Sacramento — CalBike is disappointed to see no increase in funding for active transportation in Governor Gavin Newsom’s May revise. As it has become clear there will be no leadership from Washington on climate change, active transportation, and safe streets, it’s more imperative that California step up and work toward its goals on climate and safety.
Last year’s budget stripped $400 million from California’s highly effective Active Transportation Program (ATP), which funds biking and walking infrastructure around the state. The deep cut left this essential program crippled. It was only able to hand out 13 grants in the most recent cycle, leaving many shovel-ready safe streets projects in limbo, waiting for funding.
“Active transportation projects give us the biggest bang for our buck,” said CalBike Policy Director Jared Sanchez. “Yet the governor consistently cuts sustainable transportation while leaving funding for our unsustainable legacy transportation systems untouched.”
Four hundred million dollars might build a few miles of highway, but it goes a long way for active transportation infrastructure. Restoring that money to the ATP could greenlight two dozen critical projects to build safe bikeways, intersections, paths, and more.
CalBike calls on the legislature to step up where the governor has not and restore the $400 million taken from the ATP. It’s time to stop throwing money at expensive highway boondoggles that worsen the climate crisis and invest in a transportation system that will carry California into the future, which includes active transportation as a key component.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/California_State_Capitol_in_Sacramento.jpg10001500Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-05-14 14:26:202025-05-14 14:26:20California’s Transportation Spending Has the Wrong Priorities
The Slow Streets movement wasn’t new when the pandemic hit in 2020. Berkeley had restricted traffic on neighborhood streets that became bike boulevards decades earlier. But the sudden demand for safe space to walk and bike when everyone was staying home fueled a surge in Slow Streets.
Slow Streets are shared spaces where only local car traffic is permitted and people walking, biking, and rolling take precedence in the street. Cars must travel slowly, being mindful of the shared space.
Many of the programs instituted by California cities at the height of the pandemic were temporary, taken down once life began to return to normal. But the experience of the freedom of Slow Streets left a lasting impression and a movement for spaces where kids can safely play in urban environments.
On Wednesday, May 28, 2025, at 10 am, CalBike will host a webinar on Slow Streets as part of our Summit Sessions 2025 series. Robin Pam, from KidSafeSF, and Shannon Hake from the San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Agency (SFMTA) will share experiences from the advocacy and government agency sides of creating and implementing Slow Streets. And Justin Hu-Nguyen and Robert Prinz from Bike East Bay will talk about a Slow Streets pop-up that their bike coalition just did on one of the Berkeley streets that was a Slow Street during the pandemic.
Some of the biggest victories for car-free and car-lite streets in California have been in San Francisco in the past few years. Advocates won a car-free JFK Drive through Golden Gate Park, then won it a second time — decisively — when opponents took the fight to the ballot box. More recently, the Great Highway near Ocean Beach, which was car-free during the pandemic, became a permanent park and promenade space.
SFMTA has a program formalizing neighborhood Slow Streets shared by local car traffic and people biking, walking, and rolling, and local advocates continue to work with the city to expand safe spaces for people of all ages to enjoy.
Slow Streets in the East Bay
Bike East Bay recently hosted a pop-up Slow Street on 9th Street in West Berkeley. The street is part of Berkeley’s extensive network of bikeways, and parts of it are a shared Bicycle Boulevard. Advocates see a better way to create a safe space for biking and walking, and their pop-up gave people a chance to experience and provide feedback on potential features for the street in a future redesign. Learn best practices for bringing Slow Streets to your community at CalBike’s webinar.
Pedal Ahead, the administrator of this program for the California Air Resources Board (CARB), has published its own FAQs.
Note: We update these FAQs as new information becomes available. This post was originally published on October 19, 2022, and last updated May 9, 2025
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.
TL;DR version:
The next application window will be May 29, 2025.
The program began distributing vouchers in December 2024. The April 29, 2025, application window was canceled and rescheduled due to technical issues that kept some people from accessing the waiting room.
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.
Demand continues to grow for this program, and there are a limited number of vouchers. Check out one of the many local e-bike incentive programs for more options. 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?
