The fund matters because Arizona recorded more than 3,000 motorcycle crashes and 219 deaths in 2024…

Read more

In our latest deep dive into Accident Scene Management (ASM) training by Road Guardians, we explore specialized bystander assistance programs designed specifically for the motorcycling community.

Find your local class schedule today at roadguardians.org/schedule!

Every time an Arizona motorcyclist registers a motorcycle, one dollar from that registration fee is directed into the state Motorcycle Safety Fund.

One dollar does not sound like much. Multiply it across hundreds of thousands of registered motorcycles, and it becomes a recurring source of rider-financed public safety funding.

That money is not supposed to disappear into the state’s general budget. It is held in trust for motorcycle safety purposes. Arizona law directs it toward rider education, public awareness, training, safety materials, and related programs. Beginning September 12, 2026, the law will also authorize scholarships intended to improve access to motorcycle training for people from rural and low-income areas.

The fund matters because motorcycle safety cannot be reduced to citations, penalties, and telling riders to be more careful. It requires competent training, public education, geographic access, accurate crash data, and sustained attention to how roadway policies affect motorcycles.

The principle behind the fund is sound: money generated by motorcycle registrations should be reinvested in motorcycle safety.

The problem is not the fund’s purpose. The problem is that Arizona’s public financial documents do not provide riders with a sufficiently detailed account of what the money ultimately purchases.

The fund belongs to a defined public purpose

The Motorcycle Safety Fund is established under section 28-2010 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. The fund consists primarily of one dollar from each motorcycle registration fee, along with any gifts, grants, donations, and investment earnings it receives. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 28-2010(A)–(B) (2026).

The Arizona Department of Transportation collects motorcycle registration fees and deposits the designated dollar into the fund. The State Treasurer holds and invests the money. The Legislature provides spending authority through the annual appropriation process. The Governor’s Office of Highway Safety administers the fund.

Arizona law also provides an important protection: fees, assessments, and other levies deposited into the fund are held in trust. The Legislature may not transfer that rider-generated money to finance the state’s general operations or satisfy General Fund obligations. Id. § 28-2010(D).

That restriction matters.

Dedicated funds sometimes become attractive targets during budget shortfalls. A fund may accumulate money for a defined constituency, only for lawmakers to redirect it toward unrelated expenses. Section 28-2010 was written to prevent that from happening to the Motorcycle Safety Fund.

The money has a statutory purpose. It is not a general pool of cash.

What the fund is supposed to support

Under existing Arizona law, appropriated Motorcycle Safety Fund money may support voluntary:

• Motorcycle education;

• Motorcycle awareness;

• Rider training;

• Other motorcycle programs; and

• Materials used for safety, education, and awareness.

Id. § 28-2010(C).

These categories allow Arizona to address motorcycle safety from more than one direction.

Rider training helps motorcyclists develop braking, cornering, hazard-recognition, and emergency-maneuvering skills. Public-awareness campaigns address the conduct of other road users. Educational materials can explain licensing, endorsement, equipment, impairment, visibility, and safe roadway interaction. Other authorized programs can respond to new risks involving distracted driving, roadway design, autonomous vehicles, or gaps in rural training access. It also authorizes the Accident Scene Management training classes.

Motorcycle safety is not solely the rider’s responsibility. Riders must operate lawfully and develop the skills necessary to manage risk, but motorists, transportation planners, law-enforcement agencies, training providers, and public officials all affect motorcycle safety.

A serious safety program must recognize that shared responsibility.

HB2114 expands the fund’s mission

During the 2026 legislative session, Arizona enacted HB2114, which becomes effective on September 12, 2026. The law preserves the Motorcycle Safety Fund while creating a new scholarship category.

Under the amended statute, the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety may direct:

• Up to 75 percent of fund money toward motorcycle education, awareness, training, other programs, and related materials; and

• Up to 25 percent toward scholarships for motorcycle driver-education programs for people from rural or low-income areas.

2026 Ariz. Sess. Laws ch. 246, § 1.

The scholarship authority addresses a real access problem. Arizona’s geography creates different training conditions depending on where a rider lives. A rider in the Phoenix metropolitan area may have several course options within a reasonable distance. A rider in a rural county may face limited schedules, long travel distances, lodging expenses, or no nearby course at all.

