LA County’s plan to back deals that keep rents low
David Wagner
covers housing in Southern California, a place where the lack of affordable housing contributes to homelessness.
Published July 7, 2026 4:41 PM
An apartment building rises above the streets of L.A.
(
Daniel Hanscom
/
Getty Images
)
Topline:
In what they described as an effort to prevent more corporate landlords from displacing Los Angeles renters, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors decided Tuesday to move forward with plans to require a new step in the process of selling certain apartment buildings.
The details: The board voted unanimously to develop a “Community Opportunity to Purchase Act.” If passed on a final vote, the law would compel apartment owners to notify affordable housing groups when they put certain buildings up for sale in unincorporated parts of L.A. County.
Why it matters: The goal, county leaders say, is to ensure that organizations committed to keeping rents low have a chance to buy buildings that might otherwise be scooped up by investors who might push out existing tenants through rent hikes. Landlords would not be required to sell to these groups if they can get a better offer on the open market, county officials say. Though the idea is still in early stages, landlords and real estate agents have expressed strong opposition, saying it could delay sales and discourage investment.
Read on … to learn how this idea has played out in other cities.
In what they described as an effort to prevent more corporate landlords from displacing Los Angeles renters, the L.A. County Board of Supervisors decided Tuesday to move forward with plans to require a new step in the process of selling certain apartment buildings.
The board voted unanimously to develop a “Community Opportunity to Purchase Act.” If passed on a final vote, the law would compel apartment owners to notify affordable housing groups when they put certain buildings up for sale in unincorporated parts of L.A. County.
The goal, county leaders say, is to ensure that organizations committed to keeping rents low have a chance to buy buildings that would likely otherwise be scooped up by investors who might push out existing tenants through rent hikes.
“The county is facing rising displacement pressures as rents outpace incomes,” said Supervisor Hilda Solis, who introduced the idea.
She cited statistics showing that more than half of L.A. County renters are considered “rent burdened” by federal government standards, with even higher rates among Black and Latino households.
“We need to fight,” Solis said. “We need to have tools to keep people in their homes.”
What buildings would be covered?
The proposed rules would only apply to buildings with five housing units or more and only to properties located in unincorporated areas, such as East L.A., City Terrace and Altadena. Based on past property sales data, the rules would apply to anywhere from 30 to 130 listings annually.
Nothing will change right away. Tuesday’s vote gives county staff 180 days to develop the regulations and bring them back to the board for a final vote.
During that time, the county will also work on developing a list of qualified buyers — such as affordable housing developers, community land trusts and other mission-driven organizations — who would be the first to hear about buildings coming up for sale.
Depending on how the regulations are written, the law could give those groups a “right of first refusal,” meaning they would have first dibs on making an offer to buy the building. County officials noted that a similar program in San Francisco gives qualified groups five days to respond with a letter of interest, followed by 20 days to place an offer.
Landlords would not be required to sell to these groups if they can get a better offer on the open market, county officials say.
Would sellers end up in a ‘Hotel California’ situation?
Though the idea is still in early stages, landlords and real estate agents expressed strong opposition during Tuesday’s public comment period.
“This proposal moves in the wrong direction by adding another layer of regulation and taxpayer expense, without creating any new housing units,” said Elizabeth de Carteret, the government affairs director at the Southland Regional Association of Realtors.
Meg Sullivan, who described herself as a “mom and pop” rental housing owner, said if the county establishes these rules in unincorporated areas, investors will choose to buy properties elsewhere.
“No private party in their right mind is going to invest in a market that looks like the equivalent of the ‘Hotel California’ song, where investors can check in, but it’s not clear they can ever leave, or on what timeline,” Sullivan said.
Existing groups say they’re ready to pursue deals
Tenant advocates told the board the proposed law would help protect renters from the whims of the profit-driven housing market.
Brenda Tafoya, executive director of El Sereno Community Land Trust, said organizations like hers have the experience needed to make market-rate offers on available properties.
“We work with the real estate market because we understand it,” Tafoya said. “We can partner with willing sellers and tenants to acquire properties, ensuring smooth transactions, while preserving permanently affordable housing.”
In response to concerns that the rules could delay properties from being offered to other prospective buyers, Supervisor Holly Mitchell asked county staff to consider regulations allowing listings to hit the open market at the same time affordable housing groups are given the chance to make an offer.