Vouchers will be released during limited application windows. We will post the dates of new application windows as soon as we know them. CARB usually announces application dates two to three weeks ahead of time.
I tried to apply for a voucher in the past. Did the system save my information?
No. You must start your application from scratch in each application window. Demand for this program is very high, so the administrator’s systems are unable to save information from people who haven’t yet been through the whole process.
What is the process to apply for a voucher from California’s statewide e-bike incentives program?
Be sure you have the required documentation and that you meet the income qualifications. The online waiting room will be open for an hour before the application window opens on Thursday, May 29, 2025, allowing everyone time to log on.
Important: Once you’re in the waiting room, do not close your browser window. Navigate to that window a few minutes before the deadline and do not leave.
Everyone who’s in the waiting room at the end of the hour during the next application window will receive a randomly assigned number generated by a software program. That designates your place in line.
This application window will distribute 1,000 vouchers. If you’re assigned a number of 2,000 or below, stay in line. Even if you’re over 1,000, you might get through if people ahead of you drop off. Once the required applications are completed, the portal will close.
If you apply for a voucher, the administrator will confirm your eligibility. Once your application is accepted, you’ll receive a code you can take to a participating e-bike retailer or online store. This process can take several weeks, so please be patient. 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 and you can also watch a webinar CalBike hosted to answer questions about the process.
What if I can’t apply online?
People who aren’t able to apply through the online portal may request a paper application from the administrator. Requests for paper applications will be randomized using the same system as the online portal, so people who want vouchers have the same chance of being able to apply by either method.
I meet all the qualifications 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.
I signed up on the mailing list. Am I in line to get a voucher?
No. The only way to apply for an e-bike voucher is by going to https://www.ebikeincentives.org/apply/ during a designated application period. There is no waitlist for this program.
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.
Will there be more e-bike incentives, or is this a one-time program?
The current plan envisions several application windows to distribute the $31 million currently available.
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.
The question of whether municipalities have a responsibility to maintain safe streets without hazards that could injure people riding bikes has been raised in California recently. CalBike joined an amicus brief in a court case that could have let cities off the hook if injured bike riders had signed a third-party waiver. Thankfully, the California Supreme Court struck that down. However, the Los Angeles City Attorney is lobbying for a state law to cap awards and limit liability for cities that fail to maintain their streets everywhere in California.
Here’s where bike riders’ rights are being challenged and what CalBike is doing to defend them.
Crucial court victory for bike safety
The case of Whitehead v. the City of Oakland threatened to set a bad precedent for bike safety, so CalBike weighed in along with Bike East Bay and the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. We filed an amicus brief supporting cyclist Ty Whitehead’s lawsuit against Oakland for the serious injuries he sustained in a crash on bad pavement on Skyline Boulevard. Last week, the California Supreme Court agreed, upholding the responsibility of cities to maintain safe street conditions for bike riders.
Initially, a trial court agreed with the City’s argument that the liability waiver Whitehead had signed with AIDS Lifecycle applied to it, since he was on a training ride. If that ruling had held, it could have created a liability loophole, absolving other municipalities from responsibility for fixing potholes and other issues that can be extreme hazards to people on bicycles.
Shaana Rahman of Rahman Law prepared our amicus brief supporting Whitehead’s arguments that the city was liable for his injuries. The Supreme Court’s opinion ruled that Oakland can’t hide behind the AIDS Lifecycle waiver, but it isn’t the end of the case, which returns to the Alameda County Superior Court. The City of Oakland could try other, perhaps equally harmful, arguments to escape liability. We will continue to keep an eye on this case.
Giving cities a free pass to skimp on safety
The amicus brief in the Whitehead case outlined in detail how Oakland tried to limit its liability for bicyclist injuries caused by poorly maintained pavement. The city didn’t embark on a plan to fix known road hazards but instead undertook a campaign to warn people of the dangers of riding a bike, in direct opposition to its stated goal of encouraging active transportation. A new proposal, coming from the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office, takes a similar approach to managing tight budgets. Rather than tackling the root causes of a range of street safety issues, including road hazards due to deferred maintenance, the City Attorney would like to limit damages and attorneys’ fees that people could collect when injured on public streets.
