factors. Safe infrastructure is essential to preventing bicyclist injuries and fatalities. However, the study found a disproportionate number of Black bike riders were crash victims, a finding that highlights the need for further research.
The UC Berkeley study used similar data, parsing crash statistics to see if crash rates went up or down after stop-as-yield was legalized in several states and comparing that data with national and state crash trends. The research found that allowing bike riders to treat stop signs as yields didn’t affect safety one way or the other. Since it makes bike riding easier, that’s an argument in favor of stop-as-yield.
So, if stop-as-yield laws make bike riding more appealing and reduce crashes, why can’t California pass this law? It’s complicated.
California’s twisty road to bicycle safety
California has seen bills to legalize stop-as-yield or safety stop introduced several times, and the legislature passed it in 2021, but the governor vetoed it. This year, even as Nevada proposes a stop-as-yield law and other West Coast states have recently enacted similar laws, CalBike has not found a legislator interested in introducing a bill this session.
One of the factors that stopped California’s stop-as-yield bills has undoubtedly been concerns about rising rates of traffic violence. Despite mounting evidence showing the safety of these laws, it remains difficult to convince law enforcement and legislators that allowing bike riders to treat stop signs as yields won’t increase fatalities.
Another complicating issue in the last couple of years is the steep rise in the popularity of e-bikes and, unfortunately, illegal e-motorcycles marketed as e-bikes and sold to underage riders. That, coupled with driver-caused fatal crashes and the resulting anti-e-bike hysteria in several California cities, has led to a rising public perception that bike riders are reckless. Why would we want to give these dangerous lawbreakers free rein to run stop signs?
A final roadblock is Governor Gavin Newsom. After his first veto, the author ran the bill again and it looked likely to pass the legislature once again. She pulled it at the last minute, probably because of a threatened gubernatorial veto. We may have to wait for our next governor for stop-as-yield to become law in California.
However, you never know. We’ve seen Governor Newsom move from a veto one year to signing a bill the next. CalBike will continue to push for a California stop-as-yield law. We’ve seen how perceptions can change over time with continued education and campaigning, and we won’t give up on this worthy cause.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/stop-sign-compressed-scaled.jpeg21522560Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-02-03 12:09:072025-02-07 15:38:24Two more studies show stop-as-yield works. Why isn’t there a bill in California?
Every two years, CalBike hosts the California Bicycle Summit, bringing together advocates, planners, agency staffers, and members of the bicycle community to share insights and dream up a future full of bicycles. In February, we will launch a series of free virtual sessions to bring our community together for thought-provoking and insightful discussions year-round.
First virtual summit session announced for February 20, 2025
The first virtual summit session is “Creative Approaches to Funding Active Transportation Infrastructure.” The new administration in Washington makes it likely that federal funding for active transportation projects will decrease. But local governments and bicycle advocates can still find creative ways to fund infrastructure, planning, and education projects.
The session will also address alternatives for funding active transportation infrastructure beyond the Active Transportation Program (ATP), which routinely has far more applications than it can fund.
Our initial webinar will feature programs managed by the Strategic Growth Council, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), the California Air Resources Board, and the California Transportation Commission (CTC).
Presenters:
Brianne Logasa and Marc Caswell, California Strategic Growth Council
Joey Juhasz-Lukomski, Shared Use Mobility Center
Laurie Waters, California Transportation Commission
Mary McGuirk Lizarraga or Omar Atayee, San Diego Association of Governments
We hope you can join us.
What: California Bicycle Summit Virtual Session
When: Thursday, February 20, 2025, 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.
A coalition of 61 local, statewide, and national organizations, including CalBike, has sent a letter to Caltrans and the California Transportation Commission (CTC), asking them to move with greater urgency to meet California’s transportation-related climate goals. Under SB 375, which became law in 2008, state and regional planning agencies must pursue sustainable communities strategies, which coordinate land use and transportation planning, and include infill housing and access to public transit and active transportation. With the start of a new federal administration that’s actively hostile to climate change mitigation measures and green transportation, it’s incumbent on California to pick up the slack and move more aggressively toward our climate goals.
After the letter was written, the new administration stripped California of its ability to mandate a transition to EVs. Without that, the urgency to give Californians alternatives to driving is greater than ever.
California continues to invest in freeways instead of bikeways
California’s transportation budget continues to invest heavily in projects that increase traffic and congestion and drive us deeper into a climate hole that’s decimating our state. The Active Transportation Program (ATP), the only dedicated fund for biking, walking, and transit infrastructure, receives a small fraction of the funding dedicated to highway expansion.
The ATP has been the target of repeated attempts to claw back funds while money to build new freeways remained untouched. The program has to turn away more projects than it funds in each two-year cycle.
The ATP isn’t the only source for active transportation funding, but as CalBike’s Incomplete Streets investigation showed, Caltrans has often shortchanged bikeways and sidewalks, claiming there wasn’t enough funding to build them into maintenance projects on state-controlled streets.
With the passage of the Complete Streets Law in 2024, we hope to see more robust investment in making California’s state routes welcoming and safe for people using all modes of transportation. Planners and engineers assume that because most people drive, most people want to get around by car, but the truth is that there is pent-up demand for active transportation. Research shows that building safe bikeways leads to more bicycle traffic, and cities like Copenhagen and Paris show what’s possible.
