Julie Menin is Weighing At Least 17 E-Bike and E-Moto Bills  Here’s What We Know 17%

By Emily Smith38%

8/5/2026, 9:05:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Burden of Proof, and Optimism Bias, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 16.6% saturation with 119 hits. Analysis detected 543 faulty-reasoning hits from 718 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 25% and a BS Rank of 17% (25,576 of 30,584 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 83.60% of the article peer group.

City Council Speaker Julie Menin is throwing the book at the “e-bike” debate and considering no less than 17 bills related to e-micromobility regulation at a marquee hearing scheduled for late September. 
At a press conference on Tuesday announcing the new bills, Menin claimed that her “comprehensive legislative review” was “not about blaming any one party,” but none of the bills directly address reckless car and truck drivers, who cause the majority of e-bike-involved crashes and kill or injure thousands of New Yorkers each year. 
Menin’s office has said all 17 bills are on the table, and that the hearing’s goal is to “identify effective legislative solutions” from among them. 
So far, Menin and her office have explicitly identified just 10 existing bills, while teasing another six. 
The Sept. 30 hearing is a long way’s away, and Menin has suggested the number of bills could still grow. 
For now, here’s a list of the e-bike and e-moto bills on Speaker Menin and her Council colleagues have prepared for their proverbial legislative table: 
Speaker Julie Menin on her X account, detailing the announcement of the new bills. 
Intro 950 , sponsored by Council Member Lynn Schulman (D-Forest Hills), requires delivery services to get a business license from the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection. 
Intro 244 , sponsored by Council Member Crystal Hudson (D-Crown Heights), prohibits the sale and rental of class 3 e-bikes  which can go up to 25 miles per hour and sometimes have a throttle. 
Hudson first introduced this bill last year with the support of 24 co-sponsors and the biking and walking advocacy group Transportation Alternatives. 
Intro 124 from Council Member Selvena Brooks-Power would establish a task force to investigate how to make street designs and infrastructure safer for all motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. 
Brooks-Powers (D-Laurelton) proposed several task forces and new reporting requirement during her time chairing the Council Transportation Committee under former Speaker Adrienne Adams  while opposing bike lanes in her own district. 
Also sponsored by Brooks-Powers is Intro 110 , which expands the city’s commercial bike safety laws by requiring businesses to keep records of their delivery workers and provide them with safety equipment, information and identification. 
A third bill sponsored by Brooks-Powers, Intro 787 , would require the NYPD to publicly report where it conducted “targeted” traffic enforcement , including information regarding where targets were located and specific instances of e-scooter or e-bike related enforcement. 
Another bill, Intro 389 , introduced by Lincoln Restler (D-Boerum Hill), requires all third-party food delivery services to make sure that the mopeds used by workers are properly registered with the state Department of Motor Vehicles. 
Sponsored by Council Member Gale Brewer (D-Upper West Side), Intro 78 , would require third-party apps to disclose driver data , including ID numbers and delivery time and location. 
“That information will help the city identify where infrastructure investments are needed, where they’re needed most,” said Brewer. 
Intro 95 , also from Brewer, calls for the distribution of materials detailing the proper operation of mopeds through a coordinated effort between DCWP and the Department of Transportation. 
It would require moped sellers to provide these materials upon the sale of a moped. 
Menin also touted two resolutions from Brewer and one more on the way: The first, Resolution 44 , calls on the State Legislature to increase the penalty for e-scooter drivers who leave the scene of a crash without reporting it and create a penalty for e-bikers who do the same. 
The second, Resolution 43 , calls on the state to pass a registration program for commercial e-bike delivery vehicles . 
Crucially, Brewer will also introduce a resolution calling on the state to pass a registration and licensing program for all e-bike riders , a Council spokesman said on Tuesday. 
(Mayor Mamdani reiterated his opposition to that idea on Wednesday.) 
The pro-licensing and registration resolution is one of several Menin and her allies have merely teased, including: 
“additional insurance requirements for third-party delivery applications” 
“trade-in incentives for unsafe devices” 
“stronger consumer protections” 
“expanded enforcement” 
and “infrastructure changes to slow high-speed rolling” 
We will continue to update this story as Menin and the Council publish more of the (allegedly) 17 bills and counting. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.4%Emily Smith: 1.5%Streetsblog: 3.7%Confirmation Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.6%Streetsblog: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Emily Smith: 3.3%Streetsblog: 3.6%Availability Heuristic3.3%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.5%Streetsblog: 0.3%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 1.7%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.9%Emily Smith: 2.8%Streetsblog: 4.6%Framing Effect2.9%This article: 4.0%Emily Smith: 0.9%Streetsblog: 0.6%Loss Aversion4.0%This article: 1.4%Emily Smith: 2.1%Streetsblog: 0.7%Status Quo Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.7%Emily Smith: 3.4%Streetsblog: 3.9%Optimism Bias5.7%This article: 1.0%Emily Smith: 0.4%Streetsblog: 0.6%Pessimism Bias1.0%This article: 11.8%Emily Smith: 12.1%Streetsblog: 6.5%Negativity Bias11.8%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 4.5%Emily Smith: 0.4%Streetsblog: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.7%Streetsblog: 0.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.3%Streetsblog: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 1.1%Streetsblog: 0.7%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Emily Smith: 0.5%Streetsblog: 0.3%Primacy Effect2.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.4%Streetsblog: 0.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.1%Emily Smith: 1.2%Streetsblog: 2.5%Appeal to Authority3.1%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 1.1%Streetsblog: 1.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 1.0%Emily Smith: 0.1%Streetsblog: 0.2%Slippery Slope1.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 3.0%Streetsblog: 4.7%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 5.0%Emily Smith: 1.4%Streetsblog: 0.4%Red Herring5.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 2.6%Streetsblog: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 2.5%Emily Smith: 0.2%Streetsblog: 0.8%Begging the Question2.5%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.5%Streetsblog: 1.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.4%Streetsblog: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.4%Emily Smith: 0.7%Streetsblog: 0.5%Burden of Proof7.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 3.9%Streetsblog: 2.1%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.7%Emily Smith: 0.1%Streetsblog: 0.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.7%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 1.2%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.8%Streetsblog: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 16.6%Emily Smith: 8.6%Streetsblog: 5.8%Biased Writer Voice16.6%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.2%Streetsblog: 2.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.0%Streetsblog: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Smith: 0.3%Streetsblog: 0.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

718 words analyzed.

Speakers

11speakers52%attributed speech347writer words
Selected voice

Julie Menin

100%flagged-word coverage
53 attributed words14% of attributed speech41% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+90.2 ptsWriter: 9.8%Julie Menin: 100.0%100.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.