The Latest Archives

Looking Back Five Years: Biking During COVID

March 20, 2025/by CalBike Staff

We all remember where we were in March 2020: hunkered down at home or going out to essential jobs — wondering what would happen next and how to keep ourselves and the people we cared about safe. One silver lining: a bicycling boom thanks to quiet streets mostly free from traffic. The pandemic accelerated the Slow Streets movement and showed many more people what traffic-calmed neighborhoods could feel like.

During those early months, CalBike sprang into action. And many of our COVID campaigns have fed into our ongoing advocacy. Here’s what we’re reflecting on five years later.

Bike shops are essential businesses

With gyms closed and the need for outdoor exercise, many more people started biking. To keep their bikes moving, they needed bike shops for parts and repairs. Yet, in the early days, when only essential businesses were allowed to stay open, bike shops were closed.

CalBike worked hard to get bike shop employees classified as essential workers. Within a few weeks, we succeeded, and bike shops were able to support the burgeoning biking boom.

We continue to support local bike shops, championing their inclusion in the Electric Bicycle Incentive Project. And we’ve advocated for the California Air Resources Board to incorporate community bike shops, which offer classes, DIY repairs, and low-cost options to help people keep their bikes in good running order, into the program.

Bike exchange

Another challenge of the early days of the pandemic was to provide bikes for people who couldn’t afford to buy one. Bike Match stepped up to meet this challenge, connecting people with bikes they no longer used to people who wanted a bike. In some cases, volunteers repaired neglected bikes, sending them to their new owners in good working order. It was one of the many examples of kindness during that fraught time, and CalBike helped get the word out.

While many Bike Match programs have wound down, community bike shops, bicycle kitchens, and many community groups continue to match donated bikes with people who need them.

A template for creating Slow Streets

Many California communities created temporary Slow Streets during the pandemic. A Slow Street is limited to local traffic, making the street a safe place to play, walk, or ride a bike. CalBike spoke to local advocates from Oakland about that city’s Slow Streets program, using it as a model for others who wanted their community to follow suit.

The Slow Streets movement has only gained momentum in the last five years. While some pandemic Slow Streets have been removed, others have been made permanent, and local advocates have been working toward Slow Streets networks. CalBike has sponsored and supported bills to bring down vehicle speeds and introduce slow zones, including slow school zones bills and AB 43, which allows communities more latitude to reduce speed limits.

Quick-build to bring much-needed infrastructure online

CalBike’s support for quick-build began before 2020, but the pandemic was a moment when we needed much more safe infrastructure on an accelerated time schedule. It was also a time when we proved we could make big changes very fast, so it was a great moment to highlight quick-build. We partnered with Alta Planning + Design to create a quick-build guide. Our Quick-Build Bikeway Design Guide remains a vital resource today.

CalBike continues to advocate for quick-build, and many municipalities have adopted these methods to quickly deal with dangerous streets and intersections. This year, we’re sponsoring the Caltrans Quick-Build Pilot Bill, AB 891, which would create a pilot to test quick-build techniques on state-controlled roadways.

The pandemic showed we could work together, make sacrifices, and support each other in ways we couldn’t have imagined. It also reconnected many people with the simple pleasure of spending time outdoors, of riding a bike around their neighborhood or around the county. We hope we never go through something like that again, but five years on, we can see some positive things that came out of a dark time.

CalBike Opposes Bill Giving Fire Departments More Control of Bikeways

March 19, 2025/by Jared Sanchez

Response time and access for emergency responders are critical for safety. But, all too often, fire departments see the elements of street design that make our shared spaces safer for people biking and walking as barriers to fast response. Speed humps, protected bikeways, narrower lanes, and protected intersections that slow vehicle turning movements are among the features sometimes opposed by firefighters, without evidence that these features measurably slow response times. So CalBike, along with Streets for All and many local street safety advocates, opposes the Increase Fire Department Authority Bill, AB 612.

Firefighters are not traffic engineers

Fire codes requiring a street width of 20 to 26 feet have been used to oppose bike lanes that would narrow the vehicular space less than those widths, though often, the roadway space usable by fire vehicles would remain the same. With wildfires now more commonly encroaching on dense neighborhoods, this concern is heightened.

However, many older neighborhoods were built with narrow streets. Research on the correlation between street width and urban fire risk is sparse but seems to indicate that fire response times are shorter in dense, urban neighborhoods than in suburbs with wide streets.

While access to a fire is crucial, it’s unclear why bikeways would create impediments while the many other things taking up space on the street — parked cars, dumpsters, etc. — do not. Add to this the fact that the majority of calls firefighters respond to are medical emergencies rather than fires, and it would seem like bikeways, which slow vehicle speeds and reduce injuries and fatalities for all users, would be a benefit rather than a problem.

The right way to approach fire and street safety

Fire department concerns should be carefully considered when making changes to the layout of a street. However, uninformed opposition shouldn’t derail well-thought-out plans to make our shared space safer and more appealing for people biking and walking.

