Sign In
Free Newsletter
Electric bikes and scooters were once fringe transportation options. In Arizona’s urban cores, they are now everyday fixtures and increasingly a source of serious safety concern. Cities across Arizona are responding the only way they can, by writing their own rules. Tempe is the latest to do so. That should be the moment Arizona steps in.
The problem starts with state law.
According to Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S) § 28-819, electric bicycles and electric standup scooters are regulated together and treated largely like traditional bicycles. Riders need no license, registration or insurance. These devices may operate on streets and in bike lanes by default, and on bike paths unless a local authority restricts them. But the statute leaves nearly every meaningful safety decision, including age limits, helmet requirements, sidewalk rules, penalties, and enforcement, to cities. That structure may have worked when micromobility was rare. Today, it shifts responsibility to cities without giving them a common baseline, ensuring inconsistent rules, uneven enforcement and confusion for riders, parents and police.
Tempe illustrates the consequences of that gap. From 2021 through 2024, the city recorded 116 serious injury or fatal collisions involving pedestrians or bicycle units, including “micro mobility devices, according to AZFamily. In two-thirds of those cases, the rider was the primary cause of the accident. Fox 10 also reported more than 1,100 EMS responses tied to e-scooters over four years, including more than 300 injuries and numerous cases involving loss of consciousness. Faced with those numbers, and operating under a code that relies largely on general bicycle and traffic rules, Tempe has convened a City Council subcommittee to recommend age limits, speed restrictions, helmet requirements, and clearer enforcement. In effect, the city is rebuilding a safety framework that state law never required.
Tempe is not alone. Glendale recently adopted one of the state’s most comprehensive ordinances, with age thresholds by device type, helmet requirements for minors, mandatory lighting, and fines starting at $50 and escalating to $500 for repeat violations, enforced by city police. Scottsdale has banned riders under 16 from operating faster, Class 3 e-bikes on city property. Phoenix prohibits e-bike riding on sidewalks and enforces violations as civil traffic offenses.
Each city is responding rationally. The problem is that they are responding alone.
A teenager riding legally in Tempe may be cited with a violation minutes later in Scottsdale. Parents trying to set clear rules for their children and protect their family’s financial assets must currently decipher multiple municipal codes. Police officers are asked to enforce different standards depending on city boundaries. When safety rules change block by block, compliance drops, and enforcement becomes harder, not easier.
Lawmakers have acknowledged growing concern with the introduction of Senate Bill 1008 this session, which would impose speed limits on shared-use paths. But SB1008 is not a solution. It layers a narrow rule onto an outdated statute and leaves the underlying problem untouched.
SB1008 does not clarify where e-bikes and scooters should operate, who should be allowed to ride them, what safety equipment should be required, or how violations should be enforced statewide. It preserves the underlying outdated that has produced today’s regulatory patchwork.
Arizona does not need another patch. It needs to rewrite A.R.S. § 28-819. The statute should establish clear, statewide safety rules, including minimum age requirements by device class, helmet standards for minors, default rules for where e-bikes and scooters may operate, and consistent enforcement and penalties. Cities should retain the ability to go further, but public safety should not hinge on which side of a city limit someone is riding on.
Given how much these vehicles have permeated our culture and the risks they pose, Arizona should also consider requiring that Class 3 e-bikes, which can reach 28 mph, be classified as motor vehicles within A.R.S. § 28-819. If we are going to allow vehicles capable of nearly 30 mph to share lanes with cars, we must treat them with the seriousness they demand.
Reclassification would involve registration and licensing. Crucially, it would require riders to carry liability insurance, just like any other motorist on the road. When a high-speed collision happens, victims should not be left without recourse. It would ensure manufacturer compliance with federal and state safety standards.
E-bikes and scooters are here to stay. The injuries are already happening. Cities are acting because they feel they must. It’s time our state’s motor vehicle laws caught up with reality.
Marc Lamber is a Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent-rated trial attorney.