California must act now
It’s hard to know how big a disaster must be to convince Americans, even Californians, that climate change is an imminent threat requiring immediate action. Perhaps the horror and devastation of the LA fires will be a tipping point. But our human inclination is to return to life as usual. Humans distrust change and often instinctively oppose it.
So we need our elected officials to lead the way. We need serious, major investments in active transportation and public transit. We need climate-conscious planning from statewide and regional agencies.
The signers of the letter include environmental, health, and housing advocacy groups, as well as biking and walking coalitions, and more. This intersectional group is a strong coalition to stand up for reducing driving, removing freeways, and giving urban and rural residents safe, clean, convenient transportation options.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/I-80_congestion-NB_news_release_crop.jpg6301200Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-01-23 16:20:062025-01-23 16:58:25Diverse Coalition of Advocacy Groups Urges California to Speed Up Emissions Reductions
In recent years, the number of pedestrians and bicyclists killed and seriously injured on roadways in California has steadily increased. The U.S. is now an outlier among developed nations in the rate of road deaths, and California has the highest total number of pedestrian deaths.
Vulnerable road users (VRUs) are people on our roads and sidewalks who don’t have the protection of a vehicle’s cage to keep them safe. This includes people walking, biking, riding scooters and skateboards, using mobility aids, and traveling by horseback.
As long as we prioritize the desires of car and truck drivers at the expense of others in our transportation systems, people walking and biking will continue to be disproportionately injured and killed on our shared roads. Here are some policy changes that could help make our streets safer for everyone.
Varied paths to VRU safety
There are lots of ways to make our streets safer for people outside of motor vehicles. Infrastructure is at the top of the list, but changing our streets scan be costly and time-consuming. While a project moves slowly through the planning process, more people die. CalBike is working on a quick build bill this year that we hope will result in more Complete Streets, faster and at a lower cost.
Slowing speeds is another option, since vehicle speed is one of the main factors impacting the severity of VRU injuries in a crash. We have supported legislation to reduce speeds and better enforce existing speed limits.
Another way to protect VRUs is to recognize and define the vulnerable road user in our state statute, as many other states have already done.
What is a vulnerable road user law?
In 2007, Oregon became the first state to pass a vulnerable road user law, and at least 12 states — Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington — have since adopted similar laws. More states are also adding anti-harassment laws that penalize actions such as throwing objects at bicyclists and pedestrians from a moving vehicle.
VRU laws increase the penalties for drivers in a collision that results in the death or serious injury of someone outside a vehicle. They recognize the special care that people operating dangerous machines on shared streets should exercise toward those not encased in steel and moved by a powerful motor. The League of American Bicyclists has drafted model language for such laws.
The increase in VRU collisions prompted the U.S. Congress to mandate, through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), that all states complete a VRU Safety Assessment as part of their Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). California’s assessment is very helpful in laying the groundwork for policy action to support VRUs.
Vulnerable road user laws and anti-harassment ordinances boost incentives for motorists to practice safe roadway behavior and deter unsafe behaviors around people walking and biking. They also increase opportunities for vulnerable road users to seek legal recourse after a crash. But do they work to prevent negligent driving that leads to collisions?
How effective are VRU ordinances?
In the last decade, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Sunnyvale, Sebastopol, and Santa Rosa have all adopted anti-harassment ordinances, which protect people on bicycles from “intentional threats, assaults, or harassment by motorists.”
The majority of vulnerable road user laws and anti-harassment ordinances provide increased fines and civil liability in cases where a person walking or biking is injured or killed because of negligent or intentional motorist behavior. Under most vulnerable road user laws or anti-harassment ordinances, bicyclists can bring a lawsuit against a vehicle driver in civil court — which has a lesser burden of proof than criminal court — making it easier for bicyclists to get compensated for their injuries and damages.
It’s not clear if VRU laws have the intended effect of reducing crashes and improving the safety of people walking, biking, etc. We couldn’t find studies comparing before and after crash statistics in jurisdictions that have enacted increased penalties, perhaps because the trend is relatively recent. But a recent Washington Post article about a Virginia VRU law showed that it had rarely been used.
CalBike has campaigned to decriminalize things such as jaywalking, where enforcement tends to be disproportionately aimed at people who are low-income, unhoused, or BIPOC. There’s a danger that VRU laws could be applied with the same biases, disproportionately penalizing Black and Latino drivers.
In addition, fear of stiffer penalties could increase the number of hit-and-run crashes. This is already a problem — a AAA research brief states: “The number of hit-and-run fatalities has been increasing at an average rate of 7.2% per year since 2009. A large part of this increase has been in fatal crashes involving non-vehicle occupants, mostly pedestrians.” The chance of survival for a vulnerable road user hit by a car goes down the longer they wait before getting medical attention, so more hit-and-runs leads to more preventable fatalities.
But there’s one more issue to consider with VRU laws.
Driving a car shouldn’t be a license to kill
When you read about collisions, drivers are often praised for exercising basic human decency and not fleeing the scene after they crash into a human being or an object. Police often make excuses for driver negligence, except in the most extreme cases where there is an intent to harm, and often fail to charge drivers with any crime.
This puts motor vehicles in a special category. In fact, the California Penal Code recognizes three types of manslaughter: voluntary, involuntary, and vehicular. In describing vehicular manslaughter, the code states: “This section shall not be construed as making any homicide in the driving of a vehicle punishable that is not a proximate result of the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to a felony, or of the commission of a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner.”