CalBike understands the fiscal constraints that every government entity in California faces right now, but removing the remedy for public safety violations is not the answer. The threat of high judgments should incentivize cities to prioritize creating safe streets for all users, using evidence-based approaches to apply known solutions. With quick-build methods, bicycle and pedestrian safety doesn’t even need to cost a lot.
CalBike has signed on to a letter asking legislators not to put forward a law that would limit liability on our public streets, and we’ll continue to advocate against legal measures that would keep injured bike riders from being compensated.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/bike-lane-bus-trolley-SF.jpg37125568Kendra Ramseyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKendra Ramsey2025-05-09 15:05:442025-05-09 15:05:45Bike Riders’ Right to Safe Streets Tested in Court
One of the constants growing up, as far back as I can recall, was my mother’s silver bicycle. It was a well-loved road bike from the 1970s, with black handlebar tape, tan leather toe cages, and a set of panniers. It still lives in my garage. It holds so many memories, I can’t part with it. That bike, and my mother’s dedication to getting around on two wheels in Sacramento before bike lanes were common, showed me the usefulness of the bike as a “first and last mile” solution. Biking got me to and from transit starting when I was in elementary school, when my mom and I would load our bikes on the bus if the destination was a bit too far of a walk.
Growing up car-free
Unlike most families, we didn’t have a car. And this wasn’t new for my mom, who had spent most of her adult life car-free due to a combination of environmental consciousness and financial circumstances.
One of the things we realize as we get older is that how we are raised becomes our normal. Seeing my mom use her bike to get to community college classes and jobs, I always saw the bike as a useful way to get around. In our circles, bikes weren’t a recreational activity — they were a lifeline. It required route planning, and taking into account whether the route would be safe for a woman by herself, but it was still a lifeline that got us where we needed to be.
Tuning in to marginalized voices
As I got older, I understood why our family didn’t own a car when most others did; as a single mom who often worked multiple jobs, we simply couldn’t afford it. I also understood the challenges that come with relying on a transit system that only goes to certain places at certain times. I came to see the bike as a key to opportunity.
Public planning processes often overlook the value of the experiences of people like my mom, who make things work despite challenges and provide for their families on two wheels. This is one of the reasons why leading CalBike is such a privilege. I’m grateful to have a platform to uplift the needs of women, caregivers, and others who are not the “typical” bicyclist and whose needs are often unmet.
I’m thrilled to be part of a growing group of diverse leaders in bicycle advocacy, changing the common perception of bike riders as spandex-wearing cisgender men, and amplifying the lived experiences of a broader group of people who bike. One of my goals as ED of CalBike is to center the voices of bicyclists from all walks of life; we are stronger together than we are alone.
While my mom is no longer with us, the vision of her, leaning over on the drop bars of her road bike, remains clear in my mind. I can only hope that my daughter grows up with similarly fond memories of a strong mom getting around by bike.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Family-ride-2-cropped.jpg13352724Kendra Ramseyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngKendra Ramsey2025-05-08 17:51:022025-05-08 17:51:03My Mother Rode a Bike
CalBike’s two priority bills will likely end up in the Suspense File in the Assembly Appropriations Committee shortly because both have price tags that require scrutiny in Appropriations. The Quick-Build Bill (AB 891, Zbur) provides Caltrans with an opportunity to incorporate quick-build methods, thereby improving safety for vulnerable road users. The Bike Highways Bill (AB 954, Bennett) would create two regional bikeway network pilots, testing the impact of bike highways on transportation mode shift. The Suspense File could be a stop on the way to a floor vote or a chance for opponents of these measures to axe them behind the scenes without having to publicly oppose the popular proposals.
Quicksand for quick-build and bike highways
Once bills arrive at the Appropriations Committee and get placed in suspense, they could, in theory, be voted out of committee at any time. In practice, however, the Quick-Build Bill and the Bike Highways Bill — plus some of the other measures CalBike supports — are likely to move forward to the Assembly floor or get buried in an unmarked grave during a fast-moving hearing with little or no opportunity for testimony from supporters or opponents.
