DATE: 06/17/2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Police Department
2026-237
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBJECT:
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 10.48 AND 12.24 OF THE CORONA
MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE REGULATIONS REGARDING THE OPERATION OF
BICYCLES AND ELECTRIC BICYCLES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This staff report asks the City Council to approve first reading of an ordinance amending Corona Municipal Code (CMC) Chapter 10.48 (Bicycles) and Chapter 12.24 (Parks and Recreation Areas) to incorporate electric bicycles (e-bikes) into the City’s bicycle regulations, add sidewalk and trail safety requirements, address bicycle and e-bike use in City parks, provide an education-based enforcement alternative for first-time juvenile violators, and repeal obsolete provisions of Chapter 10.48. The proposed amendments reflect the direction provided by the City Council at its April 15, 2026 meeting and are intended to improve safety for riders, pedestrians, and motorists.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council introduce, by title only, and waive full reading of Ordinance No. 3430 amending Chapters 10.48 and 12.24 of the Corona Municipal Code to update regulations regarding the operation of bicycles and electric bicycles.
BACKGROUND & HISTORY:
Corona Municipal Code (CMC) Chapter 10.48 regulates bicycles within the City but does not currently address electric bicycles (e-bikes), which are now defined by California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 312.5 in three classes based on speed and operation.
Chapter 10.48 also contains an extensive bicycle registration and licensing scheme dating from 1978 that the City no longer administers, and its existing provision addressing juvenile violations allows only for impoundment of a minor’s bicycle for up to 30 days. The chapter does not include sidewalk-specific safety requirements aimed at protecting pedestrians, and neither Chapter 10.48 nor Chapter 12.24 (Parks and Recreation Areas) clearly addresses e-bike use in City parks.
E-bike collisions in Corona have risen from zero in 2020 to 25 in 2025, with increasing juvenile involvement, while traditional bicycle collisions have remained steady over the same period. On April 15, 2026, the Police Department presented to the City Council a proposed approach for amending Chapter 10.48 to address e-bikes through three primary changes: (1) updating the bicycle definition and related requirements to include e-bikes; (2) updating the prohibited-behavior language; and (3) adding sidewalk riding safety requirements. The City Council received the presentation, heard public comment, and directed staff to return with proposed ordinance language incorporating Council’s input.
In preparing the proposed ordinance, staff incorporated the direction provided by Council and also took the opportunity to modernize Chapter 10.48 as a whole, repeal obsolete provisions, and make conforming amendments to Chapter 12.24 so that bicycle and ebike use in City parks is addressed directly. This staff report and the attached ordinance reflect that work.
ANALYSIS:
At the April 15, 2026 meeting, the City Council and members of the public discussed the Police Department’s proposed approach and provided direction on several aspects of the proposed amendments. Staff has incorporated that direction into the proposed ordinance attached as Exhibit 1. The key elements of the proposed amendments, and how to the amendments implement the direction provided by Council, are summarized below.
Application to Electric Bicycles and Updated Definitions (Section 10.48.010) The definitions in Section 10.48.010 have been revised so that the term “bicycle” has the same meaning as set forth in California Vehicle Code Section 231, which includes electric bicycles, and so that “electric bicycle” (or “e-bike”) has the same meaning as California Vehicle Code Section 312.5, thereby incorporating the State’s three-class system.
Because e-bikes now fall within the defined term “bicycle,” all of the operating, safety, and enforcement provisions of Chapter 10.48 apply equally to electric bicycles and traditional bicycles without the need to restate each requirement separately.
Repeal of Obsolete Provisions and Reorganization of the Chapter Chapter 10.48 contains a bicycle registration and licensing program dating from 1978, including mandatory registration, license tabs, ownership-transfer filings, change-of- address notices, dealer recordkeeping, and related provisions. The City no longer administers the bicycle registration program. The proposed ordinance repeals these obsolete sections and renumbers the remaining provisions for clarity. The provisions requiring the maintenance of a bicycle’s serial number have been retained so that it remains unlawful to operate a bicycle when its serial number has been removed, altered, or mutilated, in order to preserve a tool for investigating bicycle theft. The separate equipment section has been deleted because equivalent lamp and reflector requirements for operation during darkness are already established statewide by California Vehicle Code Section 21201 and continue to apply in Corona without a duplicative local provision.
