Prominent civic leaders have called on the City Council to table a vote on a proposed e-bike policy and instead turn to voters — an approach urged by some since October. That’s when parks department leadership, alongside city attorneys, first presented the policy that classified e-bikes as “non-motorized use,” to be permitted on trails where other bikes were allowed.
Critics saw the move as a violation of the 1997 voter-approved Trails, Open Space and Parks (TOPS) ordinance, which established sales tax revenues to acquire and manage many of the city’s premier outdoor destinations. The ordinance prohibits motorized vehicles — including bikes with electric motors, say critics of the proposed policy.
Last week at a City Council meeting, former council member and former Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams pointed to the TOPS ordinance stating “provisions shall not be repealed or amended except by a vote of the registered electorate of the City.”
“I urge you to secure the confidence of the voters of Colorado Springs by not trying to bypass them through some odd definition,” Williams told the council. “I respect innovation, but when it comes to ballot issues where we have trusted the people and they have trusted us, we need to fulfill that trust.”
Richard Skorman, another former council member and co-founder of the TOPS program, is also spearheading the challenge.
“There is a chance for some kind of lawsuit around this,” he told The Gazette. “I think it could come back to bite the city if we don’t get the voters’ permission.”
The City Council’s next work session is Monday. A city spokesperson confirmed e-bikes are expected for discussion then and at Tuesday’s meeting. That’s when an approval would be needed for a question to appear on April’s ballot.
Keith Thompson called the latest challenge “disappointing.” He’s executive director of Colorado Springs Mountain Bike Association, which has pushed for the e-bike policy with another leading nonprofit, Trails and Open Space Coalition.
The organizations have expressed worry over costly, potentially misleading campaigns. The organizations, too, have worried about a vote turning into a broader “referendum” on bikes.
Some opponents aren’t purely interested in a ballot question, Thompson argued. “They simply don’t like e-bikes, and many of them don’t really like mountain bikes either.”
Skorman has recognized “a healthier community” thanks to mountain bikes and “a real attraction” for young professionals moving to the city for the easily accessed terrain. He has also expressed concern over the growing popularity in the open spaces he first saw preserved by TOPS. He said he has been hit by bikes and knows other hikers who have been injured.
“I think we should have a good, healthy discussion in this community about user groups, and how they can conflict with each other,” Skorman said.
He suggested e-bikes could increase traffic and pose more conflicts for their uphill capabilities. In previous interviews with The Gazette, land managers with Douglas, Jefferson and Boulder counties, where e-bikes were greenlit in some open spaces years ago, reported no such increase in conflicts. Representatives, though, recognized imperfect data depending on trail users who report or not.
“There’s apprehension and fear,” Thompson said, “but the truth is e-bikes are very much in our open spaces today, they’re being used already.”
They should be legalized, Cory Sutela has said. But the executive director of mountain biking group Medicine Wheel Trail Advocates has opposed the parks department’s administrative approach — out of a different kind of fear.
“If we start getting in the habit of creating new definitions, I can imagine all sorts of different changes to the TOPS program,” he said. “Sure, in the short term, we have more e-bike access. But in the long term, the overall protections of the program could be at risk.”
If not in April, a vote could possibly be years out. Any wait would be necessary, Sutela said, “to prevent a legal challenge from overturning it in the future and setting us back even further.” And, he said, a wait could be time for more education and, critically, discussion regarding conservation easements that could conflict with e-bikes on parkland.
But the wait has already been too long, several e-bike enthusiasts said during public meetings in the fall. They expressed a desire to feel welcomed on trails, not banned. They spoke of e-bikes expanding their cycling life through older age, injury and disability, granting them continued rides with friends and family, and exercise and fresh air that they would not have otherwise.
The e-bike policy was about “creating accessible ways for residents to experience our great outdoors,” Mayor Yemi Mobolade said in a statement at the time of the proposal in October.
“We also must ensure that we are creating clear policies that people understand,” he said. “We know e-bikes are already being used on city trails, and we need a policy to manage this use.”
Classifying e-bikes as “non-motorized use” was in line with state and federal definitions, city attorneys have maintained.
“Importantly, we are not proposing to change anything in the (TOPS) ordinance,” Mobolade added in his statement in the fall. “What we are proposing is clarity on the definition of non-motorized use.”
Skorman disagreed. “To me, it’s a slippery slope.”
© 2025 The Virginia Gazette (Williamsburg, Va.). Visit www.vagazette.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