You can’t be punished for murdering someone with your car unless you are committing an unlawful act. While drivers break traffic laws all the time by running lights, failing to stop at stop signs, and exceeding the speed limit, these crimes may be hard to prove.
One of the research papers we found is titled If You Want to Get Away With Murder, Use Your Car, and it’s true. We hold people operating heavy machines capable of traveling at high speeds to lower standards than anyone doing anything else. So a sense of justice could lean toward equalizing the penalties and removing the special classifications for vehicular manslaughter.
The definition of involuntary manslaughter in the California penal code is causing a death while committing a misdemeanor or “in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death.” A person can be charged with involuntary manslaughter if they are acting “without due caution and circumspection.” In other words, if you aren’t breaking the law in any other way but you accidentally kill someone, you may be charged with involuntary manslaughter. If you’re working on your roof, let a 2 x 4 fall into the street, and it hits your neighbor and kills them, you could be charged with involuntary manslaughter. You didn’t mean to do it, but you are responsible.
There’s a third category of manslaughter in the California code: vehicular. If you aren’t otherwise breaking the law in your car and you accidentally kill someone, you cannot be charged with vehicular manslaughter. For example, if someone is driving the speed limit in a truck with a grille so tall they don’t see a child in the crosswalk and run the child over, they are not guilty of vehicular manslaughter and are unlikely to be otherwise held to account.
Drivers are allowed to hit pedestrians they don’t see with impunity. It’s a legal position that normalizes the thousands of deaths on U.S. roads every year, letting drivers off with a small fine for failures of attention that cause life-changing injuries or death.
Would increased liability lead to more responsible driver behavior? It’s unclear. We certainly need to prioritize street designs that reduce speed and provide safer infrastructure for people walking and riding bikes. The question is how we reduce the carnage on our streets until we are able to make those changes.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/jaywalking-scaled.jpeg14552560Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-01-22 18:06:462025-01-22 18:06:47What Is the Best Way to Prioritize the Safety of Vulnerable Road Users?
CalBike: California’s Transportation Budget Must Prioritize Green Transportation
Sacramento — CalBike applauds Governor Gavin Newsom for leaving funding intact for the Active Transportation Program (ATP) in his proposed budget, after two years of steep cuts. The ATP is the state’s only dedicated funding source for infrastructure that supports biking, walking, and public transit.
However, the governor’s budget doesn’t go far enough and preserves backward-facing investments that bake in decades of warmer temperatures and climate catastrophes. To have a realistic chance of mitigating the multiple disasters California faces due to climate chaos, we must stop investing in old ways of moving goods and people and reimagine our transportation systems.
The last budget cut two-thirds of the ATP budget, giving the California Transportation Commission(CTC) only enough funding to approve the top 13 projects out of dozens of worthy applications for grants. This budget should restore the $400 million taken from the ATP, allowing CTC to greenlight more green transportation infrastructure projects.
But that isn’t enough. The ATP is chronically underfunded, slowing the pace of California’s transition to a state that prioritizes safe passage for people using low- and no-carbon transportation options. CalBike is asking the legislature to double ATP funding going forward.
“The Active Transportation Program represents a tiny fraction of California’s transportation expenditures, yet it delivers powerful benefits for climate change mitigation,” says Jared Sanchez, CalBike’s policy director. “You can build a bike lane, upgrade a sidewalk, or add a bus-only lane for a fraction of the cost to build and maintain highway lanes. California should be investing much more in infrastructure like bicycle highways and connected biking and walking networks to make our communities healthier and safer from the ravages of climate disasters.”
State highway money (perhaps $1B) continues to build climate-killing roadways that increase traffic, fail to mitigate congestion, and work in opposition to the state’s climate goals. We must begin to shift our transportation spending to carbon-neutral options if we are to have any hope of stopping or reversing climate change.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/2020-agenda-slider-1.jpg4301200Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-01-10 19:51:182025-01-10 19:51:19California’s Transportation Budget Must Prioritize Green Transportation
CalBike does a lot of high-profile advocacy, winning big improvements for active transportation such as the Complete Streets Law and the Daylighting Law. But we also spend a lot of time deep in the weeds, sitting on state advisory boards and committees that shape agency policies and the ways that new laws are implemented. Sometimes we’re helping develop the process for a new law we helped pass; in other cases, our administrative work influences policies for biking and walking separate from the legislative process.
Our agency work is never glamorous and can be frustrating at times because of the slow pace of change. But it’s as essential to moving California’s transportation future toward biking, walking, and transit as our legislative work. Here’s a look behind the curtain at a recent meeting of the California Walk and Bike Technical Advisory Committee (CWBTAC).
What is a technical advisory committee?
The CWBTAC is an advisory body to Caltrans, and includes representatives from statewide advocacy groups like CalBike, representatives from city and county governments and transit agencies, metropolitan planning organizations, consultants, and other state agencies. Membership is open periodically by application and includes geographic, topic area, and sector goals. Quarterly meetings are closed to the public.
CalBike has been a member of the CWBTAC since it was formed in 2018 and was on the California Bicycle Advisory Committee, which the CWBTAC replaced, before that. We communicate regularly with Caltrans administrators during committee meetings such as this and in one-on-one meetings. Representing the concerns and needs of the bicycling community to Caltrans officials has been one of CalBike’s core functions since our founding 30 years ago.