Modernized Operating Procedures (Section 10.48.050)
The operating procedures section, renumbered as Section 10.48.050, has been updated with descriptive subsection headings. Substantive updates include clarifying that a passenger must ride on a seat designed for the number of persons on the bicycle—which accommodates, for example, a parent riding with a young child on a properly designed seat, and consolidating the turning and roadway-crossing provisions. Consistent with Council’s direction to preserve officer discretion rather than enumerate a list of specific maneuvers, the general prohibition on trick riding that is dangerous to the rider or others is retained without change.
Sidewalk Riding in Business Districts (Section 10.48.050(P)) Council asked staff to consider whether the existing prohibition on sidewalk riding in business districts should be retained. Staff recommends retaining it, and the proposed ordinance clarifies the prohibition by tying the term “business district” to the definition in California Vehicle Code Section 2351.
California Vehicle Code Section 21206, authorizes cities to adopt ordinances regulating the parking and operation of bicycles on pedestrian facilities provided such regulations do not conflict with the Vehicle Code. A regulation that prohibits riding a bicycle on sidewalks in a business district is the most common way California cities exercise that authority. Staff recommends that this prohibition be retained based on the following safety considerations:
1. Driveway and intersection conflicts. Business districts have the highest concentration of driveways, alleys, and parking-lot entrances. Drivers entering, exiting, and turning at these points scan the roadway for traffic and do not anticipate a faster-moving bicycle approaching along the sidewalk, particularly one traveling opposite the adjacent flow of traffic. This sidewalk-to-driveway conflict is the most common cause of bicycle collisions in the City’s business corridors.
2. High and unpredictable pedestrian volumes. Business-district sidewalks carry the densest pedestrian traffic, including patrons entering and exiting storefronts,
1 Vehicle Code Section 235 defines a “business district” as that portion of a highway and the property contiguous thereto (a) upon one side of which highway, for a distance of 600 feet, 50 percent or more of the contiguous property fronting thereon is occupied by buildings in use for business, or (b) upon both sides of which highway, collectively, for a distance of 300 feet, 50 percent or more of the contiguous property fronting thereon is so occupied.
outdoor diners, and pedestrians who may not be able to react quickly, creating direct collision exposure.
3. Fixed obstructions and obstructed sight lines. Storefront doors, outdoor dining, signage, and parked vehicles create fixed and moving obstacles and block the lines of sight between riders, pedestrians, and turning drivers, so each may appear to the other without warning.
4. E-bikes magnify each of these risks. E-bikes are heavier and can sustain higher speeds than the walking-pace movement expected on a sidewalk, which lengthens stopping distances, shortens reaction time, and increases injury severity in a collision. In the densest pedestrian environment in the City, a flat prohibition provides clearer protection than a speed limit alone.
5. Clarity and regional consistency. A bright-line prohibition is easier to understand, post, and enforce than a discretionary standard; it channels riders onto the roadway and bikeways where drivers expect them; and it keeps Corona consistent with neighboring jurisdictions and Riverside County.
Numerous jurisdictions in the Inland Empire and Orange County maintain comparable prohibitions on sidewalk riding in business districts, or broader sidewalk prohibitions that necessarily include them. In the Inland Empire, Riverside County Ordinance 995 (2025) prohibits Class 2 electric bicycles on sidewalks within any business district and prohibits Class 3 electric bicycles from all sidewalks and trails unless signage specifically allows it, based on an express finding that unregulated e-bike use on sidewalks and trails presents a health and safety hazard to pedestrians. The City of Riverside prohibits sidewalk bicycle riding altogether except where signs permit it. In Orange County, the City of Huntington Beach prohibits bicycle riding on any sidewalk within a business district (and adjacent to schools, churches, recreation centers, and playgrounds, and on crosswalks and pedestrian overcrossings); the City of Santa Ana prohibits sidewalk riding within its business district and civic-center area; the City of Irvine prohibits sidewalk riding within its business district and civic center; and the City of Newport Beach prohibits bicycle riding on any sidewalk citywide.
