E-Bikes and E-Scooters in New Jersey: Today and Tomorrow

New Jersey’s roads are buzzing–literally. Electric bikes and scooters are zipping through neighborhoods, carving a path toward a greener, more convenient future. A favorite among food delivery drivers and short-distance commuters and errand-runners, “e-bikes” and “e-scooters” are changing how New Jersey pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers share the road. These “micromobility” vehicles, however, are not without their risks. According to a recent University of California San Francisco study, e-bike injuries across the U.S. increased from 751 in 2017 to 23,493 in 2022, and e-scooter injuries rose from 8,566 to 56,847 over that timeframe.

The rapid rise of these vehicles has, to date, outpaced the development of a full regulatory regime in New Jersey. But that appears to be changing. Thanks to recently proposed legislation covering e-bikes and e-scooters, along with a recent New Jersey Supreme Court decision regarding personal injury protection (“PIP”) coverage for e-scooter riders, a fuller regulatory framework is on the horizon.

Current regulation of e-bikes and e-scooters

Today, N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.16 provides the lion’s share of regulations concerning “low-speed” e-bikes and e-scooters. Per N.J.S.A. 39:1-1, “low-speed” e-bikes are bicycles with electric motors that do not provide assistance when the bikes reach a speed of 20 miles per hour. “Low-speed” e-scooters are ones with electric motors “capable of propelling the device with or without human propulsion at a maximum speed of less than 19 miles per hour.”

N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.16(a) permits riders to operate e-bikes and e-scooters on the state’s “streets, highways, roadways, and bicycle paths,” and allows riders to park them on a sidewalk, provided that the vehicle “does not impede the normal movement of pedestrian or other traffic upon the sidewalk.” The statute permits riders to operate e-bikes and e-scooters on bicycle paths, subject to local government entities’ or a state agency’s prohibition on doing so on paths under their jurisdiction. By default, riders cannot operate an e-bike or e-scooter on a trail designated for non-motorized traffic “if such trail has a natural surface tread made by clearing and grading the soil and no surfacing materials have been added.”

N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.16(h) additionally requires e-bikes and e-scooters to be considered “motor vehicles” under 23 U.S.C. § 154, which concerns open alcoholic containers in motor vehicles. However, under N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.16(g), all New Jersey statutes, rules, and regulations applicable to bicycles “shall apply to low-speed electric bicycles and low-speed electric scooters, except those provisions which by their very nature may have no application to low-speed electric bicycles or low-speed electric scooters.”

N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.16(g) is noteworthy for two reasons. First, because it calls for e-bikes and e-scooters to be treated like bicycles, and absent any additional regulations, only riders or passengers under the age of 17 are legally required to wear a safety helmet, per N.J.S.A. 39:4-10.1. This is despite the many e-bikes and e-scooters on the market that can travel faster than 30 miles per hour. Second, N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.1 states that “every person riding a bicycle upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle.” Thus, e-bike and e-scooter drivers have rights and duties above those of pedestrians.

Potential regulation of e-bikes and e-scooters

An interesting omission from N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.16 is that e-bike and e-scooter owners and riders need not own a license to operate them, register them, or insure them. That may change soon.

New Jersey state senators Vin Gopal and Nicholas P. Scutari co-sponsored and introduced Senate Bill No. 2292 in January 2024. This bill would require owners of e-bikes and e-scooters to register them annually with the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission for a fee of $8 each year, and to carry PIP insurance coverage for pedestrians, liability insurance coverage, and uninsured motorist coverage.

The bill has sparked considerable debate and has been met with strong opposition. Proponents argue that the measure increases safety and accountability on the roads, while opponents stress concerns that the bill raises barriers to e-bike/e-scooter accessibility and equitable access to transportation, particularly for low-income individuals.

Opponents point out that the insurance requirement is particularly problematic for those who opt for these vehicles as a cost-effective alternative to car ownership. For these riders, the added financial burden of insurance could negate the economic benefits of choosing an e-bike or e-scooter in the first place, especially when they’re using theirs to earn an income, such as by delivering food for companies like DoorDash, Grubhub, and Uber.

