HB 3626 updates Oregon vehicle law to create a new category called a “powered micromobility device.” The bill defines that term as a small, powered vehicle designed to carry a person, with a maximum speed of 30 miles per hour and an unloaded weight under 100 pounds, while excluding electric assisted bicycles, motor assisted scooters, electric personal assistive mobility devices, and motorized wheelchairs. It then places powered micromobility devices into the vehicle code framework so they are treated similarly to bicycles for many purposes, including use on bicycle lanes and paths, while also making clear that they are not motor vehicles unless a statute specifically says otherwise.
The bill also consolidates and standardizes helmet requirements for children under 16. It extends protective headgear rules beyond bicycles to include electric assisted bicycles, motor assisted scooters, electric personal assistive mobility devices, powered micromobility devices, skateboards, nonmotorized scooters, and in-line skates. It revises age rules for operating certain devices, allowing people 14 and older to use Class 1 electric assisted bicycles and 16 and older to use Class 2 and Class 3 electric assisted bicycles, motor assisted scooters, electric personal assistive mobility devices, and powered micromobility devices. The bill also updates related offense provisions, fine structures, and citation rules to match the broader helmet and age framework.
HB 3626 requires the Oregon Department of Transportation to launch a public information campaign and develop a safety education program about the new rules, including helmet use, age limits, and rules of the road for bicycles and the covered micromobility devices. It also includes a one-time General Fund appropriation of $250,000 for that education effort, and the education section is scheduled to be repealed in 2028. In addition, the bill makes conforming changes across multiple sections of the vehicle code and traffic enforcement statutes, and it repeals several older provisions that are no longer needed after the consolidation.
The bill’s impact on state law is broad but targeted: it amends title, registration, licensing, bicycle-lane, and traffic-safety provisions to incorporate powered micromobility devices and to harmonize treatment of scooters, e-bikes, and similar devices. It also clarifies that local governments and state agencies may regulate the time, place, and manner of powered micromobility device use, including prohibiting use entirely in some areas. Affected parties include riders, parents or guardians of minors, retailers and rental businesses that sell or lease protective headgear, local governments, law enforcement, and ODOT.
The overall sentiment appears generally favorable and safety-oriented. The committee advanced the bill 10-2 with a do pass recommendation and referral to Ways and Means, suggesting substantial support for the bill’s modernization and safety measures. The main points of contention likely center on the age thresholds for device use, the expanded helmet mandate for minors, and the extent of local authority to regulate or prohibit powered micromobility devices, though no committee transcript is available here to show detailed debate.
HB 3626 amends multiple provisions of the Oregon Vehicle Code and related traffic statutes to add and regulate powered micromobility devices, expand helmet requirements for minors, and align age and operating rules for e-bikes and scooters. It also creates a temporary ODOT education program funded with a $250,000 General Fund appropriation and repeals several obsolete provisions, while preserving local government and agency authority to regulate micromobility use on public ways.
The available voting history suggests the bill was received positively in committee, passing 10-2 with a do pass recommendation and referral to Ways and Means. The bill’s focus on safety, clarity, and public education appears to have broad support, with any opposition likely tied to regulatory scope, age restrictions, or local control rather than the overall goal of the measure.
Likely areas of contention include whether the bill sets the right minimum ages for e-bike and scooter use, whether helmet requirements should extend to all of the listed devices for minors, and how much discretion local governments should have to restrict powered micromobility devices entirely. The bill also creates a new statutory category that may raise questions about how these devices are distinguished from bicycles, e-bikes, and scooters for enforcement and liability purposes.