May 23 is the last day for bills to leave committees in their first houses in the 2025 legislative year. The Assembly Appropriations Committee will hold a hearing at which it will vote some of the bills in the Suspense Files out, sending them to a vote of the full Assembly. The rest will not be voted down but will simply “stay in suspense.”
Most of the decisions about what bills live or die will be made before May 23. As we’ve previously covered, the Suspense File provides a way for lawmakers and lobbyists to work behind the scenes to stop bills they oppose.
Saving critical bills from suspense
The suspense process makes the Appropriations Committee chairs two of the most powerful people in the California Legislature. This year, the chair in the Assembly is Bay Area Assemblymember Buffy Wicks. We’re gathering petition signatures and, once the bills go into the Suspense File, you can use our action tool to easily send Assemblymember Wicks emails about the Quick-Build Bill and the Bike Highways Bill. Or visit our Take Action for Bike Month page to find both those actions and an action to support full funding for the Active Transportation Program.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/QB-3.jpg256768Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-04-30 18:01:042025-04-30 18:01:05Fate of Quick-Build and Bike Highways in Suspense
This post was originally published on May 10, 2023. It was updated on April 30, 2025.
In May, California’s appropriations committees wield their influence in the legislative process, as the state’s budget begins to come into focus. Appropriations committees in both the Senate and Assembly have outsize power and can affect the passage of a bill in unexpected ways. Here’s a look behind the scenes.
Kill bill
A recent CalMatters investigation found that, in the 2023-24 two-year legislative session, 2,043 bills didn’t make it to the governor’s desk. Only 25 of those were voted down; the rest died in committee, many of them in Appropriations.
If a California senator or assemblymember wants to kill a bill, one of the sneakier ways to do so is in the legislative appropriations committees. One member with the ear of the appropriations chair can get a bill put into the committee’s “Suspense File,” possibly never to return.
What’s behind this seemingly undemocratic quirk of California’s legislature, and what can we do about it?
What is the appropriations committee?
In both the California State Senate and Assembly, as legislation moves through the process, any bill that requires expenditures over a certain threshold or has any fiscal impact will advance to their respective appropriations committees. The committees must approve any additional costs before the bill goes to a full vote.
How a bill gets killed in Appropriations — the Suspense File
Led by the Senate and Assembly appropriations committees, any legislation that meets a certain fiscal threshold will be placed in the Suspense File (cue ominous music). Generally, if the cost of a bill is determined to be $50,000 or more to the General Fund, or $150,000 or more to a special fund, that bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Many bills stay in the Suspense File until the fiscal deadline passes, then disappear from the legislative process entirely. The Suspense File was developed as a mechanism for slowing the process and giving legislators a way to consider all the bills that are going to put significant pressure on the budget.
What really is the Suspense File?
The Suspense File is among the most opaque and secretive practices at the Capitol, and it allows legislative leaders to not only shelve proposals that are too expensive but also more quietly dispatch those that are controversial or politically inconvenient. It’s well known at the state Capitol that powerful legislators can use the Suspense File as a political tool to keep controversial bills from reaching the Assembly or Senate floor — typically with no explanation, and often without a public vote.
Coming back from the dead: moving bills out of the Suspense File
A bill still has a fighting chance until the Suspense File hearing, when the appropriations committees consider all the bills in the file and decide which get to move on for debate. Lobbyists, legislators, and constituents play an active and important role in deciding which bills move forward.
How CalBike fights for bills we support, with your help
Like any other civic process, shedding light and making noise can influence the course of a bill in Appropriations. When one of CalBike’s bills goes into the Suspense File, we work behind the scenes to convince key legislators to move it forward. We also ask our members to send emails and make calls to support the bill.
Sometimes that works, and sometimes a good bill dies in appropriations. Knowing how the process works helps us fight for measures that improve biking, equity, and joy. We couldn’t do it without your help.
Which bills can you help get off suspense this year?