Besides the financial implications, the insurance requirement also raises practical concerns. Currently, there is no insurance product specifically designed for e-bikes and e-scooters in New Jersey. Insurance providers have voiced concerns over the mismatch between existing insurance products and the new law, opining that new products would take years to develop. Given the lack of current offerings, some observers speculate insurers will price e-bike and e-scooter insurance similarly to motorcycle insurance, which is notoriously expensive. This could further deter individuals from using these vehicles, especially those who are already struggling financially.

One solution discussed by safe street advocates is amending New Jersey’s No-Fault Act to cover low-speed e-bikes and e-scooters the same way pedestrians are covered by personal injury insurance provisions. Interestingly, the New Jersey Supreme Court recently issued a decision regarding that issue.

The New Jersey Supreme Court enters the e-bike/e-scooter discussion

This past May, mere months after Senators Gopal and Scutari introduced their e-bikes/e-scooters bill, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled unanimously that e-scooter riders cannot receive PIP benefits under their automobile policies when they’re injured in an accident while riding their e-scooter because they do not fall within the definition of a “pedestrian” under New Jersey’s No-Fault Act.

In Goyco v. Progressive Insurance Company, David Goyco was riding an e-scooter in November 2021 in Elizabeth, New Jersey, when he was struck by a car. At the time, he was insured by Progressive Insurance Co. with a policy that had no-fault coverage. He filed a claim for PIP benefits based on his injuries and corresponding medical expenses. Progressive denied his claim because the e-scooter did not qualify as an automobile under the New Jersey Auto Insurance Law, and he did not meet the definition of a pedestrian.

Goyco filed suit seeking approval of his claim. One of his arguments was that because (as I mentioned above) N.J.S.A. 39:4-14.16(g) provides that e-bikes and e-scooters should be considered the equivalents of a bicycle, and N.J.S.A. 39:6A-2(h) recognizes bicyclists as pedestrians under the state’s No-Fault Act, e-scooter riders should receive PIP benefits under their automobile policies.

The trial court ruled against Goyco, holding that he was not operating a motor vehicle when he was injured nor was he a pedestrian as that term is defined by N.J.S.A. 39:6A-2(h): “any person who is not occupying a vehicle propelled by other than muscular power and designed primarily for use on highways, rails and tracks.” The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s ruling.

The New Jersey Supreme Court, after engaging in traditional statutory interpretation, found that Goyco’s e-scooter was “propelled by other than muscular power” and was “designed primarily for use on highways,” as “highway” is normally broadly defined. Thus, he was not a pedestrian.

Goyco’s policy arguments were equally unpersuasive to the court. It noted that the No-Fault Act had two primary goals: “provid[ing] prompt payment of medical expenses arising from an automobile accident, regardless of fault,” and “contain[ing] the rising cost of automobile insurance premiums.” The court opined that “[e]xpanding the definition of ‘pedestrian’ to include [e-scooter] operators would advance the medical coverage goal but undermine the goal of curbing the rise of insurance costs.” It further noted that the New Jersey Legislature “may certainly choose to expand the availability of PIP coverage to [e-scooter] operators, as they did with motorcycles, but that policy decision and its insurance cost implications, if any, is properly for the legislature, not the court.”

The path ahead for regulation of e-bikes and e-scooters

From Sussex County to Cape May County and everywhere in between, New Jerseyans need only take a brief walk or short drive around their neighborhoods to see just how prevalent e-bikes and e-scooters are. With so many of these vehicles on the road, and so many more likely to join them, it would be shocking if New Jersey did not increase its regulation of them.

Given Senator Gopal and Scutari’s proposed legislation, it is a safe bet that we will see a new registration program for e-bikes and e-scooters. An insurance requirement, however, might be a different story.

Based on the response to that legislation and the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in Goyco, we are likely to see a compromise regarding insuring e-bikes and e-scooters, including perhaps amending the No-Fault Act. The compromise will need to balance (i) protecting e-bike and e-scooter drivers and other people on the road from harm caused by e-bikes, e-scooters, and other vehicles with (ii) the reality that a primary reason so many New Jerseyans have turned to e-bikes and e-scooters is because they offer relatively lower costs of ownership compared to automobiles. Until an affordable insurance option for e-bike and e-scooter owners is available, we are unlikely to see an insurance requirement mandated by New Jersey law.

Nicole Marie Lombardi is an attorney at Lombardi & Lombardi, P.A., a leading New Jersey personal injury, criminal defense, and employment law firm effectively representing the legal needs of its clients since 1975. She can be reached at nicolel@lombardiandlombardi.com.