Course cost is only one part of the barrier. Travel, time away from work, fuel, lodging, and limited class availability can make training harder to obtain.

The new scholarship authority allows the state to begin addressing those barriers. Its success will depend on how the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety defines eligibility and structures the program.

The law does not yet answer several practical questions:

• What qualifies as a rural area?

• How will low-income eligibility be determined?

• Will scholarships cover the full course cost?

• Can funds cover travel or lodging?

• Will money be paid to students or directly to training providers?

• Which courses will qualify?

• How will applicants learn about the program?

• How will the agency ensure statewide access?

• What happens if scholarship money remains unused?

• What results will be reported to riders and lawmakers?

Those questions need answers before the scholarship program begins distributing money.

The public accounting is too general

Arizona’s public budget records show that the Motorcycle Safety Fund generally operates at a level of about $198,900 per year. The Department of Public Safety’s fiscal year 2027 budget submission reports $198,900 in actual fiscal year 2025 activity, a $198,900 estimate for fiscal year 2026, and a $198,900 request for fiscal year 2027.

The same budget submission explains an unusual accounting process.

The Governor’s Office of Highway Safety administers the fund, but its appropriation appears within the Department of Public Safety budget unit. The appropriated money is transferred into the Department of Public Safety’s accounting structure and then transferred back to the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety for expenditure.

The Department of Public Safety records the entire $198,900 as a transfer out. Its public budget pages do not identify a corresponding breakdown for training, contractors, materials, advertising, scholarships, or administration.

This does not establish that the money was diverted or misspent. The available records show an interagency transfer consistent with Arizona’s budget structure.

They do not tell riders what the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety purchased after receiving the transfer.

That distinction is important. A public fund can comply with state accounting requirements while still failing to provide the public with enough information to evaluate program performance.

The available budget documents do not clearly disclose:

• Which vendors or organizations received money;

• What safety campaigns were funded;

• How much was spent on advertising;

• Whether any training seats were subsidized;

• How many riders participated;

• How much was spent in rural Arizona;

• What materials were purchased;

• How much was charged to administration;

• What performance measures were used;

• Whether funded programs changed rider behavior;

• Whether expenditures were associated with changes in crashes, injuries, endorsements, or training completion.

For riders, “$198,900 transferred” is not a complete answer.

The relevant question is: transferred for what?

Arizona has more motorcycles and continuing safety challenges

Arizona reported 279,569 registered motorcycles in 2023, up from 209,719 in 2019. That was an increase of approximately 33 percent in four years. The state also reported 258 motorcyclist fatalities in 2023, the highest number in at least twenty years and an 11.2 percent increase from 2022.

Those numbers should be interpreted carefully. An increase in registered motorcycles means more exposure and more riders on the road. A raw fatality count does not, by itself, establish whether the risk per registered motorcycle or per mile traveled increased.

It does establish that motorcycle safety deserves a defined and measurable state response.

Arizona cannot determine whether the Motorcycle Safety Fund is working merely by showing that the money was appropriated and transferred. The state needs to connect spending to outputs and outcomes.

Outputs could include:

• Number of courses supported;

• Number of students receiving assistance;

• Number of rural training locations;

• Number of awareness advertisements;

• Estimated audience reach;

• Materials distributed;

• Training-provider participation;

• Cost per completed course.

Outcomes could include:

• Increased Class M endorsement attainment;

• Increased course completion;

• Reduced geographic gaps in training access;

• Improved public awareness;

• Reduced unlicensed motorcycle operation;

• Improved rider knowledge;

• Changes in relevant crash patterns.

Not every outcome can be attributed to a single program. Motorcycle crashes are affected by traffic volume, speed, impairment, roadway design, vehicle behavior, rider experience, enforcement, weather, and many other factors.

That does not excuse the state from measuring what the program actually does.

“Up to” does not mean “must spend”

The HB2114 allocation language requires careful attention.

The new statute permits “up to” 75 percent for motorcycle education and related programs and “up to” 25 percent for scholarships. Those percentages are ceilings. They are not guaranteed minimums.

If the annual appropriation remains $198,900, 25 percent would equal $49,725. The law does not require the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety to award the full $49,725 in scholarships.

The agency could award less.

That may be reasonable during the first year if program infrastructure is still being built or qualified applications are limited. It also means riders should not assume that the scholarship provision automatically guarantees a quarter of the fund for direct training assistance.