The Increase Fire Department Authority Bill would expand the veto power of fire departments on new road projects. This would force all California communities to consider access for fire vehicles first and road safety second, even though many more people die or are injured by traffic violence than by fires.

Providing fire departments with an additional poorly defined and poorly understood method of vetoing roadway safety projects will ultimately slow down or halt the shift toward safer roads in California’s cities. Fire departments have neither the resources nor the expertise to design streets and will have to rely on transportation departments to implement engineering changes.

There is a better way. Last year, the City of Berkeley created a street trauma prevention position within its fire department. That person will be responsible for mediating between the needs of vulnerable road users for safer streets and the access needs of first responders. It’s a bold and creative approach that could get fire departments beyond “no” to a more nuanced understanding of and approach to street safety.

CalBike opposes AB 612 as written but looks forward to working with the proponents. We hope to change the measure to one that supports a holistic approach to street safety. Today, CalBike, along with almost 30 allied organizations, sent the letter below, explaining our opposition to the bill unless it’s amended.

March 19, 2025 AB 612 Opposition Letter Download

California Legislators Stand Up for the Active Transportation Program

March 18, 2025/by Jared Sanchez

The Active Transportation Program (ATP) provides one of the only statewide funding sources dedicated to biking and walking infrastructure projects. It is chronically underfunded, receiving far more excellent applications than it can greenlight, and recent cuts have made the situation even more dire.

Now, 13 senators and assemblymembers have signed on to a letter to Governor Gavin Newsom, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, and Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, who chairs the Assembly Budget Committee. They are throwing their support behind the campaign to restore $400 million taken from the ATP in 2024.

Deep cuts to bike infrastructure

The ATP was targeted for cuts by the governor in the past two tight fiscal years. In 2023, legislators were able to restore funding for this program, which is one of California’s most equity-focused transportation programs and also one that reduces greenhouse gas emissions by making biking, walking, and taking transit safer and more appealing.

In 2024, legislators were only able to restore $200 million of the $600 million originally cut from the program. That allowed Cycle 7 of ATP grants to move forward, but the reduced funds meant that only 13 projects got funding, and local communities are rethinking their reliance on the ATP.

A demand to restore funding

Last year’s budget deal between the governor and the legislature called for restoring the $400 million cut from the ATP if future funds became available. CalBike and our allies have campaigned for the restoration of those funds, and that’s exactly what the letter signed by these legislators asks for. They note that $400 million could fund an additional 36 high-scoring projects from the ATP’s Cycle 7.

It’s rare for legislators to go on the record with a demand like this, and we commend them for supporting active transportation. If any of these legislators represents you, please send them a message thanking them.

Catherine Blakespear, Senate District 38

Damon Connolly, Assembly District 12

Mike Fong, Assembly District 49

Mark Gonzalez, Assembly District 54

Mike Gipson, Assembly District 65

John Laird, Senate District 17

Liz Ortega, Assembly District 20

Blanca Pacheco, Assembly District 64

Nick Schultz, Assembly District 44

José Solache, Assembly District 62

Esmeralda Soria, Assembly District 27

Tom Umberg, Senate District 34

Chris Ward, Assembly District 78

Budget Request Letter ATP Download

National Bike Summit (open thread)

March 13, 2025/by Kendra Ramsey

CalBike’s executive director, Kendra Ramsey, attended the League of American Bicyclists’ National Bike Summit, March 11-13, 2025. She sent us short updates from the Summit, which we posted in this open thread.

Thursday, March 13

Closing plenary

The closing plenary of the National Bike Summit featured one of the top transportation safety officials in the country, Chair Jennifer Homendy of the National Transportation Safety Board. Here are some of her words:

“We shouldn’t need stuff to feel safe. We can have all the stuff out there and it won’t matter; it just takes one,” she shared on the amount of gear Americans are expected to use while biking and walking to feel safe. “Safety is a right every road user should be able to expect. But the tragic reality is our system is failing.”

She continued: “Every single death, every single injury, is 100% preventable.”

She also discussed technology that can help create a safe system which protects all road users, including intelligent speed assist. She noted that it is no one’s right to break the law or take someone’s life.

She closed saying, “Anyone who can create a safer system can and should do so now.”

While I’ve been gone, my father in law has been taking my daughter out on her bike!

The final day of the National Bike Summit started with a panel on Responding to the Current Political Environment, which was both sobering and hopeful. Speakers suggested we filter out the noise and respond to the real challenges we face as a movement. The “noise” includes things like the information yesterday that any discretionary finding with the phrase “bike lane” will be frozen and reviewed. The real challenges include the “user pay, user benefit” model, which is being uplifted, and the false argument that bicyclists don’t pay taxes and shouldn’t be served by the transportation system.