Our two priority bills, the Quick-Build Bill (AB 891, Zbur) and the Bike Highways Bill (AB 954, Bennett), could be placed on suspense in May. You’ll find actions you can take to move these critical bills and others forward on our Bike Month Action page.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CalBike-Insider-Image4.png7201280Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-04-30 17:51:282025-04-30 17:52:07Inside the Black Box of Appropriations
The latest movement started by post-secondary students has an unorthodox approach: on-campus bicycle programs, offering DIY repair space, repair services, or bike rentals. Imagine a dedicated space on campus that is open to students in the afternoon with a free set of tools to crank on bicycles together. Imagine dedicated bicycle rentals for students to borrow for a week or a semester, with a set of free DIY tools located at the rental station. Many campuses now have vibrant, bicycle-centered spaces that build community while encouraging students to get out and ride.
Campus bike projects create connections
As culture wars and diversity of opinion have become more polarizing, some young people have turned to bicycling groups to kindle meaningful friendships amid exams, school schedules, practicums, and more. Others discover on-campus bicycling groups when they see a group of their peers cycling down a campus roadway, smiling, and having fun.
At first, bicycle repair seems very niche. But when taking into account the larger picture of the college student experience, bicycle repair makes a lot of sense. College campuses are often designed to prioritize walkability and facilitate easy access to classes, libraries, food, and other amenities. This is why bicycling has been able to satisfy the needs of students who have a desire to renew their connection with nature, get across campus in a short amount of time, or find new social groups. It’s also a way to explore off-campus options in a more convenient way and provides autonomy.
We found several examples of student-initiated movements, ranging from some that had been around for 10 years or more to those that had just started this year, in 2025.
Meet the students who keep the wheels turning
Meet Allan of Brandeis University, Kenedy and Hosea from Tartan Bike Project, and McTzviel of Orange Bike Project.
Allan on the left, Hosea and Kenedy in the middle, and McTzviel on the right
Tartan Bike Project is a new initiative currently being led by Kenedy and Hosea, working closely with administrative staff at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to bring their first-ever student-led bicycle project to life. For Brandeis University out of Waltham, Massachusetts, Allan F. has initiated the soon-to-be bicycle library, Brandeis Bikes, a reincarnation of the old DeisBikes that used to exist at the school. Lastly, Orange Bike Project of Austin, Texas, a student-led bicycle repair shop, has been running since 2008. It is fully operational with afternoon hours, and some of the original alumni are still hanging around.
Each project was a student-initiated endeavor that sought to do the same thing: connect students on campus with reliable bicycle resources and a tool to access off-campus activities.
How to start a college bike project
“Be stubborn, know what you want, and have a good idea of what that looks like,” said Kenedy when we asked what it takes to start a college bike project. Although the Tartan Bike Project is the newest, it has helpful experience to share. Kenedy used to attend the University of Texas, where she was introduced to the Orange Bike Project after she got a bike. When Kenedy got to Pittsburgh, she met Hosea, who helped her raise over $20,000 to start the Tartan Bike Project and advocated beyond that for space on campus to be allocated for a bike shop similar to the one run by the Orange Bike Project in Texas.
The Orange Bike Project has been on the UT campus for many years, consistently serving students. “The project gives a lot, but the project also takes a lot — so have resiliency and patience” was McTzviel’s advice to anyone wanting to start a similar endeavor, emphasizing the logistics involved with sustaining a long-term initiative.
Allan F. shared a similar lesson after Brandeis University rejected his initial proposal late last year: “It showed me where the gaps were and how to strengthen the proposal,” he said. Creating a bike project is a different kind of academic endurance that requires a strong sense of purpose, a clear vision, and a willingness to adapt.
Know Your Whys
Each bike project leader said it’s worth the effort to create these social groups because they live on even after the founders graduate. McTzviel joked that, “Sometimes you have to remind yourself that you are there for school,” not just hanging out with friends and creating a physical space for students to gather and work on bicycles.
A bicycle repair location is a hub for student engagement around an essential service students need.