The agency should publish:

• The amount available for scholarships;

• The amount awarded;

• The number of applicants;

• The number of recipients;

• The average award;

• Recipient distribution by county;

• Course-completion rates;

• Reasons applications were denied;

• Any unspent scholarship balance.

Without those measures, the public cannot distinguish between a successful scholarship program, weak demand, poor promotion, restrictive eligibility, or administrative delay.

Riders need an annual public report

The most practical reform is straightforward: require an annual Motorcycle Safety Fund report.

The report should disclose:

1. The number of motorcycle registration transactions;

2. The amount deposited from registration fees;

3. Gifts, grants, and donations;

4. Investment earnings;

5. Beginning and ending fund balances;

6. Legislative appropriation;

7. Administrative expenses;

8. Education and awareness expenditures;

9. Training expenditures;

10. Scholarship expenditures;

11. Vendors and grant recipients;

12. Number of people served;

13. County and rural distribution;

14. Cost per participant;

15. Program performance measures;

16. Unspent balances and outstanding obligations.

The report should be available online in both PDF and spreadsheet formats.

A rider should not have to search hundreds of pages of agency budget submissions to determine that the money entered one agency’s accounting system and was transferred back to another.

Arizona can do better than that.

Riders should have a voice in spending priorities

Arizona should also consider establishing a Motorcycle Safety Fund advisory committee.

The committee could include:

• Rider organizations;

• Rider-training providers;

• Rural riders;

• Independent motorcyclists;

• Transportation-safety professionals;

• Arizona Department of Transportation representatives;

• Governor’s Office of Highway Safety representatives;

• Tribal-community representatives;

• Motorcycle industry participants.

The committee would not replace agency authority or procurement requirements. Its role would be to review needs, evaluate access barriers, recommend priorities, and assess public reports.

Riders help finance the fund. They should have a formal way to advise the state about how it can produce better safety results.

The fund is worth protecting

It would be easy to look at a fund of roughly $198,900 and conclude that it is too small to matter.

That would be a mistake.

At that funding level, Arizona cannot solve every motorcycle safety problem. It can still:

• Help riders obtain training;

• Expand access outside metropolitan areas;

• Support public-awareness campaigns;

• Develop motorcycle-specific educational materials;

• Collect or analyze needed data;

• Test new safety programs;

• Build partnerships with training providers;

• Demonstrate which programs deserve future funding.

The fund also represents something larger than its annual appropriation. It recognizes that motorcycle safety deserves a dedicated policy response and that rider-generated revenue should serve riders.

The goal should not be to attack the fund. The goal should be to make it accountable, measurable, and accessible.

What should happen next

Arizona should take five steps before the HB2114 changes take effect:

1. Publish the current fund balance and recent expenditure history.

2. Release the criteria for rural and low-income scholarships.

3. Clarify how administrative costs interact with the 75/25 allocation.

4. Create an annual public reporting framework.

5. Give riders and training providers a structured advisory role.

ABATE of Arizona is working on requesting the underlying financial records, contracts, program descriptions, and performance reports. Those records will show whether the state’s accounting summary matches the actual safety work performed.

The principle is simple:

Money collected from motorcyclists for motorcycle safety should produce identifiable motorcycle safety benefits.

Arizona has protected that principle in statute. It now needs to prove the principle through transparent spending and measurable results.

The Motorcycle Safety Fund matters. That is exactly why riders should know where every dollar goes.

Rider action

Save this article and share it with another Arizona rider.

Ask one question:

What did Arizona’s Motorcycle Safety Fund purchase last year, and what measurable result did riders receive?

Subscribe to Motorcycle & Transportation Watch for continuing coverage of rider training, roadway policy, motorcycle legislation, autonomous vehicles, crash data, and the decisions affecting Arizona motorcyclists.

While the agreement focuses on agricultural equipment, the states involved represent the heart of America’s motorcycling community. These same states are home to countless riders, motorcyclist rights organizations, and independent repair shops that understand the importance of giving owners access to the tools, software, parts, and information needed to maintain their bikes.

We hope this settlement serves as a precedent for other major manufacturers, including motorcycle manufacturers, to recognize that customers should have the right to repair the products they own. Ownership should include the ability to maintain, diagnose, and repair your vehicle.