Speakers highlighted that active transportation and healthy, prosperous communities are bipartisan issues, and that the reframing we may need to do to continue to secure funding is nothing new (wording changes with different leadership, so we’ve done this before!). If you ask most people if they think Americans should pay half of their income on housing and transportation, they would say no. Accordingly, we should be re-shaping our communities to meet the needs of our neighborhoods and our nation.

My next sessions cover the new AASHTO and NACTO bike guides, so I won’t bore you all with wonky details!

Wednesday, March 12

Another lobby day photo: most of the California folks from the evening reception on the Hill.

Lobby Day Part 2

I met with staff from Congresswoman Matsui’s office this afternoon (who represents Sacramento, where I live). We stressed the need to defend the funding of already awarded bike projects, and fight for active transportation funding in the next transportation reauthorization. They shared that with the current climate, having Republican support for our projects is more critical than ever, and suggested folks in our communities reach out to their republican Congresspeople to ask for critical bike projects to continue to be funded — especially those that have been frozen!

Lobby Day Part 1

We started the day with the Congressional Bike Ride, led by the Chair of the Congressional Bike Caucus, Mike Thompson of California’s District 4. He spoke about the importance of bicycling, and shared his motto “the bike is the cure.”

The California delegation regrouped at the Bike Lobby Day headquarters, then headed out for multiple meetings. I accompanied Anya McCann of North Natomas Jibe (@Jibewithus) to meet Congressmember Thompson outside of a Ways and Means Committee hearing. He was eager to hear how the Congressional Bike Caucus can be more helpful to the bike movement, and we discussed the threats to funding existing and future active transportation projects.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by California Bicycle Coalition (@calbikeorg)

Tuesday, March 11

Wednesday advocates from across California will be meeting with our elected representatives to share the successes of federal active transportation funding, and ask for support in continuing this critical support for our communities.

… more to come!

California delegation, National Bike Summit 2025

Bicycle Friendly Communities have twice the ridership of all communities in the US. -Bill Nesper, ED of the League of American Bicyclists

Americans of all backgrounds want stronger, healthier communities — Bill Nesper … and bicycling makes our communities stronger and healthier

Wes Marshall, author of Killed by a Traffic Engineer:

You can take zero transportation classes and graduate as a professional engineer. You can’t build the kind of streets that encourage people to walk or bike.

“Factor of Safety” mentality: engineers design so that “9 out of 10 drunk orangutans would survive a crash.” Wide clear zones protect the most out of control drivers by placing bicyclists and pedestrians right in the clear zone, where the drivers will crash.

Measuring fatalities by VMT makes us think roads are getting safer, but looking at it by population shows the true risk (exposure metric). Measuring based on VMT comes from a manual a car-maker produced, not based on any scientific reasoning.

Discussed the ineffectiveness of education campaigns when our roads are built for speed and the safety of car drivers. (Eye ball heads is a campaign from Colorado to get peds to make eye contact with drivers before crossing).

Tim Oey, me, and Justin Hu-Nguyen talk bike education in school at lunch.

Downtown protected bikeway tour, led by several staff from the District Department of Transportation. DC was planned by L’Enfant to have very wide streets for grandeur, which today results in the ability for road width to be repurposed for bikes. The protected bikeways in the downtown core form a comfortable network which has expanded steadily over the past decade. Many are two-way, complete with bike signalization. They’re working to do more permanent concrete/pour in place curbing instead of flex posts to add better protection with less need for maintenance.

Kendra Ramsey bike tour National Bike Summit 2025

CARB Proposes Changes for E-Bike Incentive Project

March 6, 2025/by Laura McCamy

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) held a work group meeting on March 5, 2025, to get feedback on proposed changes for the next application window of the E-Bike Incentive Project. Around 270 people attended the meeting, showing that interest in the program remains strong. Here is a summary of the proposed changes.

Current status of the program

CARB presented the current status of the program, including eligibility, specifications for eligible e-bikes, and the amount of the vouchers. Throughout the work group, questions and comments were a mix of concerns and issues with applying for vouchers and suggestions about proposed changes.

In the first application window, on December 18, 2024, there were 37,000 people in the waiting room by the time the portal opened at 6:00 p.m. Applicants in the work group reported being confused about the process and the difference between the waiting room and being in queue to apply.

By 6:42 p.m. on December 18, the first 1,500 people had completed their applications and the portal closed. At that point, there were nearly 100,000 people in line hoping to get e-bike vouchers. In the weeks after the launch, CARB and the program administrator fielded 20,000 inquiries about the program.

As of March 5, almost all of the first 1,500 applications have been reviewed, and 800 people have redeemed vouchers to buy e-bikes, amounting to a disbursement of approximately $1 million. CARB reported that 97% of applicants so far fall into the high-priority categories because they make less than 225% of the federal poverty level, live in an environmentally disadvantaged community, or live in a low-income census tract.

Proposed improvements for the next application window

Attendees had numerous complaints about the chaotic application process in the first window. People would like to be able to set up an account ahead of time and upload their paperwork. Unfortunately, according to Shaun Ransom, the CARB staffer in charge of the E-Bike Incentive Project, the cost to create all those accounts is prohibitive because interest is so high.