For students like Allan, Hosea, Kenedy, and McTzviel, spending time working on their bike projects was the equivalent of a real-world practicum. It gave them the opportunity to leave a lasting mark and serve the needs of future students. They gained lots of skills that are relevant to the post-college world, like writing proposals, time management, building a team, working as a team, and project management. It was a crash course on entrepreneurship and business management.
Student leaders looking to start a bike project usually need some inspiration. They can turn to the Youth-Bike Hub (YB Hub), another youth-led initiative, started by the National Youth Bike Council. YB Hub aims to create a more collaborative, environmentally sustainable, and connected world by empowering bicycle projects for or started by youth. The YB Hub is a newsletter that lifts up youth-bike initiatives happening around the country and leads quarterly calls between these groups. It’s a great way to connect with bike projects on different college campuses. Join the YB Hub newsletter if you are interested in starting or hearing from a college bike project.
More help to set up a campus bike program
Tatiana from Georgia Tech is offering a webinar, Essentials to start a College Bicycle Program, to provide information and answer questions on July 14 at 11:30 a.m. ET. Join the webinar on Zoom with this link.
During the webinar, Tatiana, the former president of Starter Bikes at a Bicycle Friendly University, will break down the essential resources you need to start or sustain a bike program on your campus. From sourcing tools and parts to securing space and allies, she’ll share practical tips and lessons learned from running a thriving student-led bike shop at Georgia Tech.
The National Youth Bike Council is also developing a guide to assist students in launching campus bike projects. Students don’t need to start from scratch; there are lots of resources and support available.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/bikes-on-campus.jpg36305445CalBike Staffhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngCalBike Staff2025-04-28 19:30:092025-05-06 16:02:20NYBC: Bicycle Programs Are the New Student Movement
Bike and pedestrian safety advocates, including CalBike, were disappointed by the introduction of the Increase Fire Department Authority Bill (AB 612) by Assemblymember Chris Rogers. The bill gives greater veto power to fire departments, which sometimes oppose new bikeways on the basis that they could impede firefighting and EMS operations and potentially slow response times.
But the fire service and street safety advocates don’t have to take opposing positions, and they shouldn’t, according to Mike Wilson, a member of the Berkeley Disaster and Fire Safety Commission and a senior safety engineer at Cal/OSHA. A former firefighter, EMT, and paramedic, Wilson wrote the proposal (see the end of this post for a downloadable copy) for the Berkeley Fire Department’s new Street Trauma Prevention program manager position, working closely with Berkeley Fire Chief Dave Sprague, Walk Bike Berkeley, and Amory Langmo, president of Berkeley Firefighters IAFF Local 1227. The position is a first in California: it applies Berkeley Fire’s prevention expertise to the growing problem of street trauma. Wilson hopes to see fire departments across the state take a similar approach, which he says has multiple benefits for the public, the fire service, and individual firefighters and paramedics. We spoke with Wilson about his vision for collaboration between the fire service and street safety advocates.
Prevention, alongside rapid response
Most fire departments’ primary concern over new bikeways, speed humps, traffic diverters, or other infrastructure that protects vulnerable road users is that it could slow response times in the event of an emergency, something Wilson understands well after 13 years in the field. Wilson pointed out that a singular focus on emergency response, with little attention to prevention, is not new in the fire service, which had this same perspective about structure fires until the 1970s.
In 1974, the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control issued a report called America Burning, highlighting the need for fire prevention programs as part of the core mission of the U.S. fire service, alongside its well-founded function of responding to and suppressing fires. Until that point, the Commission found that 95% of fire services funding was used for responding to fires, and only about 5% was spent on fire prevention.
“That report launched the whole effort within the fire service to establish prevention programs, and every city in the country eventually did that,” Wilson said. “Everywhere you look, there is something related to fire prevention, and it has been led by the fire service.” Cities and states passed fire codes and changed building codes with egress requirements, occupancy limits, fire suppression systems, and numerous other requirements.
This work resulted in a 64% reduction in fire-related deaths between 1977 and 2021, saving more than 5,000 lives in the decades since the report was published. Wilson points to that success as the foundation for a novel proposal: fire departments, which respond to many more EMS calls due to traffic collisions than fires, should apply their expertise at prevention to street safety. “The fire department can and should be drawing on its expertise in prevention when it comes to fires and apply that to street safety,” he said.
