ESSB 6110
SignedSenate
Electric bicycle, motorcycle
Addressing electric-assisted bicycles and electric motorcycles.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill updates Washington’s definition and classification of electric-assisted bicycles (e-bikes), tightening power and speed limits and clarifying exclusions. It also creates a work group to study and recommend regulations for electric motorcycles, especially to address rising use among young people and the lack of current state oversight.
- Revises the legal definition of 'electric-assisted bicycle' to cap motor power at 750 watts and clarify three classes (Class 1, 2, and 3) based on speed and motor operation (e.g., Class 3 allows up to 28 mph with a speedometer).
- Explicitly excludes vehicles that can exceed 20 mph on electric power alone or are easily modified to do so.
- Creates a new work group led by the Department of Licensing to study and recommend a regulatory framework for electric motorcycles, including licensing, registration, safety training, and equipment rules.
- Requires the work group to include representatives from state agencies (e.g., Department of Transportation, State Patrol), local governments, and advocacy groups focused on active transportation and safety.
- Mandates the work group submit its final report—including draft legislation—by December 15, 2026.
Who is affected
- Electric-assisted bicycle riders and owners — Riders of electric-assisted bicycles (e-bikes) will face updated state definitions and classifications, including clearer power and speed limits (e.g., max 750-watt motor, 20 or 28 mph depending on class), and stricter rules against modifying bikes to exceed those limits.
- Young electric motorcycle users — Teens and young adults who use electric motorcycles may soon be subject to new state rules—including licensing, registration, and safety training—once a new framework is developed and enacted.
- State and local transportation and licensing agencies — State and local agencies (e.g., Department of Licensing, Department of Transportation, State Patrol) will need to coordinate on research, rulemaking, and potential implementation of new electric motorcycle regulations.
- E-bike and electric motorcycle manufacturers and sellers — Retailers and manufacturers of e-bikes and electric motorcycles may face new requirements for consumer disclosures and could be held accountable for deceptive marketing or tampering.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Standardizing e-bike classes and capping motor power at 750W with clear speed limits (20/28 mph) improves road safety by reducing high-speed collisions and clarifying where e-bikes may operate (e.g., bike lanes vs. roads), directly benefiting everyday riders, pedestrians, and cyclists by reducing conflict points in shared spaces.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)Creating a regulatory framework for electric motorcycles—including licensing, age restrictions, and safety training—addresses a critical gap in oversight that has allowed unregulated teen use, thereby reducing crash risks for young riders and others sharing roads with high-speed, lightweight electric motorcycles.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1), (2)(c)(iii), (iv)Requiring manufacturers and vendors to provide clear disclosures about vehicle classification and prohibiting deceptive marketing protects consumers—especially low-income and immigrant buyers—from being misled into purchasing vehicles classified as “bicycles” that actually require licensing and insurance, thus avoiding costly legal or insurance penalties.
consumer protectionPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(c)(vi), (vii)The work group’s inclusion of local government and active transportation advocates ensures that future regulations reflect real-world infrastructure needs and equity concerns—e.g., ensuring electric motorcycles don’t displace low-speed e-bike users from protected bike lanes—supporting inclusive mobility planning.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(a), (c)(vii)Explicitly excluding vehicles easily modified to exceed 20 mph helps prevent unsafe “stealth” high-speed e-bikes from entering shared infrastructure, reducing risks to pedestrians and cyclists—though enforcement will depend on clear definitions and reasonable thresholds.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)
The bill’s exclusion of vehicles capable of exceeding 20 mph on electric power alone may unintentionally criminalize riders of high-performance e-bikes (e.g., Class 3 e-bikes used for commuting or recreation) if enforcement is overly aggressive or poorly defined, potentially leading to unwarranted citations or impoundments—especially for low-income riders who rely on faster e-bikes for time-sensitive travel.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)Mandating consumer disclosure statements and penalties for deceptive marketing could increase compliance costs for small e-bike retailers and importers, especially those selling imported models with ambiguous power ratings—potentially reducing access to affordable e-bikes for budget-conscious consumers.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(2)(c)(vi)Future licensing, registration, and age restrictions on electric motorcycles could reduce mobility options for low-income young adults and teens who rely on low-cost electric two-wheelers for transportation, particularly in areas with limited public transit access.
TransportationRef: Sec. 2(2)(c)(ii), (iii), (iv)The bill’s focus on penalties for tampering and deceptive marketing—without specifying due process safeguards—risks over-enforcement against DIY e-bike modifiers (e.g., hobbyists or low-income commuters who adjust speed controllers to extend range), potentially criminalizing common practices without clear intent or public safety justification.
Rights & LibertiesRef: Sec. 2(2)(c)(v)Local governments may face administrative and enforcement burdens if new electric motorcycle regulations are adopted, especially in jurisdictions without dedicated traffic enforcement units—though the bill does not mandate funding for such enforcement, creating unfunded mandates.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)
Who Is Most Affected
Low- and middle-income e-bike riders benefit from clearer safety standards and protected access to bike lanes, but may face new barriers if future regulations impose licensing or registration fees—especially if they rely on modified or higher-speed e-bikes for commuting.
Young users of electric motorcycles stand to gain from increased safety oversight (e.g., mandatory training, age limits), but may lose affordable transportation access if licensing requirements exclude them or raise costs significantly.
State and local agencies gain authority and structure for future regulation but face new responsibilities (e.g., enforcement, licensing) without guaranteed funding—potentially straining already limited resources.
Small e-bike retailers may face compliance costs for disclosures and liability risks, while larger manufacturers may absorb costs more easily; electric motorcycle sellers face new regulatory exposure but also market clarity if future rules standardize classifications.
Pedestrians, cyclists, and transit-dependent communities benefit from reduced high-speed vehicle conflicts on shared infrastructure, but may be indirectly harmed if future licensing reduces affordable mobility options for low-income commuters.