Caltrans workshops implementation of new Complete Streets law
The most recent CWBTAC meeting convened shortly before Thanksgiving, and the main topic on the agenda was Caltrans’ implementation of the recently passed Complete Streets Law, SB 960.
Caltrans presented an overview of the process to ensure the infrastructure needs of people who get around by biking, walking, or taking transit are considered as the agency plans new maintenance projects and outlined the types of public engagement that occur at each stage of the project development process. The meeting then went into breakout groups, during which time participants shared ideas on how Caltrans should implement the Complete Streets law (SB 960). CalBike shared ideas on outreach to bring voices from disadvantaged communities into the discussion and how to create a process that doesn’t allow the desires of car drivers to overrule the interests of vulnerable road users.
Advisory bodies like the CWBTAC provide an opportunity for direct engagement and conversation with Caltrans and other agency staff. These meetings are an opportunity for CalBike to share the bicyclist’s perspective with not only Caltrans but also the local, regional, and statewide agencies and stakeholders that participate.
We will continue to work on Complete Streets implementation, both in large discussion settings and smaller meetings with Caltrans staffers, in the year ahead. The legislative session is barely getting started, but CalBike is already hard at work to make state roadways safer for everyone.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CalBike-Insider-Image4.png7201280Kendra Ramseyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKendra Ramsey2025-01-09 12:11:482025-01-09 15:25:18CalBike Insider: Statewide Bike/Walk Advisory Committee Weighs in on Complete Streets
This was a year of ups and downs, of big wins for safer streets and big setbacks for funding to build safer streets. Like almost every year, 2024 was a time of contradictions and mixed messages for bicycle advocates in California and beyond. So it’s time to celebrate the good and make fun of the bad. Here’s CalBike’s rundown of the best and worst of 2024.
Best evidence that persistence pays off: SB 960, the Complete Streets Law
Three bills. Eight years of campaigning. And, in 2024 — Complete Streets success! We applaud Senator Scott Wiener for standing behind and reintroducing his legislation to require Caltrans to build infrastructure for people walking, biking, and taking transit on state-controlled roadways. CalBike stuck with it, too, tirelessly campaigning for Caltrans to live up to its own policies around Complete Streets.
CalBike’s Andrew Wright brings us a festive holiday song to celebrate this win (sung to the tune of Auld Lang Syne):
Verse 1: Should safer streets be just a dream, And never see the day? Not anymore — Complete Streets Bill Has paved a brighter way!
Chorus: For safer roads and paths we cheer, For biking, walking fine, Let’s raise a toast, the fight is won, This victory is thine!
Verse 2:
Guv’nor’s pen has sealed the deal, Complete Streets law is here. A step toward safety for us all, Let’s celebrate this year!
Honorable mention: the Transportation Accountability Act, AB 2086
Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo’s Transportation Accountability Act, AB 2086, which CalBike joined other advocates in supporting, will be an excellent adjunct to the Complete Streets law. The bill mandates greater transparency and reporting from Caltrans about where it spends California transportation dollars and will allow us to better advocate for shifting the budget toward infrastructure that encourages active transportation.
Worst missed chance to make our streets even safer: the demise of SB 961, the Safer Vehicles Save Lives Bill
Advocates weren’t asking that car and truck drivers stop killing people, just that they kill fewer people. But even that was too much for California lawmakers. After all, carnage on our streets is part of the American way of life — am I right? First, the legislature killed the provision of the bill that would have mandated truck underride guards, an inexpensive safety feature for semi-trucks that would have saved hundreds of lives every year. Then the governor vetoed the final version of the bill, which required car manufacturers to install intelligent speed assist in some faraway future year. ISA warns drivers when they exceed the speed limit by 10 mph or more, and it’s already required in the EU. But we can’t have nice things, apparently.
Best act of transportation transparency: the Incomplete Streets Report
CalBike started requesting Caltrans project records, which aren’t available to the public, in 2023. The CalBike team spent much of 2024 reviewing and analyzing the data, culminating in Incomplete Streets: Aligning Practice with Promise in Caltrans Projects. The report, which was previewed in Streetsblog California over the summer, showed the inconsistent and inadequate treatment of biking and walking infrastructure in Caltrans projects and helped pass the Complete Streets Bill. Let’s hope it sparks a new era of building streets for everyone at Caltrans, starting in 2025!
Worst way to announce the best news: E-Bike Incentive Project launch
The long-awaited statewide E-Bike Incentive Project accepted its first set of applications in December, preparing to give away 1,500 incentives out of a projected total of 15,000 currently available through the program. This is terrific news, and we hope more application windows will follow starting in early 2025. After more than two years of refining the program and the passing of many promised launch dates, the California Air Resources Board announced the first application window less than three weeks before the date, which sent everyone scrambling to get the word out or get ready to apply a week before Christmas, but why not? We didn’t have anything else to do right now. We’re thrilled the program has started the process of handing out vouchers, and we look forward to more application windows in 2025.
Best 2024 election news: New bike champions in the California legislature
Six of nine candidates CalBike endorsed for district elections won and three lost, two of them by the narrowest of margins. We’re looking forward to working with five new bike champions in the Assembly and one in the Senate this session, as well as the many returning active transportation supporters. We hope the other excellent candidates come back to run again in the near future.
