Like other government agencies across the country, the Rossmoor Community Services District Board is struggling to find a way to regulate the bad behavior of some electric bike users while protecting the overall benefits of bicycling itself around the proud urban forest.
The District’s Board of Directors debated a proposed ordinance for more than hour at its October meeting before deciding to reach out to the community itself for input on the growing problem.
Director Tony DeMarco, Chair of the Parks and Facilities Committee, which oversees the issue, said the committee engaged in a lively discussion and then asked Interim General Manager Sharon Landers to summarize what the committee had heard from the district’s insurer.
At issue is the damages being caused by e-bikes in the community, both from others being “terrorized” on sidewalks by insensitive e-bikers to actual physical damages evidenced by photos, said Landers.
Nevertheless, she said in summary, it boils down to what is considered a liability concern for district residents and therefore, the committee asked that an ordinance be drawn up to submit to the board.
“If the board were so inclined, it would prohibit the operation, not the presence, but the operation of E bikes and bicycles, and also conventional scooters,” she said, introducing an ordinance written in an attempt to protect the district’s public spaces from motorized devices.
“So motorized scooters also are prohibited. They’re motorized; they’re considered to be motorized vehicles. They’re currently not allowed in our parks, but conventional scooters are so I looked at all three as something that we might want to address. It’s really hard to tell the difference between bicycles and electric bicycles,” she said.
Landers said having consulted with the District’s insurance underwriter, the matter is serious because of potential liability.
“There’s always potential liability if you do something negligent, but similar to a dog off a leash, which is prohibited in our parks,” she said.
“If there’s a dog off the leash and it jumps on another park user, perhaps hurting them, we don’t have liability for that, because we prohibited dogs off leashes, similar here, if we prohibited the operation of these transportation modes, it would reduce our liability significantly,” Landers told the board.
DeMarco acknowledged the issue is a thorny one, having discussed it at length at a recent committee hearing and although “we kind of agreed (with a proposed ordinance),” he said. The committee chose to prohibit all bicycles because “it is kind of difficult to tell electric bicycles from regular bicycles.”
DeMarco said while he agreed with the sentiment of the proposed regulation, “this is the first time I’ve read it (the new ordinance) since it was drafted after the meeting. We agreed,” he acknowledged, “but then this (proposed ordinance) includes anything operational,” he said.
“Yes,” said Landers, “and thank you for the reminder but what came up in committee is what reduction in liability would the district have if we prohibited the operation of these motorized vehicles,” implying that the district will have little or no protection without some sort of regulation limiting access to electric-powered bicycles, etc.
DeMarco agreed, but also said the reality is that, with improving technology, it has become really hard to discern the difference between a regular bicycle and a powered one.
The E-bikes have pedals just like a non-e-bike. So again, there’s probably going to be some residents who might be upset that they can’t ride their bicycles through the park, but you’re not going to be able to differentiate. And I think that’s where we landed,” he acknowledged.
DeMarco was correct. While Directors grudgingly accepted the reality, it was not without plenty of “what ifs” and an intense effort to find another solution before enacting any measure that will in any way impair the ability of residents and their children to ride their bicycles throughout Rossmoor’s famous “urban forest.”
“I think we’ve all been concerned about the behavior of some of the e-bikers,” said Director Michael Maynard, “I’ve seen things, we’ve all seen things, but I don’t want to clump them all into this guilty verdict,” he said.
“I remember many times as a father riding to this park and the other park with my two daughters (now grown), on scooters, and we weren’t doing jumps and things. I want to see Brownies riding their bikes,” he said.
Maynard also said there would be enforcement only when there was a police officer present, noting “our staff doesn’t have the time” to enforce such an ordinance. “I just have a hard time depriving other family members from enjoying a park with a bicycle in safe, responsible ways,” he said.
DeMarco said he did not disagree, voicing similar concerns, even asking the District’s legal counsel to review the proposed ordinance to determine where changes could be made.
Director Mary Ann Remnet, a member of the committee, said the committee discussion was very healthy and they too are trying to balance the interests of residents against the threat of liabilities.
“One of the things that we looked at with that, because that was a good part of the discussion, is that we have to look at the safety aspects for everyone in the park, because it is a small park, and there’s a lot of people there. We have a lot of seniors, we have a lot of kids, and there are ways to protect the little kids, because they’re not marathon bike riders,” she said.
“And yes, it would be nice if everyone could do that, but even someone getting hit at three to five miles an hour on a bike because you’re sharing the sidewalk, we looked at it from the standpoint of the safety of the people that were walking on the sidewalks as well as the bike riders that are sharing it, and trying to make it an enforceable situation,” said Remnet.
“Empowering bikes is a good thing, and everybody would love to do that, but you can’t disregard the people that are also walking on those same sidewalks,” she added.
Director Jo Shade suggested the board reach out to the residents before taking any action.
“I do agree with a lot of the things Michael was saying, but times are changing,” said Shade, “and I think it should be a campaign with our district going through social media and putting these pictures (of e-biker damage) out through social media so residents can see the damage that is being done.”
“What’s going on, I mean, they’re (e-bikers) building ramps in the parks. This is insane. It isn’t just coming as pie in the sky,” she added. “The damage they’ve done in these photos speaks volumes.”
“These are not evil people,” she added. “It’s just they like to have their fun, and one of those is riding their e-bikes,” said Shade. “I grew up with three brothers,” she said.
“You need to walk your bike through the park, even when you go to Rossmoor Center, you have to walk your bike through the park. You get off your bike and walk it, otherwise it’s dangerous to pedestrians,” she noted.
She said DeMarco was correct. “It is hard to tell the difference between e-bikes and regular bikes. I would like to see us follow what is safe for Rossmoor, honestly, that’s what it needs to come down to, because everything else is just coming down to, oh, well, it used to be like so and so, but used to be don’t exist anymore, because there’s people that come in and tear up the parks like so. We have to change with the times, and we have to adhere to the liability issues and the damage that’s being done. And I apologize if people are going to have to get off their bike and walk it,” she said.
Board President Nathan Searles said motorized scooters have already been prohibited. That’s explained in the packet. “I would say I don’t know that we have enough dangerous activity regarding non-motorized scooters to outlaw them in the park,” he said.
“I understand the bike situation because that’s the guidance we’re given from our law enforcement partners as well, that their inability, by law, to distinguish between a motorized and non-motorized bicycle for enforcement of any action is the issue,” said Searles.
“The Sheriff’s Department and the California Highway Patrol aren’t going to get into selective enforcement, and that’s the issue. So, the only way they can enforce e-bikes, they’ve given us this guidance, is to outlaw all bikes, and then we can enforce it,” he said.
However, having said that, President Searles said that he sensed from the board that they were not ready to have a vote on what would have become the first reading of a new ordinance to enforce biking bans listed in the ordinance.
Instead, in an abundance of caution, he suggested a cooling-off period allowing the Board and the Administration to search every which way possible to preserve the existing freedoms as the modern realities of a potential liability lawsuit remain just an accident away.
Following the hour-long discussion, the board voted unanimously to postpone action on the provision until a later date.