“This motion is not about taking property, forcing a sale or preventing a sale — it’s about creating a fair and transparent process,” Mitchell said, arguing that many older landlords want to retire without having to sell to corporate buyers.
Where would the funding come from?
Mitchell said public funding to support building purchases could come from money raised by Measure A, the county sales tax increase voters approved in 2024 to support housing and homelessness efforts. The L.A. County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency, which is funded by the tax revenue, has programs to support affordable housing preservation.
L.A.’s idea is not new. Washington, D.C., has had a “Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act” in place since 1980.
Supporters say D.C. tenants use the city’s program to form associations that negotiate with new buyers to ensure ongoing affordability in about half of buildings coming up for sale, according to a 2023 study by the Coalition for Nonprofit Housing and Economic Development.
But critics point out that D.C.’s program rarely results in tenants actually owning their buildings. That same 2023 study found that ownership by a tenant-sponsored cooperatives was the outcome in only about 2% of building sales.
Solis said she wants the county to take a phased approach, with the initial program eventually being expanded to include a way for tenants to purchase their buildings directly.
A detention officer waits outside the main entrance of the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego on Feb. 20, 2026.
(
Adriana Helditz
/
CalMatters
)
Topline:
A new law will require local agencies to publicly disclose audio recordings and written records of 911 calls originating from privately run immigration detention facilities.
The Detention Facility Transparency Act: Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 423, called the Detention Facility Transparency Act, on Tuesday. It was one of 21 immigration-related bills in a package his office announced the same day. The law will require local agencies to turn over recordings and written records of 911 calls from privately run detention facilities if a member of the public requests them. It includes an exception if an active investigation is underway and requires redacting the names of affected individuals.
The backstory: In February, L.A. Taco reported that detainees inside Otay Mesa were throwing lotion bottles wrapped with notes about conditions inside over the wall of the facility to organizers standing outside. Earlier this year, CalMatters sought information, including 911 audio records and other reports, about alleged serious incidents at detention facilities through a California Public Records Act request. While a San Diego County sheriff’s spokesperson said the agency was not investigating those cases, he said he was unable to turn over additional records because they were part of “a law enforcement investigation.”
A new law will require local agencies to publicly disclose audio recordings and written records of 911 calls originating from privately run immigration detention facilities. The bill was prompted by CalMatters reporting on alleged sexual assaults at the Otay Mesa Detention Center.
Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 423, called the Detention Facility Transparency Act, on Tuesday. It was one of 21 immigration-related bills in a package his office announced the same day.
The law will require local agencies to turn over recordings and written records of 911 calls from privately run detention facilities, if a member of the public requests them. It includes an exception if an active investigation is underway and requires redacting the names of affected individuals.
“Well, it goes without saying, these past two years, Donald Trump has brought fear and has brought anxiety, disruption and stress to our immigrant communities,” Newsom said in a recorded video statement on his website.
“So, today, I sign a number of bills to strengthen transparency and to strengthen accountability and oversight over federal immigration enforcement and civil detention in our state,” the governor said.
State Sen. Lena Gonzalez, a Democrat from Long Beach, introduced SB 423 as state investigations and courts found serious gaps in essential medical care within the facilities. She said the aim was to stop private operators, and the agencies that work alongside them, from keeping what happens behind detention walls from the public's view.
In February, L.A. Taco reported that detainees inside Otay Mesa were throwing lotion bottles wrapped with notes about conditions inside over the wall of the facility to organizers standing outside.
“For 280 days we haven’t eaten a single piece of fruit, banana, apple, orange, or anything fresh," an Otay Mesa detainee wrote, the news outlet reported. "We are all in one big room with no doors or windows. We can’t see any grass or trees. We are all constantly sick.”
Gonzalez, who is chair of the Legislative Latino Caucus, said no person “should have to resort to throwing notes over the walls of a detention facility to have their needs met and their voices heard.”
Earlier this year, CalMatters sought information, including 911 audio records and other reports, about alleged serious incidents at detention facilities through a California Public Records Act request. While a San Diego County sheriff’s spokesperson said the agency was not investigating those cases, he said he was unable to turn over additional records because they were part of “a law enforcement investigation.”
“When journalists and reporters attempted to obtain records about reported incidents at these facilities through the Public Records Act, they faced severe pushback from law enforcement, citing vague investigatory records exemptions, despite there being no active investigation,” said Gonzalez.
Immigrant Defense Advocates and the First Amendment Coalition co-sponsored the bill.