Best California bike champion heading to the national stage: Laura Friedman
In the Assembly, Laura Friedman was a steadfast voice for active transportation and safer streets, sponsoring visionary legislation for 15-minute cities (which hasn’t passed — yet) and omnibus changes to the California Vehicle Code to make the streets safer for people on bikes (the OmniBike Bill, which passed in 2022). Friedman successfully ran to fill Adam Schiff’s congressional seat. We’re glad to have such a strong bicycle advocate in the U.S. Congress.
Worst way to save a fraction of California’s state budget: Defund the Active Transportation Program
It was a tough budget year in 2024, the second year of budget shortfalls. That left the governor and legislators with some hard decisions about where they could make cuts. For the second year in a row, Governor Gavin Newsom proposed cutting the Active Transportation Program, this time to zero. The ATP, which gives grants to local governments for projects that make biking and walking safer, is one of the smaller programs in California’s transportation budget. Every year, it’s more oversubscribed as the demand for Complete Streets grows. The legislature restored $200 million of the total $600 million that should have gone to the program, which meant only 13 out of dozens of worthy projects got funding in the most recent cycle. It was a small savings for the California budget but a big loss for safe streets.
Best reporting on the worst news for active transportation: Melanie Curry and Streetsblog California
Streetsblog California and the USA, LA, and SF Streetsblogs bring us indispensable reporting about the latest developments for biking, walking, public transportation, high-speed rail, urbanism, and much more every day. But we have to call out Streetsblog California’s editor, Melanie Curry, for fearlessly wading through the weeds to shed light on the arcane minutiae of the CTC and other administrative bodies. These agencies rely on their work being too dense and complex for the public to understand to operate with impunity out of public view; Curry’s reporting digs into the details to make critical information comprehensible and help hold state agencies accountable to the public.
Worst local bikeway decisions: tie — Richmond Bridge and Culver City bike lane removals
Adding a bikeway to a local street or bridge creates a valuable connection and a joyful ride or commute. Taking away an existing bikeway is a movement in the wrong direction — we aren’t going to beat climate change by driving like it’s the 1950s.
Proving they think bicycles are toys and Serious People drive cars, local politicians are pushing to remove the popular Richmond/San Rafael Bridge path, which provides a connection between Richmond and San Rafael for people biking and walking, replacing it with a car breakdown lane on weekdays and opening the bikeway only on weekends.
Culver City removed protected, already-built bike lanes, forcing people on bikes to share a lane with buses. As a result, the city will have to return $435 million in grant money that funded the original construction of the lanes.
Looking for a way to harm the climate while also taking a bite out of city budgets and stealing joy? Look no further than these two regressive projects. Way to not go, Culver City and Richmond/San Rafael Bridge.
Most fun while keeping bikeways clear of debris: Bicycle-powered street sweeper
The Napa County Bicycle Coalition got creative in its effort to keep Caltrans from killing a protected bikeway over street sweeping challenges. The advocacy group fundraised, bought a bicycle-pulled street sweeper, and adopted that section of roadway. If there’s a better way to have fun while cleaning, we haven’t heard of it.
Most dangerous marketing ploy: Labeling electric motorcycles as e-bikes and selling them to kids
To skirt the stricter rules for electric motorcycles and capitalize on the popularity of e-bikes, some manufacturers and retailers are marketing e-motorcycles that go much faster than allowable speeds for e-bikes under California law as e-bikes. The proliferation of these illegal e-motorcycles on our streets and bike paths fuels anti-e-bike sentiment, leading to discrimination against people riding legitimate e-bikes and discouraging people from riding bikes. We hope the industry and California regulators take action toward honest labeling of these illegal e-motorcycles.
Most compelling race: Which will be completed first, the Sagrada Familia or pedestrian-friendly crosswalks on Beach Boulevard in Orange County?
Construction began on architect Antoni Gaudi’s sprawling Sagrada Familia church in Barcelona in 1882 — and it’s still not finished. We’re still waiting for Caltrans to make Beach Boulevard, which starts at the Pacific Ocean and is a major thoroughfare through Orange County, a street that serves all users. Paris rebuilt Notre Dame in less than six years. We hope we don’t have to wait another 60 for Caltrans to reimagine Beach Boulevard.
Best click-bait title to break into the mainstream: Killed by a Traffic Engineer by Wes Marshall
Want to get the attention of traffic engineers and active transportation supporters alike? Call your book Killed by a Traffic Engineer. Wes Marshall’s tome is more than the best-titled transportation book of the year; it’s a fantastic read that makes a compelling case for radically changing the way we plan and manage our roadways.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/BestWorst-Header2024-scaled.jpg6562560CalBike Staffhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngCalBike Staff2024-12-23 17:23:492024-12-23 17:47:49CalBike’s Best and Worst of 2024
California’s E-Bike Purchase Incentive Project is distributing vouchers in a series of application windows. The first opportunity to apply was December 18, 2024. All 1,500 vouchers available in this window have been reserved. We will post upcoming application windows here and on our e-bike campaign page.
Pedal Ahead, the administrator CARB chose for this program, has published its own FAQs, which contain some additional information. Please note: Some of the information in the Pedal Ahead FAQs doesn’t agree with the information we have about the program. We have been told by CARB that some of the elements referenced in their FAQs are still under discussion. We will update our FAQs as we get additional information.
The official website for California’s E-Bike Incentive Project is live at ebikeincentives.org. You can get more information about how to apply for an incentive at that site, and bicycle manufacturers and retailers can sign up to participate.