“The approach we took on the commission, working with Chief Sprague and Local 1227, was that the fire service has done a great job at prevention and has really taken fire prevention seriously,” Wilson said. “Prevention is the flip side of response. The fire service has demonstrated its ability to do both really well.”
As a result of that focus on prevention, an average of two people per year were injured in structure fires over a recent five-year period in Berkeley. But during that same period, an average of 694 vehicle occupants, cyclists, and pedestrians were injured, and five were killed, each year, in traffic collisions. “Our opening position on this was that Berkeley needed the fire department to build a prevention program on street trauma,” he said. “If government is all about allocating resources to the highest need, street trauma clearly represents a gigantic gap in making the city of Berkeley a safer place for the people who live and work here.”
Prevention benefits everyone
During Wilson’s 13 years as a firefighter, EMT, and paramedic, he estimates that he responded to more than 10,000 emergency calls, including many hundreds involving street trauma. Among those, a few stand out as the worst: kids getting hit by cars, many of whom didn’t survive, and doing everything possible as a paramedic to keep them alive from the street to the trauma center. “Paramedics often witness their patients’ last moments,” Wilson said. Dealing with the aftermath of street trauma “takes a toll on the mental health of firefighters and other first responders, and particularly on paramedics,” he said.
Reducing the number of injuries and fatalities due to traffic collisions will reduce exposure to severe trauma among firefighters and paramedics, who have high rates of PTSD due to the demands of their jobs. “The fire service is recognizing that mental health and post-traumatic stress injuries are a real thing,” Wilson said. California has passed bills and allocated resources to support first responders who struggle with mental health issues. In Wilson’s view, one way to support them is to reduce their exposure to critical injuries and fatalities from street trauma, which are some of the worst calls they will go on in their careers.
Wilson also has a personal reason to advocate for prevention. In 2016, a car hit his wife, Dr. Megan Schwarzman, on her bike from behind in what he calls a “catastrophic collision.”
“She barely survived, thanks to the efforts of Berkeley Fire and Highland Hospital’s Trauma Center,” he said.
“Fire departments are focused on response times, and I get that. I lived that for years. Meg survived because Berkeley Fire was on scene in two minutes, with multiple pieces of equipment, and they extricated her from under the car in four minutes,” he said. “They were phenomenal, state-of-the-art. And at the same time, her collision was 100% preventable. It was a terrible street design that dumped cyclists directly into the right lane of traffic.” The better outcome would have been a prevention mindset in street design that separated the lanes with hardened barriers, a step that would have spared Meg and her family the trauma in the first place.
Mode shift could improve response times
There is a growing body of evidence showing how bike lanes and other street design changes can save the lives of cyclists and pedestrians, but there isn’t a lot of data on the impact of bikeways on emergency response times; what little there is appears to show not much difference before and after. Wilson sees a long-term upside to safer infrastructure for people biking and walking: “If you build the infrastructure in ways that are safer for bicyclists and pedestrians, that infrastructure will get used.” He cited a survey of Berkeley residents that found 27% regularly bike or walk for daily needs, and another 27% would bike or walk if it were safer. To feel safer, 86% of respondents reported wanting concrete-protected bike lanes, and 74% wanted parking-protected bike lanes.
That mode shift would reduce vehicle congestion, which is the biggest access issue for fire and EMS response. “The problem of cars blocking access by fire and EMS equipment, that’s the big impediment when it comes to getting your equipment through,” Wilson said.
Reshaping the Increase Fire Department Authority Bill
Wilson has opened conversations with some of the backers of AB 612, and he’s hoping to get them into conversation with CalBike and other active transportation advocates. “I think of [AB 612] as overly narrow in terms of the mission of the fire service,” he said. “It begins with the assumption that the only role of the fire department is rapid response. That’s obviously important, but it’s not the whole picture. The history of the fire service underscores that.”