Several people, including those representing community-based organizations (CBOs) partnering with the project complained that the short notice for the first application window (less than two weeks) didn’t give them or their communities enough time to prepare. CARB promised to give 30 days notice of future application opportunities and send multiple emails to alert people to get ready.

Some commenters thought the windows were or should be a lottery. The first come, first served model disadvantages people with slower internet speeds or less access to technology. CARB’s proposal for the next application window is to add a randomizer, making selection more like a lottery. Applicants would have a half hour window during which they could enter a waiting room. After 30 minutes, the waiting room would close and the randomizing software would choose 1,500 people at random. Those people would get a link to enter the application portal. Those not chosen would be notified immediately and wouldn’t need to wait in line.

Administering a program with such overwhelming demand presents technical challenges. Despite rumors and reports to the contrary, the first window went relatively smoothly and avoided crashing the servers. CARB’s proposed changes should make the process clearer for applicants and fairer for those who need more time to log on to the website.

A greater role for community organizations

The CBO network working with the E-Bike Incentive Project raises awareness of the program among underserved communities and helps members of those communities navigate the application process and buy an e-bike. However, CBO representatives reported having little to do after the first launch because few or none of the people they serve were able to secure vouchers. CARB presented a proposal to administer 500 vouchers directly through CBOs to allow them to connect people with the greatest need of inexpensive, sustainable transportation to the incentive program.

CalBike has advocated for direct distribution through CBOs. It gives people who might have a hard time applying online because of issues with internet access, language barriers, disabilities, or other barriers a chance to benefit from the program. CBOs can identify people who are likely to get the most use from an e-bike and provide after-purchase support with group rides and in-person safety classes.

However, the current CARB proposal is to distribute 500 vouchers through CBOs and 1,000 through the online portal during the next application window. We believe the pace of distribution is too slow, particularly given the enormity of the need. We will urge CARB to make the CBO distribution additive to the total vouchers available in the window, rather than subtractive, and distribute 2,000 vouchers during the next application cycle.

Program administrator applications opening

CARB awarded the contract to administer the initial $10 million approved by the legislature to Pedal Ahead. The agency later added another $3 million to the program and allocated an additional $18 million in a subsequent budget. The additional $3 million was initially added to the first $10 million contract but may now be shifted to the second tranche of funding, increasing that to $21 million.

Applications to administer the second tranche of funding will open and close in the second quarter of 2025. CARB plans to announce the third-party administrator for the next round of e-bike incentives in the third quarter of this year.

A recording of the work group will be available in two weeks, and we’ll add it to this post. In the meantime, here are the slides.

CA Ebike Incentive Program WG Slides_March_5_2025 – Solicitation and Workgroup Download

California to Launch Bike Highway Pilot Program Under Bennett Bill

March 6, 2025/by CalBike Staff

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 6, 2025

Contact: Michelle Sevilla, Michelle.Sevilla@asm.ca.gov (805) 485-4745 ext. 10638

Jared Sanchez, jared@calbike.org (714)262-0921

(SACRAMENTO) – Assemblymember Steve Bennett (D-Ventura) introduced AB 954, which would launch a pilot program for Caltrans to develop a bike highway program. Offering full separation from motor vehicles, bike highways accommodate high volumes of people traveling longer distance on bicycles (more than 3 miles) by connecting users to major destinations, employment centers, and transit hubs. CalBike is a sponsor of this measure.

Bike highways offer an important alternative to residents seeking relief from rising gas prices, and those working to lower their carbon footprint. In June 2022, Caltrans released a Bay Area Bike Highway Study that identifies feasible opportunities to add these corridors and incorporates best practices most suitable for the region. With the U.S. importing an estimated 2.4 million e-bikes between 2020-2023, commuting longer distances by bike is becoming more feasible for the average consumer. California prioritizes bicycling as a key part of its larger decarbonization goals, and is among 19 states offering assistance to purchase an e-bike with the launch of the California E-Bike Incentive Program in late 2024. The State of California was recognized as the 4th most Bicycle Friendly State in the Country by the League of American Bicyclists in December 2024.

“I’d like to see California elevate our offerings to our residents,” said Assemblymember Steve Bennett. “We must strengthen and diversify the connections neighborhood to neighborhood and from city to city. Bike highways provide the highest sense of safety and will attract more people to take advantage of their bikes. If you build it, they will come.”

“The Bicycle Highways Bill will create a safe, separated bikeway network, similar to California’s highway system,” said CalBike Policy Director Jared Sanchez. “This is an essential step to make getting around by bike a viable option for more Californians. We know better infrastructure leads to more biking and we know that more biking is crucial to combat climate change, so CalBike is excited to sponsor this bill.”