Important note and we can’t emphasize this enough: There are not enough e-bike vouchers for everyone who qualifies and wants a bike. Think of it like the lottery — some people will succeed in getting vouchers, but many more will not. If you meet the program requirements, you still have to get in line during an application window and submit an application — and not everyone who gets in line will make it through the application process. The program has a limited scope and budget that can’t meet the tremendous demand.
CalBike continues to advocate for additional funding for this hugely popular program.
Note: This post was originally written October 19, 2022, and last updated December 20, 2024.
TL;DR version:
The first window to apply for statewide e-bike incentives was December 18, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. Applications are currently closed.
The program started distribution of the first 1,500 vouchers in December 2024. That’s about 10% of the total vouchers currently funded. More vouchers will be released in subsequent application windows.
The program is limited to California residents with income at or below 300% of the federal poverty level.
Applicants must be at least 18.
The voucher amount will be $1,750, with $250 additional for people below 225% FPL or living in a disadvantaged census tract.
Incentives are limited to one per person. There is no limit per household.
There are many local e-bike incentive programs. Visit our e-bike page for a full list.
What is California’s E-Bike Incentive Project?
The E-Bike Incentives Project is a program to provide vouchers to California residents to help them afford an e-bike. CalBike advocated for the budget allocation, which passed in 2021 and funds the pilot project. CARB has allocated additional funds for a total of $31 million, which will fund approximately 15,000 vouchers.
The California legislature hasn’t allocated ongoing funding for the program past the pilot, but CalBike will advocate for continued funding, and CARB appears committed to including e-bikes in its clean vehicle incentive programs.
When can I apply for a California e-bike incentive?
The first of several voucher application windows was December 18, 2024, at 6:00 pm Pacific time. More vouchers will be released during several application windows in 2025. We will provide application dates as soon as we have that information.
I signed up on the mailing list. Am I in line to get a voucher?
Joining the mailing list for the E-Bike Incentive Project or CalBike’s mailing list will give you timely updates on the program but it has no impact on your application status.
I meet all the qualifications for to get a voucher. Why can’t I get one?
We have heard from many people who are understandably disappointed and frustrated that they weren’t able to submit their application for an e-bike incentive during the most recent application window.
The reality is that CARB’s E-Bike Incentive Project is not like many of the other programs that benefit low-income Californians where applicants who meet the program criteria are guaranteed the benefit. The e-bike program has limited funding and a limited number of vouchers to distribute. Applications are taken during designated windows on a first-come, first-served basis and not everyone will be able to apply for a voucher. For context: during the first application window in December of 2024, nearly 100,000 people got in line for 1,500 vouchers.
CalBike continues to advocate for more funding for this program, but many people who want vouchers will not get them. However, there are many local e-bike incentive programs where you might have a better chance of getting assistance to buy an electric bike.
Will there be more e-bike incentives next year, or is this a one-time program?
The current plan envisions several application windows to distribute the $31 million currently available. The first application window is for 1,500 vouchers. We anticipate more application windows and opportunities to apply for a voucher in 2025.
How do I apply for a voucher from California’s statewide e-bike incentives program?
To apply, you’ll need documentation to prove that you meet the income qualifications. Once the application window opens at 6 p.m. on December 18, 2024, you can register through the website. You’ll be placed in a waiting room to enter the application portal. The first 1,500 people will advance and be able to complete the application.
Once your application is accepted, you’ll receive a code you can take to a participating e-bike retailer or online store. The amount of your voucher will be applied to your purchase, which can include gear such as racks, a lock, or a helmet, in addition to the bike.
You can find more information about the application process in the implementation manual.
How long does it take to apply for an e-bike incentive?
The online application process takes about 20-30 minutes. In addition, you might have to wait in line to access the application portal. During the first application window, people waited in line for up to 45 minutes. Being in line doesn’t guarantee that you’ll get to submit an application.
If you do get to submit your application, you can make the process faster by:
Having all your paperwork handy. You can find a list of documents to prove eligibility here. Have scans of the documents you’re using to prove eligibility or take a photo with your phone.
Watch the required e-bike safety and climate impact videos ahead of time. The safety video is 12 minutes long and the climate video is five minutes. Pre-watching will allow you to simply check those boxes and complete your application in about 10 minutes.
You don’t need to know what bike you want to purchase before you apply for the voucher. You will have 45 days to select and purchase your bike. If you need more time, you can request a 45-day extension.
I submitted an application. When will I get my voucher?
People who submitted applications should allow up to 60 days to receive their vouchers. Once your application is approved, you will receive an email with a voucher code you can take to a bike shop or online retailer to apply to the purchase of an e-bike.
The administrator will contact you if your application is missing any items needed for approval. If that happens, you must respond within 14 days to preserve your application reservation.
What are the requirements to apply for an e-bike incentive?
You will have to prove income eligibility and California residency.
Other requirements:
Be at least 18 years old
Purchase the bike within 45 days of incentive award with the option to extend for an additional 45 days
Own the bike for one year
Take a 12-minute bike safety education class online
Can more than one person in the same household apply for an e-bike voucher?
Yes.
Individuals can only get one voucher each, but there is no limit to how many people from the same household can apply as long as each person qualifies.
Who qualifies for the California e-bike incentive program?