Additional Sidewalk and Trail Safety Requirements (Section 10.48.050(I), (Q), and (R))
Where sidewalk riding is permitted (outside business districts), the proposed ordinance adds the following safety requirements responsive to Council’s direction:
Subsection (I) provides that a rider shall not operate faster than is reasonably safe and proper and in no event faster than 10 miles per hour on any sidewalk or trail unless otherwise posted.
Subsection (Q) requires riders to travel in the same direction as the flow of traffic on the adjacent roadway whenever practicable.
Subsection (R) requires riders, when on sidewalks or trails, to yield to pedestrians and to provide an audible warning when passing pedestrians or other bicycles.
Although a lower sidewalk speed was discussed, staff recommends the 10 mph standard to remain consistent with the limit contemplated in pending state legislation that would establish a 10 mph sidewalk speed limit statewide. Aligning with the anticipated state standard would avoid the need to re-sign City sidewalks if that legislation is enacted.
Bicycle and E-Bike Use in City Parks (Section 10.48.050(J) and Chapter 12.24) Council asked staff to address bicycle and e-bike use in City parks. The proposed ordinance does so in two ways. First, new Section 10.48.050(J) prohibits riding on playgrounds, open fields, sports fields, and turf or landscaped areas within any public park. Second, the ordinance makes conforming amendments to Chapter 12.24 (Parks and Recreation Areas): it defines “bicycle” in that chapter by reference to Section
10.48.010 so that e-bikes are included, expressly lists bicycles among the devices that may not be operated recklessly in a park, and revises Section 12.24.030(BB) to provide that bicycles, skateboards, roller skates, in-line skates, and non-motorized scooters may be operated within a park only on designated walkways and sidewalks and only in compliance with Chapter 10.48, while motorized scooters, go-carts, and similar devices remain prohibited. Because Chapter 12.24 already provides for ejection from a park as an enforcement tool, that authority is retained.
Violations, Penalties, and Education Alternative (Sections 10.48.060 and 12.24.040) The enforcement provisions of both chapters are restructured for clarity and consistency.
A general provision establishes that violations may be enforced under Chapter 1.08 of the Code. Responsive to Council’s emphasis on prioritizing education over punitive enforcement for juvenile riders, the ordinance provides that, for a minor’s first violation, the enforcement officer may allow the minor to complete a bicycle safety educational course approved by the Chief of Police in lieu of citation; the violation is still counted as a first violation for purposes of escalating penalties on any subsequent violation. The ordinance also provides that the parent or legal guardian of an unemancipated minor is jointly and severally liable for any fine imposed on the minor, and that the listed remedies are cumulative.
Repeal of Impoundment Provision and Limitations on Seizure of E-Bikes The existing Section 10.48.140 authorizes the Chief of Police to prohibit operation of a juvenile violator’s bicycle for up to 30 days by impounding the bicycle and holding the owner’s registration certificate. Staff recommends repealing this provision. At the April 15, 2026 meeting, Council also asked staff to consider whether the City could seize e-bikes from riders who repeatedly violate the regulations. The City Attorney’s office has advised that the City lacks the legal authority to impound e-bikes on that basis, and staff therefore does not recommend retaining the existing impoundment provision or adding a general seizure provision. The analysis supporting this conclusion is summarized below.
1. California Vehicle Code Section 22651.08 authorizes removal of a Class 3 electric bicycle (capable of speeds up to 28 mph) only when the operator is under 16 years of age. It does not authorize removal of Class 1 or Class 2 electric bicycles (both limited to 20 mph), and no other statutory or case law authority was identified that would permit impoundment of an e-bike for other violations.
2. California Vehicle Code Section 21 preempts local agencies from enacting ordinances on matters addressed by the Vehicle Code unless the local regulation is expressly authorized by the Vehicle Code. Because the Vehicle Code specifies the limited circumstances in which an e-bike may be impounded and does not otherwise authorize impoundment by local ordinance, Section 21 would likely prohibit the City from adopting an ordinance allowing impoundment of e-bikes for general violations of the CMC.