“The governor has sent a powerful message: No more secrecy. SB 423 makes clear that 911 calls and related records about events in detention must be released upon request. This will shed more light on a notoriously opaque system, leading to stronger oversight and accountability,” Ginny LaRoe, Advocacy Director, First Amendment Coalition, said in a written statement.
Gonzalez’s bill was one of several detention oversight bills Newsom signed Tuesday. Others impose a new 25% tax on private detention facilities, expand health, safety and oversight requirements for the centers, and add to the state attorney general’s oversight role.
Why now: The ride has been closed since the evening of July 12, after two women who rode the coaster less than a week apart both needed to be rushed to the hospital after they exited. One of them, 25-year-old Naomi Greer-Wilkinson, collapsed shortly after the ride ended and was found to have massive brain bleeding inside the skull that required emergency brain surgery. She remains in a vegetative state in the hospital, unable to speak or move and dependent on a ventilator. Her family filed a lawsuit against Six Flags on her behalf.
Why it matters: Six Flags recently settled a wrongful-death lawsuit from the family of a 22-year-old man who died after riding the coaster in 2022, and three more lawsuits alleging traumatic brain injuries were filed last week. “While X2 consistently passed a multitude of safety tests, we have decided to close the ride because we believe it’s the right thing to do,” park President Brian Oerding said in an online announcement. “Ride safety is a cornerstone of our business, and when we see guest confidence affected, we take it seriously.”
The backstory: According to the Six Flags Magic Mountain website, the X2 roller coaster reaches a top speed of 76 mph (122 kph) and has a total length of 3,610 feet (1,100 meters). The seats rotate 360 degrees “so your body will be flipping around the entire time,” and the ride features two “raven turns” — half loops that turn into sheer drops midway. It debuted at the park in 2002 under the name X as the world’s first “fourth-dimension” roller coaster and reopened in 2008 as X2 with new trains and special effects. The uniqueness of the ride drew thrill-seekers from around the world and garnered a fervent fanbase.
The Southern California theme park said Tuesday that it is permanently shuttering the ride after nearly 20 years. Six Flags recently settled a wrongful-death lawsuit from the family of a 22-year-old man who died after riding the coaster in 2022, and three more lawsuits alleging traumatic brain injuries were filed last week.
“While X2 consistently passed a multitude of safety tests, we have decided to close the ride because we believe it’s the right thing to do,” park President Brian Oerding said in an online announcement. “Ride safety is a cornerstone of our business, and when we see guest confidence affected, we take it seriously.”
The ride has been closed since the evening of July 12, after two women who rode the coaster less than a week apart both needed to be rushed to the hospital after they exited.
One of them, 25-year-old Naomi Greer-Wilkinson, collapsed shortly after the ride ended and was found to have massive brain bleeding inside the skull that required emergency brain surgery. She remains in a vegetative state in the hospital, unable to speak or move and dependent on a ventilator. Her family filed a lawsuit against Six Flags on her behalf.
Her attorneys said more than 100 people claimed they suffered brain injuries from the roller coaster in the past two years, and more lawsuits would be filed in the coming weeks.
According to the Six Flags Magic Mountain website, the X2 roller coaster reaches a top speed of 76 mph (122 kph) and has a total length of 3,610 feet (1,100 meters). The seats rotate 360 degrees “so your body will be flipping around the entire time,” and the ride features two “raven turns” — half loops that turn into sheer drops midway.
It debuted at the park in 2002 under the name X as the world’s first “fourth-dimension” roller coaster and reopened in 2008 as X2 with new trains and special effects. The uniqueness of the ride drew thrill-seekers from around the world and garnered a fervent fanbase.
The park settled a wrongful-death lawsuit filed by the family of Christopher Hawley, a 22-year-old who died the day after he rode X2. He was taken to the hospital after the ride with severe brain bleeding. The medical examiner’s office said his death was from blunt head trauma. The case was settled at the end of August, a few days before the trial was scheduled to start.
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the administration to resume, for now, deportations of migrants to countries that are not identified in their removal orders, handing President Donald Trump another victory in his aggressive immigration agenda.
The order: The court's brief order granting the petition did not outline a reason for staying a lower-court order that blocked the third-country deportations. It noted the court's three liberal justices objected to staying the order. The administration said it has used the policy to deport tens of thousands of noncitizens to Mexico and countries in Africa and Latin America after the migrants' home countries refused to accept them.