Kate Faulkner, Government Liaison for Channel Islands Bike Club said: “Channel Islands Bicycle Club, representing over 300 members, supports the Bicycle Highway Bill. Bike Highways will reduce traffic congestion, improve fitness and health, and provide travel options for those who don’t feel safe cycling on roads. Studies have shown that many people, particularly families, women, and seniors, would choose to bike if safe options are convenient and available.”

“The Bicycle Highway Pilot Program under AB 954 is a vital investment in both infrastructure and people. For BikeVentura.org, it’s an opportunity to expand our mission of delivering critical bicycle safety education to underserved communities, ensuring they can thrive in a transportation system designed with equity and safety at its core. BikeVentura stands proudly with Assemblymember Bennett on this transformative initiative,” said Lawrence Abele, Board Member of Bike Ventura.

Assemblymember Bennett has supported active transportation throughout his tenure in the State Legislature and the Ventura County Board of Supervisors. He is chair of the Budget Subcommittee No. 4 on Transportation, Climate Change, Natural Resources, and Energy.

Advocates Fight Potential Loss of Bike/Ped Access to Richmond-San Rafael Bridge

March 5, 2025/by Laura McCamy

Robert Prinz from Bike East Bay and Warren Wells from the Marin County Bicycle Coalition contributed to this post.

Note: This post has been updated to reflect the new hearing date.

Bay Area bicycle coalitions, with support from a broad range of local groups plus statewide and national advocates, have been fighting for over a year to keep the bike path on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge open 24/7. The Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) will hold a final vote to decide the fate of the path on Thursday, April 3, 2025 — two weeks later than the original date.

CalBike will attend the April 3 hearing and testify, and we hope you will, too, no matter where you live. If you’ve ever ridden over this bridge, you know the value of having bike access connecting the East Bay and Marin County. You can testify virtually; sign up to be notified when the item comes up.

Update: The hearing date has been pushed back to April 3, 2025. You can still sign up to get notified when to testify and it’s still crucial for supporters of bicycle and pedestrian access to this vital bay crossing to speak up.

A local fight with statewide implications

CalBike doesn’t usually get involved in campaigns for local infrastructure other than offering support when asked. Our local partners are excellent at this advocacy and know their territory better; plus, we don’t have the capacity to weigh in on the many local projects throughout California. However, we feel the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge fight has statewide implications and calls for support from allies around California.

Last year, we signed onto a letter in support of the path with many other organizations.

Richmond-San-Rafael-Bridge-path-coalition-letter Download

A brief history of the RSR Bridge bike/ped path

Advocates, including CalBike, have worked for decades to gain bicycle access to all of the Bay Area’s toll bridges. CalBike has supported measures to keep the bicycle and pedestrian pathways on our bridges toll-free to ensure the broadest access, including the passage of AB 2669 in 2024, making toll bridges free permanently for people walking and biking.

Securing a path on the Richmond-San Rafael was a decades-long effort. The path, placed in what was formerly a breakdown lane, opened in the fall of 2019 for a four-year pilot period. It has proven immensely popular and spurred cities on both sides of the bridge to upgrade their bicycle infrastructure to improve access. Automated counters installed on the bridge show that more than 400,000 people have walked or ridden across the bridge since the path opened. Many of these are people going to work, school, and other destinations across the bridge — trips that would likely be by car without the bike path.

For more information on the project, visit the Bike East Bay or Marin County Bicycle Coalition websites.

Bridge access threatened

Opponents of the path started a movement to get rid of the path on Mondays through Thursdays, converting it into a car breakdown shoulder by moving an existing zipper barrier. The shoulder would be converted back into a biking and walking path only Thursday evening through Sunday evening under this plan.

The plan includes a shuttle for people who want to cross with a bike, but the hours are limited, it wouldn’t accommodate adaptive bicycles, it will only come every half hour outside commute hours, and future funding is uncertain. People biking and walking would have continuous access to the Richmond-San Rafael crossing for just three days out of the week.

Those favoring adding more traffic on the bridge cite increased pollution in Richmond and worsening traffic, even though the air quality study they point to does not show an impact from the path. Emissions data has shown reduced pollution on the upper deck where the trail was added but increased pollution during winter months on the lower deck with the additional car lane.

Caltrans data shows only a slight increase in commute times. Travel speeds on the upper deck of the bridge are lower since the path was added and there’s been a significant reduction in collisions on that level, while the number of crashes has increased on the lower deck where a third car lane was added.

Ultimately, attempting to “fix” car congestion by making it easier to drive will lead to more traffic, more pollution, and just as much congestion. Induced demand is real, no matter how much people want to wish it away.

Protecting the right to bike and walk everywhere

Bicycle and pedestrian access to California’s bridges is crucial. Bridges are vital links between communities that can’t be replicated on surface streets. This is particularly true in the Bay Area, where bridges provide connections across the snaking arms of the San Francisco Bay.

The Richmond-San Rafael pathway pilot has been a success. People bike and walk across the span for recreation and commuting. Moving forward, we need more options for active transportation, not fewer.