3. Although Vehicle Code Section 21206 allows local agencies to regulate the registration, parking, and operation of bicycles, the City Attorney’s office has advised that the section does not expressly authorize impoundment; it addresses operational and parking requirements only.
Repealing the existing impoundment provision therefore removes authority that the City cannot lawfully exercise. Importantly, this does not eliminate every impoundment tool: the City retains its authority under Vehicle Code Section 22651.08 to impound a Class 3 ebike operated by a person under 16, and the Police Department retains the ability to seize an e-bike as evidence in connection with a crime or a collision. For these reasons, the proposed ordinance relies on the first-violation education option, the escalating administrative penalty structure, and parental responsibility for fines, rather than impoundment, as the City’s principal enforcement tools for juvenile riders.
Modifications to E-Bikes and Parental Responsibility
Council asked staff to consider addressing modifications to e-bikes and parental responsibility. California Vehicle Code Section 312.5(d) already prohibits modifying an electric bicycle to exceed 20 miles per hour on motor power alone, to exceed 750 watts of power, or to remove its operable pedals, and provides that any vehicle so modified is no longer an electric bicycle under State law. Staff believes this statute is sufficient for PD to address any issues with e-bikes being modified.
Off-Highway Electric Motorcycles and Towing
Public comment at the April 15, 2026 meeting raised concerns about towing fees associated with certain e-bike-style vehicles. As clarified at that meeting, the City’s tow fees apply to illegal off-highway electric motorcycles operated unlawfully on City streets, sidewalks, or bike paths in violation of California Vehicle Code Section 436.1, and do not apply to lawful electric bicycles as defined by State Law. The proposed amendments do not change the City’s authority to tow with respect to off-highway electric motorcycles.
Penalty Structure and Parental Liability
Council asked staff to consider an escalating penalty structure for repeat violators.
Violations of Title 10 are infractions under CMC Section 10.64.010, and CMC Section
1.08.025 already establishes escalating penalties of $100 for a first offense, $200 for a second offense within one year, and $500 for each additional offense within a year. This structure is consistent with the penalties established by Riverside County Ordinance 995 and will apply to violations of the chapters 10.48 and 12.24 as amended.
California Civil Code Section 1714.1 establishes parental civil liability for any act of willful misconduct of a minor that results in injury or death to another person or injury to the property of another. Additionally, the proposed ordinance makes a parent or guardian jointly and severally liable for fines and penalties imposed upon a minor for violation of any provision of chapters 10.48 and 12.24.
Pending State Legislation
Several bills addressing electric bicycles are currently pending in the State Legislature, including measures that would set sidewalk speed limits, impose age- and speed-based restrictions, require safety courses, and address registration of certain e-bike classes.
Staff has drafted the proposed amendments to be consistent with these anticipated standards where possible—most notably the 10 mph sidewalk speed limit—so that the City’s regulations would require minimal revision if the legislation is enacted.
Education and Outreach Efforts
In addition to the proposed ordinance, the Police Department continues to pursue an education-focused approach consistent with Council’s direction. Department efforts include an e-bike safety class for parents and children, distribution of informational materials through the City’s water-bill mailings, public-service messaging through the City’s social-media channels, and ongoing coordination with the Corona-Norco Unified School District and School Resource Officers on outreach to students and families.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact associated with approval of the recommended action.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
This action is exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which states that a project is exempt from CEQA if the activity is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. This action amends Chapters 10.48 and 12.24 of the Corona Municipal Code to define and regulate electric bicycles and to add safety requirements, and there is no possibility that approving this ordinance will have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no environmental analysis is required.
PREPARED BY: GARY GRIFFITTS, POLICE LIEUTENANT
REVIEWED BY: ROBERT NEWMAN, CHIEF OF POLICE
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Exhibit 1 – Ordinance Amending Corona Municipal Code Chapters 10.48 and
12.24 2. Exhibit 2 – Amendments to Chapter 10.48 and 12.24 (Redline)