Wilson hopes the bill will be amended to include the fire service’s potential to be a “serious ally for street safety.” To that end, members of the Berkeley City Council have asked the Disaster and Fire Safety Commission for direction on the bill and are hoping to work with Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, encouraging her to meet with the author to revise the bill to cover street trauma prevention, alongside response.
“The question is not only how do we get to these critical incidents quickly, but how do we support the development of a genuinely safer city? That’s the vision of a modern fire service.” — Mike Wilson
Thanks to Wilson’s work with Chief Sprague, IAFF Local 1227, and Walk Bike Berkeley, the City of Berkeley has hired its first Street Trauma Prevention program manager, who reports to Fire Chief Sprague. It’s too soon to measure the impact, but it’s a mindset shift other communities should replicate.
Mike Wilson’s presentation on street trauma prevention
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/IMG_6947.jpg15362048Laura McCamyhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngLaura McCamy2025-04-17 16:12:212025-04-21 15:30:55Building an Alliance Between Firefighters and Street Safety Advocates
The State Highway System Management Plan (SHSMP) “presents a performance-driven and integrated management plan for the State Highway System (SHS) in California,” according to its webpage. Every other year, Caltrans presents the SHSMP to the California Transportation Commission. CalBike dug into the sections on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and submitted comments, part of our ongoing efforts to ensure that Caltrans adheres to the requirement to build Complete Streets passed in SB 960.
Good news and bad news for biking and walking
The 2025 draft SHSMP outlines the 2026 State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) performance targets for biking and walking infrastructure on the state highway system, which includes many local routes that double as community streets used by all travel modes. The clarity in this reporting gives CalBike and other advocates an opportunity to speak up in advance to pressure Caltrans to better serve people using active transportation.
For sidewalks, the report shows 31 miles of repair for existing sidewalks and 38 miles of new sidewalks in 2026. That’s a decent amount of sidewalk work, and we’re glad to see Caltrans prioritizing the safety and comfort of pedestrians.
The 2026 SHOPP target is to repair 5 miles of existing Class I bikeways, which are off-road bike paths. The agency also plans to fix 20 miles of existing Class II bike lanes, which are designated by paint only. There’s no plan to rehab Class III (shared bike/car lanes, which are no longer recommended in Caltrans guidance) or Class IV protected on-street bikeways.
Caltrans plans to build 210 miles of bikeways, a significant number. Of those, 15 miles will be Class I and 44 will be Class IV. The Class IV bikeways are particularly significant: CalBike’s research found that Caltrans has rarely included Class IV bikeways in its projects, often downgrading to Class II when Class IV is recommended, so this is a welcome goal.
Unfortunately, 75% of the planned new bikeways on state-controlled streets are Class II. Class II lanes, particularly next to the high-speed vehicular traffic often found on state routes, do not provide adequate protection for people on bikes and won’t encourage people to choose bike riding over driving a car. Plus, although the SHSMP doesn’t include any Class III lanes, Caltrans will still add them to its projects.
More questions for Caltrans
We see this SHSMP showing signs of progress while demonstrating that Caltrans needs to do more to prioritize the safety of people who get around by bike. We are interested in how Caltrans will allocate these statewide targets to the districts to implement. The devil is in the details for SHOPP projects.
We are concerned that the level of funding projected for the 10-year SHOPP investment has not increased significantly since the 2023 SHSMP ($2.45 billion in 2025 compared to $2.37 billion in 2023). It’s also not clear why the performance need decreased so much between the 2023 and 2025 SHSMPs for bike/ped infrastructure ($10.6 billion in 2025 compared to $14.6 billion in 2023).
CalBike looks forward to working with Caltrans and getting more details on how the 10-year need and investment were determined and what the differences were between 2023 and 2025.
The 2026 SHOPP programming is just around the corner. Transportation officials are assembling the program of projects now, and we’ll learn what sort of recommendations align with these new goals in the winter.
https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CalBike-Insider-Image4.png7201280Jared Sanchezhttps://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.pngJared Sanchez2025-04-16 15:50:062025-05-08 17:46:16CalBike Insider: Digging into the State Highway System Management Plan