CalBike is showing up to speak up for bridges that serve everyone. We hope you will too.

CalBike Virtual Summit Session Highlights Active Transportation Funding Sources

February 28, 2025/by Kendra Ramsey

On February 20, 2025, CalBike held the first in a series of virtual Summit Sessions, a quarterly webinar series continuing the groundbreaking discussions of the California Bicycle Summit throughout the year. Over 150 people attended the webinar, Creative Approaches to Funding Active Transportation Infrastructure, where a panel of speakers shared diverse resources municipalities can use to fund biking and walking infrastructure.

Thinking outside the ATP

The Active Transportation Program (ATP) is California’s only dedicated funding source for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects. The program disburses grants in two-year cycles, funded through federal and state sources including Senate Bill 1 gas tax funds. The program is consistently oversubscribed and only able to award the highest-scoring projects, demonstrating the need for additional funding sources for active transportation projects.

California Transportation Commission Deputy Director for Traditional Programming Laurie Waters gave a high-level overview of six programs beyond the ATP:

State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
Caltrans State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP)
Local Streets and Roads Program
Local Partnership Program
Solutions for Congested Corridors

For each program, Waters outlined the amount of funding available, what percentage of it is competitive versus granted to agencies based on a distribution formula, the types of projects typically funded, and the name of the program manager at CTC. Her slides are below. Relevant to the discussion, CalBike won a major victory in 2024 with the passage of the Complete Streets Law, which will increase active transportation and transit improvements in SHOPP projects in coming years.

Waters CalBike Funding Presentation New.pptx Download

Housing + active transportation

Brianne Logasa, an associate planner with the California Strategic Growth Council (SGC), and Marc Caswell, an advisor with SGC, presented on Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) funding for transportation projects. AHSC receives 20% of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, with revenue generated through California’s Cap and Trade program.

The minimum grant through AHSC is $10 million, with transportation projects capped at $15 million. A typical project might include infill affordable housing, park space, sidewalks and paths, and bikeways. This funding can be used for a range of amenities beyond sidewalks and bike lanes, including bike racks, wayfinding, lighting, and bike racks on buses.

Local agencies can partner with developers to implement active transportation elements in coordination with new housing development. By pairing sustainable transportation with infill housing, AHSC is an effective way to combat climate change. This program rewards projects with a bold vision for transforming neighborhoods.

The slides from this presentation are below.

AHSC-General-Calbike2025 Download

Alternative funding on the street in San Diego

Omar Atayee, a principal engineer with the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), presented on the Imperial Avenue Bikeway Project, which was funded in part by an AHSC grant. He broke down the elements of this ambitious San Diego project covering more than three miles of a major urban street.

The foundation for the project was SANDAG’s regional bike plan, with Imperial Avenue as a connection on its regional bikeway network. Atayee walked through the multiple funding sources the agency used to secure funding for the project and the partnerships that made the project work. The Imperial Avenue Bikeway provides a real-world example of the types of transformative projects that can be funded through a combination of sources, including AHSC.

The slides from his presentation are below.

02-20-2025 Cal Bike Summit Sessions Program (SANDAG)Download

Green transportation programs through CARB

Joey Juhasz-Lukomski, a program manager at the Shared Use Mobility Center, a nonprofit that works with the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) to implement several sustainable transportation funding programs, including the Clean Mobility Options (CMO) program. CMO Grants allow up to $100,000 for needs assessments to ensure SANDAG was using the funding where it was most needed.

Projects can include up to $1.8 million for capital costs and four years of operations for bikeshare, car share, and other mobility pilot programs.

Juhasz-Lukomski also talked about funding through the Sustainable Transportation Equity Project (STEP), also funded through CARB. STEP offers grant funding for things like zero-emissions transit, bike lanes, bikeshare, infrastructure, education, and tree planting. At least one community benefit organization (CBO) or local or tribal government needs to be part of every STEP project.

At the moment, no additional rounds of funding for CMO and STEP have been secured, but the state transportation budget could provide additional rounds if legislators see value in these programs. Juhasz-Lukomski’s slides are below.

CalBike_CMOSTEP_slides_2025.2.18_JJL.pptx Download

The California Bicycle Summit is a biennial gathering of advocates, planners, and thought leaders in the active transportation movement.

Watch the webinar.

CalBike’s 2025 Legislative Agenda

February 25, 2025/by Jared Sanchez

The deadline to submit legislation in Sacramento has passed, so we have a preliminary look at CalBike’s legislative agenda. Despite new limits on the number of bills each legislator can submit, there are many bills of interest to people who care about active transportation and safer streets.

Some of the bills we expect to support (or oppose) have been filed but the specific language is still in the development stage, so we’ve put them on our watch list for now. We’ll provide updates as bill provisions become clearer.

Here are the bills CalBike is sponsoring, supporting, or monitoring at the very beginning of the legislative session.

CalBike sponsors bills for better bike infrastructure, e-bike classification

CalBike is sponsoring or co-sponsoring three bills we think will bring significant positive changes to California streets and make our shared spaces safer for vulnerable road users.

