FAIRFAX TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM #3.f
MEETING DATE September 3, 2025
PREPARED FOR Mayor and Town Council
PREPARED BY Christine Foster, Assistant to the Town Manager SUBJECT Authorize the Mayor to Sign an Updated Letter to the District Attorney Renewing the Request for Enforcement Action Against Manufacturers and Retailers That Mislabel Electric Motorcycles as Legal E-Bikes
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Mayor to sign the letter of support.
BACKGROUND
In October 2024, the Town Council authorized a letter to District Attorney Frugoli raising concerns about mislabeled electric vehicles that are being sold as e-bikes but actually exceed the legal limits under California Vehicle Code §312.5. These vehicles are often purchased for minors, creating public safety and legal concerns.
Since then, additional developments, including expanded sales of these devices and a ruling in a local consumer fraud lawsuit (Whitman v. Super73), have further highlighted the need for coordinated enforcement. A revised letter (Attachment 1) has been prepared for Council’s consideration in response to ongoing community concern, recent legal developments, and the continuing safety risks for youth.
DISCUSSION
The updated letter outlines the following key points:
• Legal Misclassification: Many vehicles sold as Class 2 e-bikes exceed 750 watts and can reach speeds over 20 mph, making them illegal under state law. • Consumer Fraud: These vehicles are often misrepresented to buyers, particularly parents, which may constitute fraud under California consumer protection laws. • Enforcement Gaps: Local law enforcement efforts are ongoing but limited. The DA’s office is uniquely empowered to investigate and litigate these cases under consumer fraud statutes. • New Developments: Expansion of illegal vehicle sales, growing community support for enforcement, and a legal precedent set by the Whitman v. Super73 case reinforce the need for action.
Staff finds that the updated letter is consistent with the Town’s prior position and ongoing efforts to improve youth safety and traffic enforcement, and that it aligns with Marin County’s broader response to the Grand Jury report: With Power Comes Responsibility – Youths Under Age 16 Operating Class 2 E-Bikes:
A Safety Risk.
2 FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
ATTACHMENTS
Draft Letter to District Attorney Frugoli
3 T O W N O F F A I R F A X
142 BOLINAS ROAD, FAIRFAX, CALIFORNIA 94930
PHONE (415) 453 - 1584 / FAX (415) 453 - 1618
The Honorable Lori E. Frugoli
District Attorney for Marin County
3501 Civic Center Drive, Suite 145
San Rafael, CA 94903
SUBJECT: Enforcement Action Against Manufacturers and Retailers That Mislabel Electric Motorcycles as Legal E-Bikes
Dear District Attorney Frugoli,
We are writing to respectfully renew the request for your office to investigate and take enforcement action against manufacturers and retailers that mislabel and sell high-powered e-motorcycles (commonly referred to as "e-motos") as legal Class 2 e-bikes in Marin. This practice is responsible for the proliferation of e-motos on Marin streets and in Marin schools and for the disproportionately high injury rate for Marin's youth. It also undermines the integrity of our traffic safety laws.
Last year, several Marin officials and community groups raised concerns about the growing number of underaged youth injured while riding mislabeled electric vehicles. County 911 data showed that youth ages 0-15 suffer disproportionately high injury rates on e-wheels. Safe Routes to Schools counts revealed that throttle ebikes dominate among middle schoolers. Local police confirmed that many popular models exceed the speed and motor limits allowed under California Vehicle Code (CVC) §312.5 for e-bikes, classifying them as e-motorcycles.
While local jurisdictions have attempted to address this through citations, towing, education and school registration programs, enforcement has proven difficult. Given the scope of the issue, we believe your office is uniquely positioned - with the authority to investigate and prosecute false advertising and fraudulent business practices under California law - to take meaningful action.
A relevant precedent is the multi-county litigation against JUUL for deceptive marketing of flavored vapes to youth, which resulted in a $462 million settlement.
Last year, we understand your office declined to pursue e-moto enforcement due to concerns about resources and lack of broad support. Recent developments, however, warrant reconsideration.
New Developments
1. Expansion of Illegal E-Moto Sales in Marin
Despite major retailers discontinuing sales of e-motos like Super73, some local retailers have expanded 4 their offerings, for example:
• P-51: Advertised top speed of 28-32 mph-well above the 20 mph Class 2 limit. Marketed as "Class 2 compliant" with no license requirement. Promotional materials target children as young as 13, and riders without helmets.
• Super73: Continues to be marketed as a Class 2 e-bike. According to a July 14 call with a Last Mile Marin salesperson, riders are encouraged to use the third party "Bike" app to exceed 20 mph-an acknowledgment of speed capability in excess of Class 2 limits. • E-Ride Pro: This model advertises speeds up to 62 mph and acceleration from 0-30 mph in two seconds. Although labeled "off-road," it is unclear whether sales are restricted to licensed adult riders or whether youth are being allowed to purchase and operate these vehicles illegally.
2. Community Momentum for Action
Marin residents, elected officials, and influential cycling coalitions increasingly express concern over illegal e-moto use on our streets. Serious injury reports on the County's Bicycle Safety Dashboard are rising, and schools struggle with enforcement as students evade school bans by parking off-campus.
The San Francisco Chronicle focused on this phenomenon at White Hill Middle School in a recent article.
The Marin County and municipal ordinances establishing a minimum age of 16 for Class 2 e-bikes effective July 1, 2025 also reflect a growing consensus for tighter controls.
We hope this strong and broad-based support reassures your office that this is a public safety issue, not an anti-e-bike stance. Mislabeling e-motorcycles as e-bikes - vehicles that can be legally operated by minors without a license - causes serious injuries and gives legitimate e-bikes a bad name.
That is why People For Bikes (the national trade association of manufacturers) has called for action against e-motos, along with Cal Bikes (the California coalition of cycling advocacy groups) and the Marin County Bicycle Coalition. To quote MCBC on "E-motorcycles sold as E-bikes:" "Attorneys, national bicycling advocacy groups, and local law enforcement [have]confirmed that many of the labeled Class 2 e-bikes, such as Super 73, were not legal on public roads and pathways. People were stunned to learn that the e-motorcycles were built to go significantly faster than the 20 MPH limit imposed by California law as defined for low-speed Class 2 e-bikes. Severe and permanent motorcycle-equivalent injuries to brains and physical mobility, particularly among children 10-19, began to be reported by health professionals .... Many parents, unaware of the legal restrictions, have inadvertently purchased these devices, putting them at legal and financial risk in the event of a crash." MCBC added that removing these illegal vehicles from our streets is an "essential first step in ensuring safer cycling environments and preserving the reputation of the cycling community." The most effective means is an enforcement action by public officials including Marin County.
3. Legal Precedent and Opportunity
The recent Whitman v. Super73 ruling by Marin Superior Court offers a clear legal pathway. In this consumer fraud action, Fairfax parents allege they were misled into buying Super73s for their children.
Rejecting Super73 's request to dismiss the case, the Court ruled that plaintiffs have stated valid claims against Super73. The case will now proceed to discovery and trial. 5 This case supports the viability of claims under California's consumer protection laws that your Office enforces. Importantly, it provides a roadmap for a similar case by your Office against local retailers like not yet named as a defendant in the Whitman case and against manufacturers in addition to Super73.
We respectfully urge your office to revisit this issue in light of the facts above. The community is ready to support you in protecting Marin's youth from the dangers of mislabeled e-motorcycles. We are available to provide further documentation or assistance.
Sincerely,
Lisel Blash, Mayor
Town of Fairfax