What's next: The court said it would take up the case for full oral argument in December. The action by the high court marks the third time the justices have rejected efforts by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Boston to pause the deportations, which the judge said violate due process rights and fail to give detainees meaningful notice to raise arguments that they have credible fears of torture or abuse in the countries where they could be sent.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the administration to resume, for now, deportations of migrants to countries that are not identified in their removal orders, handing President Donald Trump another victory in his aggressive immigration agenda.
The court also said it would take up the case for full oral argument in December.
The court's brief order granting the petition did not outline a reason for staying a lower-court order that blocked the third-country deportations. It noted the court's three liberal justices objected to staying the order.
Solicitor General John Sauer told the justices the third-country deportation policy amounted to "an essential tool to remove certain aliens, including some of the worst criminal aliens" in court papers earlier this month. The administration said it has used the policy to deport tens of thousands of noncitizens to Mexico and countries in Africa and Latin America after the migrants' home countries refused to accept them.
"While certain aliens may benefit from stalling their removal, the Nation does not," Sauer wrote in an emergency application Sept. 24.
The action by the high court marks the third time the justices have rejected efforts by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Boston to pause the deportations, which the judge said violate due process rights and fail to give detainees meaningful notice to raise arguments that they have credible fears of torture or abuse in the countries where they could be sent.
The National Immigration Litigation Alliance, which is representing migrants facing deportation, said in court papers that their clients are facing significant harms.
"The record shows that class members removed without meaningful notice or an opportunity to present country-specific protection claims have faced prolonged and arbitrary detention, beatings and sexual assault, disappearance, and chain refoulement to countries from which the United States had already granted them protection," wrote lawyer Trina Realmuto. "These harms cannot be undone."
The Department of Homeland Security said Murphy's rulings have created a logistical nightmare, including canceled flights, potential diplomatic clashes, and a lag in removing people convicted of assault and drug crimes.
The administration argued that if a country has assured Secretary of State Marco Rubio that it will not engage in persecution or torture, that should be enough to deport a noncitizen to a country that's not their own.
The Supreme Court's conservative supermajority has recognized the president has substantial authority over the border. Last summer, in a 6-to-3 decision, the court ruled President Trump has sweeping power to end the temporary protected status program for people who can't return to their home countries because of wars and natural disasters.
Crucial teen commuting tool? Or dangerous devices?
Jill Replogle
covers public corruption, debates over our voting system, culture war battles — and more.
Published September 29, 2026 2:08 PM
Police examine an e-bike at the Orange County District Attorney's buyback event on Sept. 13, 2026 at Angel Stadium.
(
Jill Replogle
/
LAist
)
Topline:
E-bikes have become very popular in Orange County, where teens and tweens rely on the often-powerful vehicles to traverse long distances in spread-out suburbia. But their popularity has brought an alarming increase in serious injuries, especially among young riders.
The crackdown: Some O.C. school districts ban e-bikes on certain campuses. Others require e-bike safety training for students. District Attorney Todd Spitzer has pressed criminal charges against four parents after their children were involved in collisions — all of them on more powerful e-motorcycles.
Parents’ dilemma: Parents of e-bike commuters have said they are not opposed to regulating the vehicles, and they want authorities to crack down on dangerous and illegal riding. But an outright ban goes too far, they’ve said. The vehicles help cut down on the need for parental driving, and help students get to school on time, they’ve argued.
Read more… to learn how state and local policymakers are responding to the growing popularity of e-bikes among O.C. teens.
The bell had already rung on a recent morning at Newport Beach’s Ensign Intermediate School. But two of the school’s students hadn’t made it to class. Instead, they were sitting on a sidewalk across from campus, detained by a police officer for parking their e-bikes on the street.
The situation at Ensign has gotten messy since the school district, Newport-Mesa Unified, voted to ban e-bikes from middle and elementary school campuses, citing safety concerns. Many students kept riding their e-bikes to school anyway, parking them in swarms in the surrounding neighborhood.
The neighbors did not like this. Shouting matches ensued between students and homeowners. At least one student returned from class to find her tires deflated.
The city responded to the tension by putting up “No e-bike parking” signs on several streets.
The city of Newport Beach prohibited e-bikes on some streets around Ensign Intermediate School after neighbors complained.
(
Jill Replogle
/
LAist
)
“I wouldn't want it in my neighborhood either, like, I get it,” said Corey Gulbranson, who got a $100 parking ticket on behalf of his daughter, one of the Ensign students detained for allegedly illegally parking her e-bike. “But at the end of the day, we're just trying to get our kids to school on a legal mode of transportation.”