Eligibility for the pilot program will be limited to people whose income is less than 300% of the federal poverty level. That means the income caps (based on 2024 FPL guidelines) would be:
Individual: $45,180
Family of 2: $61,320
Family of 3: $77,460
Family of 4: $93,600
Family of 5: $109,740
How much will the California e-bike incentives be?
The base incentive will be $1,750 for all types of e-bikes. The program will offer an additional $250 to people living below 225% of the federal poverty level or living in a disadvantaged community. The maximum incentive is $2,000.
Can I stack the California e-bike incentive with other e-bike incentives or rebates?
Yes.
If you qualify for a California voucher and an e-bike incentive from a local government, utility, transportation agency, or other entity, you may use both incentives toward the purchase of the same e-bike. This is called stacking. Some local programs are planning to work in tandem with the statewide incentives while others might not allow stacking; ask your local provider for more information.
What kinds of bikes qualify for incentives?
You can use the incentive to buy any type of e-bike, including a folding bike, cargo bike, or adaptive bike. All three classesof e-bikes will be eligible for the program. However, you will need to purchase from a list of approved e-bike models. You must purchase a bike with UL or EN safety certification.
E-bikes are grouped into three classes:
Class 1: pedal assist only, 20 mph speed limited — will qualify for the program
Class 2: pedal assist or throttle, 20 mph speed limited — will qualify for the program
Class 3: pedal assist only, 28 mph speed limited, helmets required, must be 16 or older to operate — likely to qualify for the program
Note: Only bicycles that include pedals, fall into one of these three classifications, and are offered by an approved retailer qualify for the incentive program. Other forms of electric mobility, such as scooters and mopeds, are not included.
Why isn’t the e-bike model I want on the approved list?
The list of approved e-bike models is not a definitive list of all e-bikes that might qualify for the California program. A manufacturer or retailer must apply to have a model added to the list. Further, not all e-bike brands meet the requirement to have a business location in California.
If you want to see a particular e-bike model added to the list, contact the manufacturer or a local retailer that carries it and ask them to apply to the program. The incentive program continues to add new e-bike models to the list.
Where can I buy an e-bike with a CARB incentive?
The program administrator has a list of qualifying bike retailers. You can buy from a bike shop or order an e-bike online. All e-bikes in the program must come fully assembled, you online retailers must provide assembly.
Do I have to know what bike I want before I apply for an incentive?
No. People who receive vouchers have 45 days to buy a bike. If you can’t make the purchase in that time, you can apply for an extension and get an additional 45 days. You must request the extension — it isn’t automatic.
However, we recommend visiting a bike shop and test-riding e-bikes if possible. All bikes are not the same. It’s important to get a bike with a frame that fits you and that you feel comfortable riding. A bike shop can help you with this.
What if I have to return my bike?
You are allowed to exchange a bicycle bought with an e-bike incentive. However, the voucher doesn’t cover the cost of return shipping for bikes purchased online. That’s why we recommend test-riding bikes before you make a purchase, if at all possible.
What qualifies as an adaptive bike?
CARB wants to keep the definition of adaptive bike as inclusive as possible. The category will most likely include tricycles and bikes modified for people with disabilities.
Can I use an e-bike incentive to buy a conversion kit?
No. A conversion kit allows you to add aftermarket electric power to a standard bike frame. Conversion kits are not eligible for incentives.
Can I get a rebate on an e-bike I already purchased?
No. The Electric Bicycle Incentives Project is not a rebate program. You need to apply and get approved before you purchase a bike in order to use the incentive.
If you recently bought an e-bike, you might qualify for a rebate from a local program such as 511ContraCosta. Check the list on our e-bike page and ask your local utility about rebates. In addition, if the E-BIKE Act passes Congress, you might be eligible for a federal tax credit.
Can I buy bike accessories to go with my bike?
Yes. If you are awarded an incentive through the California program and your bike purchase, including sales tax, is less than the amount of your voucher, you can buy gear for your ride with the remaining balance. Approved purchases include racks, helmets, reflective vests, and locks.
If I don’t get a voucher in December, when can I try again?
CARB has not set a date for the next round of e-bike incentives. We will let you know as soon as we have that information.
Can I get an e-bike voucher from CalBike?
No.
CalBike is not administering the e-bike incentives program. Our role is one of advocacy. We advocated for the creation of this purchase incentive, and we will continue to push for an expanded budget to support the program. CalBike also shares critical information about the program via our e-bike newsletter, and we help our member’s voices be heard so that the program better serves the people who need it most. CalBike does not process or distribute incentives.
CARB will manage the incentive distribution process through its third-party administrator starting in 2023. We will share information about how to apply once it’s available, but CalBike won’t be involved in processing applications or awarding e-bike incentive vouchers.
Where else can I get assistance to buy an e-bike in California?
The E-Bike Incentives Project is California’s first statewide e-bike voucher program. However, there are many regional and local programs where you might be able to get funding to help you buy an e-bike now.
SB 400, which CalBike helped pass in 2019, added an e-bike benefit to the Clean Cars for All program, which aims to take polluting cars off the road. If you have a qualifying car to turn in, incentives can be as high as $9,500, and you can use the funds to buy e-bikes and bike accessories for multiple family members. However, this program is administered by regional air quality management districts, and not all districts have added the e-bike benefit. We spoke to people who got this voucher in the Bay Area and Southern California to give you an idea of the process. Find out more details about the Bay Area program on this handy reference page.