Caltrans Quick-Build Pilot (AB 891, Zbur): Quick-build allows public agencies to respond quickly to unsafe road conditions by adding paint, planter boxes, soft-hit bollards, and other inexpensive infrastructure for bicycle and pedestrian safety. This bill would establish the Quick-Build Project Pilot Program within Caltrans, allowing the agency to implement more Complete Streets on state-controlled roadways without a yearslong planning and funding process. Many local governments already use quick-build to test new bikeways and other active transportation infrastructure; this will allow the same safety interventions on the state routes that serve as local main streets or popular bike routes.

Bicycle Highways Bill (AB 954, Bennett): California has a highway system for motor vehicles, so why not an interconnected network of separated bikeways that allow for safe, fast bicycle transportation? This bill would create a pilot program at Caltrans. It’s an excellent step toward making the bike an appealing and convenient transportation option for more Californians.

Illegal E-Motorcycle Classification (SB 455, Blakespear): Much of the concern about e-bikes on California streets is actually about electric motorcycles and mopeds illegally marketed as e-bikes and often sold to underaged riders. Selling e-motorcycles as e-bikes allows sellers to circumvent California regulations about registration and licensing and puts unsuspecting buyers at risk. The language of the bill is still being written, but the author’s intent is to clarify state regulations, remove gray areas, and specify penalties for violations.

CalBike’s active transportation slate

We’re starting the session with five excellent bills in our active transportation slate. Look for more bills to be added to this slate.

School Streets Bill (AB 382, Berman): For now, this bill is a placeholder with provisions to be added. If it’s similar to Berman’s 2024 school zone safety bill, it will clarify and strengthen regulations to keep students safe from traffic violence as they walk into school. We look forward to working with our partners and the sponsor as this bill evolves.

Caltrans Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (AB 1132, Schiavo): Extreme weather events, made more frequent by climate change, impact California’s transportation systems. Highway 1 has repeatedly been shut down by slides in Northern California, as were train tracks in Southern California. Fires in Paradise and Los Angeles showed the vulnerability of our escape routes. This bill requires Caltrans to identify what makes communities resilient to climate-caused transportation disruptions. It’s an excellent first step toward making all California communities more climate resilient.

Remove Bikeway Roadblocks Bill (SB 71, Wiener): Green transportation champion Senator Scott Wiener is building on his past work to make it easier to build transit and active transportation projects. California’s CEQA environmental review law has been used to stall the building of bikeways and the adoption of bike plans. In recognition of the fact that public transit, biking, and walking have positive environmental impacts, this seeks to make a current temporary CEQA exemption permanent.

Sustainable Transportation Permitting (SB 445, Wiener): Climate disasters are accelerating; we must accelerate our responses. One of the best antidotes to climate change is providing no-carbon transportation options. To that end, this bill speeds up the permitting and construction of sustainable transportation projects. It will have the additional benefit of allowing communities to fix dangerous roadways more quickly, thus reducing the heavy toll of traffic violence.

Safe Crossings Save Lives (SB 671, Cervantes): This bill would beef up requirements for walk signals to make them more pedestrian-friendly. One of the most important provisions is a requirement for the state to inventory the status of existing pedestrian signals. This will show which intersections aren’t using the latest technology or programmed for maximum pedestrian safety; it will highlight where funding and maintenance are needed and improve safety at intersections.

Bills we’re watching

There are a number of bills that could get added to CalBike’s support list once their provisions are clearer, and some we might oppose. In addition to the bills listed below, we are watching several bills that we don’t have all the details about. Check our Legislative Watch page for updates as we learn more.