Crucial teen commuting tools? Or dangerous devices?
E-bikes and significantly more powerful e-motorcycles have become very popular in many Orange County suburbs, where the streets are wide, public transit is spotty, and distances are longer than some are willing to pedal on a regular bike. For teens and tweens, e-bikes provide a taste of independence. They also relieve parents of some of their driving duties. Plus, e-bikes can replace polluting cars.
But their popularity has brought an alarming increase in serious injuries, especially among young riders.
At Providence Mission Hospital in Mission Viejo, e-bike crashes are now sending more kids to the ER than any other cause, according to Dr. Tetsuya Takeuchi, the hospital’s trauma medical director. More than 70% of those patients had some level of head injury, from minor concussions to devastating brain damage, he said, often because they were not wearing a helmet.
But even Takeuchi recognizes the nearly irresistible draw of e-bikes.
“If you ride one, you realize how easy it is to go everywhere with it,” he said. “I am not by any means surprised at how popular this is, especially amongst kids.”
‘Bicycle-shaped devices’
Not all e-bikes are equally fast, or equally dangerous. California uses a three-tier system, developed by the bike industry, to classify e-bikes depending on:
engine power
max speed
whether the bike has pedals
whether a cyclist has to use those pedals before the engine kicks in
California law prohibits children under age 16 from riding Class 3 e-bikes with engines capable of reaching 28 miles per hour. In reality, though, many kids are riding e-vehicles that go faster — in some cases, much faster.
“There are lots of what I will call 'bicycle-shaped devices' being ridden,” said Asha Weinstein Agrawal, a research associate at the Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University. “Some of them are legal e-bikes. Some of them are not.”
What do California laws say about e-bikes and e-motorcycles?
First off, all e-bikes must have pedals. California has adopted a three-tier classification system for e-bikes:
Type of E-Bike
Pedal Assist
Speed
Age and Helmet Requirements
Class 1
Yes
Up to 20 mph, no throttle
No age limit. Helmet required for 17 and under.
Class 2
No (throttle or push button)
Up to 20 mph
No age limit. Helmet required for 17 and under.
Class 3
Yes
Up to 28 mph
Must be 16 or older. Helmet required for all ages.
E-motorcycles are designed primarily for off-highway use and require a driver’s license.
For more information, check out Go Safely California, a joint effort of CalTrans and the state Office of Traffic Safety.
Agrawal recently co-authored a 210-page report on e-bike safety. It includes data collected from middle and high schools in Marin and San Mateo counties, which showed that only 12% of students’ e-bikes fit into the legal classification system. The other 88% were more powerful than legally allowed under California law.
A Newport Beach Police officer tickets a middle schooler for parking her e-bike on the street across from Ensign Middle School on Sept. 4, 2026.
(
Jill Replogle
/
LAist
)
Any bicycle-shaped device that goes faster than 30 miles per hour is technically an e-motorcycle, which requires a special driver’s license and, if ridden on public roads, insurance and registration.
Agrawal said it’s hard for parents, and even police officers, to figure out what’s legal and what’s not.
“Nobody understands this,” she said. “It’s very hard to enforce.”
The crackdown
Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer has taken some unusual approaches to addressing the e-bike dilemma. To date, he has pressed criminal charges — including for child endangerment — against four parents after their children were involved in collisions, all of them on e-motorcycles, not e-bikes.
One of those parents, a woman from Aliso Viejo, was charged with three felonies, including involuntary manslaughter, after her 14-year-old son allegedly struck and killed an 81-year-old man while doing wheelies in the street in Lake Forest on an e-motorcycle souped up to reach 60 miles per hour.
People with e-bikes, e-scooters and e-motos move through the long line at the Orange County District Attorney's buyback event at Angel Stadium, Sept. 13, 2026.
(
Jill Replogle
/
LAist
)
The DA’s office said it has also sent letters to retailers reminding them of a ban on selling products used to modify e-bikes to go faster than legally allowed.
Spitzer recently tried another novel approach: buybacks. On a recent Sunday, hundreds of people brought their e-bikes, e-scooters and e-motos to an event at Angel Stadium in Anaheim, hoping to turn them in for up to a thousand dollars in gift cards. The county event was paid for with $100,000 in asset forfeiture funds.