In addition, there are numerous local programs through nonprofit organizations, utilities, and other entities. You can find many California programs on this list of global e-bike incentive programs.
Why can’t I get an incentive to buy a non-electric bike?
Excellent question. The current program covers only electric bike purchases, not standard or acoustic bikes. Electric bikes tend to be significantly more expensive than traditional bikes, so a purchase incentive may be the only way for many people to afford one. In addition, many people who don’t feel comfortable riding a standard bike because of age, health issues, the need to carry passengers or cargo, etc., may replace car trips with bike trips on an electric bike.
However, the classic bicycle is incredibly energy-efficient and elegant transportation, and some places do offer incentives to help residents buy non-motorized bicycles. For example, the French government is offering 400 Euros to citizens who trade their cars for a bike or e-bike. CalBike would love to see a program like this in California, and we will continue to explore ways to encourage more people to choose the joy of riding a bike.
How do I purchase a bike with an incentive?
The statewide incentive will be a point-of-sale benefit. Once you pick out a bike from a qualifying retailer, the incentive amount will be applied when you make the purchase. You don’t have to put out that money up front and get reimbursed.
I’m an e-bike retailer or manufacturer. How can I participate in the program?
Retailers can apply online through the program website. Qualifying retailers must have some kind of physical presence in California(a shop, office, or manufacturing facility), even if you sell your bikes exclusively online, and can only sell eligible models through the program. It’s not too late for retailers to participate.
Manufacturers with e-bike models that meet the program’s specifications can also get their bikes added to the list of eligible bikes. Please contact the administrator for information on how to apply.
Is California’s statewide program an expansion of the San Diego e-bike program?
No. Some press reports stated that California’s statewide purchase incentive was an expansion of a similar program in San Diego. This is incorrect.
CARB chose Pedal Ahead, an organization that runs an e-bike program in San Diego, to administer the statewide program. However, the CARB purchase incentives pilot will have rules and parameters determined by CARB in conjunction with input from advocates and the public. The statewide program is separate from and different from the San Diego program.
How do I get more information about the e-bike incentive program?
Have we mentioned that CalBike has an e-bike incentives interest list? Use the form below to add your name, and we’ll send periodic updates as we get more information, including letting you know when you can apply.
This post was originally published 12/11/24 and updated 12/16/24.
The California Air Resources Board announced that its much-delayed E-Bike Incentive Project would open for applications on Wednesday, December 18, 2024, at 6:00 pm PT. CARB won’t release all $31 million in vouchers on that date; it still plans to do a phased program, releasing a limited number of vouchers every few months. In the initial window, it will distribute 1,500 vouchers using about 10% of the program funding.
See the bottom of this post for links to informative videos about how to apply.
E-bike incentive program basics
The California vouchers are $1,750 and may be used to purchase an eligible e-bike from an approved retailer. The voucher can go toward the purchase of a bike, including sales tax, as well as accessories such as a helmet or panniers to go with the bike.
All the e-bike models in the program have safety-certified batteries. People who are awarded vouchers will have 45 days to choose an e-bike and make a purchase. The incentive is point-of-sale and will act as a discount applied to your purchase from an approved retailer. If you need additional time, you can get a one-time, 45-day extension to use your voucher.
You can buy an e-bike online through this program. However, the cost to return a bike purchased online is not covered by the voucher, and the shipping can be expensive. If you’re able to go in person to test-ride bikes, the program administrator recommends doing that. Finding the right fit is crucial when buying any bike, including an e-bike.
Only eligible California residents will receive vouchers
To qualify for an incentive, you must be over 18 and a California resident. You must also meet income requirements, and you’ll need documentation to verify your age, residency, and income. Participants in certain assistance programs are automatically income-eligible. Find out what you need to prove your eligibility.
The program is open only to people who earn 300% of the federal poverty level or less. People with income at or below 225% of the federal poverty level or who live in a disadvantaged community will qualify for an additional $250, for a total incentive of $2,000. You don’t need to know if you meet these additional criteria; the program administrator will verify your qualification for the additional incentive when it reviews your application, and the voucher will state the total incentive.
Many people will not get vouchers on December 18
If e-bike incentive programs in other states are any indication, demand for the vouchers will be very high. CalBike has an e-bike interest list of more than 20,000 people. As many as 10 million Californians are income-qualified for this program. There are only 1,500 vouchers available in this round. The math means that many people are likely to be disappointed.
At 6:00 p.m. on December 18, the application portal will open. At that time, people will be placed in a waiting room to be let in to apply, to prevent the site from crashing. You will be let in in the order you get onto the site. The program will only accept 1,500 applicants. You can’t pre-register to get in more quickly.
Unfortunately, we can’t offer any tips to improve your chances of being one of the lucky ones to make it through the traffic jam and complete an application. But remember that this is just the first of several application windows. CARB plans to give out around 15,000 incentives in total with the money already budgeted for this program. You’ll have another chance in 2025.
Helpful videos on the e-bike incentive application process
The program administrator has created a video to walk you through the application process.
If you still have questions about the application process, CalBike hosted a webinar on December 16, 2024 to go over the process and answer many questions from applicants.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/e-bike-single-man-cropped.jpg200544Kendra Ramseyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKendra Ramsey2024-12-16 19:09:352024-12-23 17:05:02California’s E-Bike Incentives Are Finally Here