State highway work zone speed safety program (AB 289, Haney): Establishes a speed enforcement system through Caltrans.
E-bike reflector requirement (AB 544, Davies): This bill would require e-bikes to have a rear red reflector or light visible at 500 feet at all times of day.
E-bike clarification (AB 545, Davies): Further clarification of the definition of an e-bike to include fully operable pedals and a motor that can’t exceed 750 watts.
Highway Design Manual: Increase Fire Department authority (AB 612, Rogers): This bill would give local fire departments greater say in active transportation improvements.
Illegal Electric Motorcycles (AB 875, Muratsuchi): The illegal e-motorcycle bill CalBike is sponsoring clarifies the regulations differentiating e-bikes from motorcycles. This bill invites police officers to confiscate e-motorcycles, which could lead to disproportionate enforcement against BIPOC Californians.
The Safe, Sustainable, Traffic-Reducing Transportation Bond Act of 2026 (AB 939, Schultz): This bill would put a $20 billion state bond on the 2026 ballot. The money would be divided among a range of transportation projects, including active transportation and micromobility. We’re looking forward to more details about where the funds would go.
Higher fines for minors not wearing helmets (AB 965, Dixon): This bill is exactly what the name says.
E-bike Disclosure for Parents and Minors (AB 968, Boerner): This bill would add a requirement that e-bike manufacturers and distributors include a warning about risks and responsibilities if a minor operates the bike.
Intelligent Speed Assistance for Dangerous Drivers (AB 981, Gipson): The governor vetoed the bill we cosponsored to add ISA to all new cars in California. This would require people convicted of reckless driving offenses to install the system in their cars.
Caltrans Slower Streets (AB 1014, Rogers): A bill to lower speed limits on state highways.
Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025 (AB 1243, Addis): This bill would put a price on damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions and require emitters to pay into a superfund program administered by CalEPA.
Regional housing needs and transportation plans (AB 1275, Elhawary): This bill would move California toward integration of housing and transportation plans to build more housing near transit, jobs, schools, etc.
San Francisco Bay Area Local Revenue Measure (SB 63, Wiener/Arreguin): This is a third try at authorizing legislation to develop a predictable operational revenue source to ensure the future of Bay Area transit providers.
Study for road and safety improvements (SB 78, Seyarto): A Caltrans study to identify high-collision spots and projects to improve safety at those locations.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (SB 220, Allen): Updates rules about membership on the board of directors of LA Metro.
EMotos (SB 586, Jones): Yet another bill targeting the proliferation of two-wheeled electric vehicles, this one creates an eMoto category of off-road vehicles.
Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Act of 2025 (SB 684, Menjivar): The senate counterpart of Assembly Bill 1243 (see above).

We will undoubtedly add, remove, and move bills on this list. CalBike’s Legislative Watch page has the most up-to-date information. Subscribe to CalBike’s newsletter for regular updates on the most crucial bills for active transportation and periodic reassessments of the status of all the bills we’re supporting or watching.

Bikeway Removals Must Stop

February 25, 2025/by Laura McCamy

Mary Daval from Culver City and Michael Swire from San Mateo contributed to this post.

Getting approval and funding to build new bikeways can be an uphill battle. However, once a lane or bike path is approved and installed and people get to experience enhanced safety and traffic calming for all road users, it’s rare for cities to take bike lanes out. Unfortunately, two California cities may be doing just that.

“When they go low, we go local” in Culver City

In 2021, Culver City got funding from a Metro Active Transportation (MAT) grant to help fund a project called Move Culver City. The stated goal of the project was to “create mobility options for everyone.” The project removed a lane of car traffic from Culver Boulevard and added a dedicated bus lane and a bike lane.

In 2023, a new city council voted to modify the project to add back the removed car lane. They accomplished this by taking out the protected bike lane and creating a shared bike and bus lane, a solution that negates gains for both biking and transit.

The ostensible reason for ripping out the bike lanes and increasing car space was congestion. Now that the removal is complete in what officials call Move 2.0, local advocates report that congestion is just as bad during peak hours and drivers move at freeway speeds during off-peak times.

Culver City advocate Mary Daval said, “We’re so far from Vision Zero. We’re so far from safe streets. We know terrible things have happened on the Move corridor.”

The MAT grant could be reduced by around $500,000 if Culver City maintains the project in its current configuration without protected bike lanes. However, residents recently elected a new city council that’s more friendly to active transportation. Since the project is a quick build, advocates hope that the original configuration can be restored. They are looking for crash and traffic data to point the way to an evidence-based plan for safer streets.

Local advocates aren’t giving up, despite a federal administration that is unfriendly to active transportation, citing a Culver City saying: “When they go low, we go local.”

Pedaling backward in San Mateo

San Mateo’s City Council recently decided to pursue removal of half a mile of separated bike lanes on Humboldt Street. The bike lanes offer greater safety for people biking and walking on a street known as one of the least safe in the city for vulnerable road users. The bike lanes provide access to multiple schools serving 6,000+ students and were paid for with a federal grant. Humboldt is in an equity-priority neighborhood, with almost 20% of residents unable to afford the high cost of auto ownership.

San Mateo could spend up to $3 million to rip out these bike lanes — money that could have been better spent on the dozens of projects that remain on hold in the City’s Bicycle Master Plan. It’s sad that there is never enough money (at the state or local level) to build bikeways, but there is always funding to expand car storage.

There is still time to save the San Mateo bike lanes. You can sign the petition and contact Move San Mateo to find out how to get involved.

Bike advocate Mike Swire told CalBike: “We are extremely disappointed in the San Mateo City Council’s decision to potentially spend millions of taxpayer dollars to rip out critical safety infrastructure next to several schools, in an Equity Priority Area where 20% of residents don’t own cars and the streets have the highest crash rates in the city.”

Swire added, “Meanwhile, San Mateo just saw its third vulnerable road user die in the past five months. Why should free car storage on public streets take priority over safety for those who bike and walk to get around?”

CalBike supports advocates in their efforts to save these critical bike lanes. While most of our work is at the state level, we sometimes partner with local advocacy groups to provide support on issues of statewide significance. We hope removing bikeways doesn’t become a trend across California.