One man near the front of the line said he had arrived at 1 a.m. By the time the event started at 10 a.m., sheriff’s deputies were turning people away.
“Holy smokes,” Spitzer said from behind a podium mounted in the parking lot. “Look at the participation. … And you can see why, because we have a serious problem here in Orange County and across the nation with individuals who have e-bikes and e-motorcycles.”
Spitzer spoke about the dangers, but also the attractiveness of a high-powered personal vehicle, especially for teen boys.
“We're not gonna change our internal DNA about who we are as young people and the fact we wanna go places, and we wanna experiment, and quite frankly, we like fast things,” he said. “ But the fact of the matter is when you have a machine, and you don't understand its capabilities, you can find yourself in harm's way very quickly before you can control that mechanism.”
Orange County District Attorney is testing out a range of strategies to crack down on illegal e-bikes and e-motos, including a buyback event at Angel Stadium on Sept. 13, 2026.
(
Jill Replogle
/
LAist
)
Are unsafe riders ‘ruining it for other people’?
Paul Dumont drove to the buyback event all the way from Chatsworth in hopes of exchanging five e-bikes he had bought for his kids and grandkids.
“They got injured on them when we first got them, so they've been sitting in storage,” he said of the bikes.
Dumont said he wished he had bought less powerful e-bikes. “But I bought them the best ones,” he said. “I thought they'd be better.”
Denise Mills and her 17-year-old son Nathanael came from Torrance to turn in three e-motorcycles that he had been riding to and from his high school last year. He stopped after the school told him it was illegal. A new state law defining e-motorcycles took effect in January.
A student at Ensign Middle School runs to campus after parking his e-bike at a nearby park, Sept. 4, 2026.
(
Jill Replogle
/
LAist
)
“That was very unfortunate because it's his primary source of transportation,” Mills said. “Now it's his dad and I.”
Nathanael said he had logged several thousand miles without an accident.
“ Partially it's, like, people ruining it for other people,” he said of efforts to tighten the rules for young riders.
Local leaders grapple with the flood of e-bikes
Cities and school districts are testing a variety of approaches to decrease e-bike crashes and injuries, from prohibiting riding on sidewalks to outright bans for young riders. The Brea City Council has even discussed using police drones to follow unsafe youth riders home in order to inform their parents.
In a more typical approach, the Huntington Beach City School District requires all student e-bike commuters to pass a safety course in order to get a permit to park their bike on campus. Newport-Mesa has a similar program for high schoolers.
Marin County limits youth under age 16 to riding Class 1 “pedal-assist” e-bikes, which have motors that kick in only while pedaling, and shut off once the bike reaches 20 miles per hour. The ban on more powerful e-bikes for young riders is part of a pilot program approved by the state legislature that sunsets in 2029.
At the federal level, O.C. Congressman Dave Min, D-Irvine, co-authored a bill earlier this year, the Safe SPEEDS Act, that would develop nationwide safety standards for e-bikes, including minimum age recommendations.
A dilemma for parents
Parents of student e-bike commuters have said they do not oppose regulating the vehicles, and they want authorities to crack down on dangerous and illegal riding. But an outright ban goes too far, they’ve said.
“ I know there are kids that are a little wild,” said Kellie Newcombe, whose 13-year-old daughter is still riding her pedal-assist bike from their home in Costa Mesa to Ensign Intermediate School in Newport Beach.
“That is not my child. That is not her friends. They are so ridiculously safe and by the book,” she said. “It's just super frustrating that they would say every kid cannot ride an e-bike.”
A spokesperson for Newport-Mesa Unified told LAist in an email that the school district’s new e-bike restrictions have gone smoothly and are helping to reinforce safety. But that is not how Gulbranson and Newcombe see it.
“We've had my daughter intimidated by multiple neighbors now,” Gulbranson said. “This whole guise of doing it under safety is totally misguided.”
Newcombe said she worries about her daughter’s safety more now that an increasing number of parents are driving their kids to school.
“They're in a rush because the traffic is insane,” she said. Plus, her daughter now has to cross a busy street to get to campus.
Newcombe said she wishes the school district would work with local leaders and police to enforce e-bike rules and to create safer paths to school for responsible riders.
How to reach me
If you have a tip, you can reach me on Signal. My username is @jillrep.79.
For instructions on getting started with Signal, see the app's support page. Once you're on, you can type my username in the search bar after starting a new chat.
And if you're comfortable just reaching out by email I'm at jreplogle@scpr.org