The MRF Is pleased to see the snowballing right to repair results, which continue to consistently support consumer rights. The MRF will continue working with lawmakers, industry partners, and consumer advocates to ensure motorcyclists enjoy the same repair freedoms that Americans expect for every vehicle they own.

ABATE of Arizona’s release about this settlement:

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the attorneys general of Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, and Arizona reached a settlement with John Deere over allegations that the company unfairly restricted customers’ ability to repair its agricultural equipment.

ABATE of Arizona and the motorcyclists in the state have been advocating for broader “right to repair” policies, arguing that vehicle owners should be able to repair and maintain the products they purchase without unnecessary manufacturer restrictions. While this settlement is about farm equipment rather than motorcycles, it reflects the same underlying principle: that owners and independent repair shops should have fair access to the tools, software, and information needed to perform repairs.

The settlement generally requires John Deere to:

• Make diagnostic and repair tools more available to customers and independent repair providers.

• Provide access to repair information on fair terms.

• Avoid practices that unnecessarily limit independent repairs.

In the complaint, the FTC argued that Deere provides a service software tool to authorized dealers but does not provide the full version to equipment owners or independent shops. This does not directly change repair rights for motorcycles, but it is viewed by many as a significant precedent that could influence other industries, including powersports and automotive repair.

ABATE of Arizona would like to thank the Attorney General of Arizona, Kris Mayes, for her work on protecting consumers’ rights.

See the full story here:

https://apnews.com/article/john-deere-right-to-repair-agriculture-equipment-cb7514ffedb95c130a976af661f2bc02

Michael Infanzon
ABATE of Arizona – Legislative Director

Vote like the person on two wheels who sees every bad road design, every distracted driver, every poorly written traffic law, and every agency decision that treats riders as an afterthought.

Motorcyclists understand freedom, responsibility, risk, and awareness. We know policy is not abstract when it affects the road under our tires.

This election season, ask candidates where they stand on motorcycle safety, rider education, fair enforcement, fuel policy, road design, and the right to ride without being ignored.

Vote informed. Vote engaged. Vote like your freedom to ride depends on it.

Here is the 2026 Legislative Scorecard.

Are you legally endorsed to ride the bike you are already riding?

That question matters because Arizona law does not treat a motorcycle endorsement as optional. A person may not drive a motor vehicle on a highway without a valid driver license and the proper endorsement required by law. For motorcycles, that means a Class M license or a motorcycle endorsement added to an existing driver license. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 28-3151(A), 28-3103(A)(1).

For riders who already know how to handle their bike, the math is not complicated. Scheduling and taking a short MVD rider test is far better than being stopped, cited, and left trying to sort out license issues, court costs, towing charges, and possible impoundment. ADOT describes the motorcycle skills test as a 10 to 15 minute demonstration on a closed, off-street track. The fee issue is also small compared to the risk: ADOT currently lists a motorcycle endorsement fee of $15.

In plain English, this is not the place to gamble.

A few minutes at MVD is cheaper than a day in court. A small licensing fee is cheaper than a tow bill. A planned test is cheaper than explaining to an officer, a judge, or an insurance company why you were riding without the motorcycle authority Arizona law requires.

The Real Risk Is Not the Test

A lot of riders put off getting the motorcycle endorsement because they think the test is harder than it is, or because they do not want to deal with MVD scheduling. That may be understandable, but it is still a bad calculation.

Arizona law gives officers authority to remove and impound vehicles in several circumstances tied to license status. A.R.S. § 28-3511 authorizes removal and impoundment when a person has never been issued a valid driver license or permit and cannot produce evidence of a valid license or permit from another jurisdiction. It also provides a twenty-day impound period for vehicles removed under that section, except where statutory exceptions apply.

Even where early release is possible, that does not mean the matter is painless. The City of Phoenix’s own impound FAQ states that a vehicle owner seeking release after a no-license or revoked-license issue must prove the license issue has been fixed and must pay a $150 administrative fee, plus towing and storage charges.

That is the practical point. The motorcycle endorsement process is not just a paperwork issue. It is risk control.

The rider test is short. The consequences of being caught without the required endorsement are not.

What the Arizona Motorcycle Skills Test Looks Like

The Arizona motorcycle skills test is not a mystery. ADOT publishes the test instructions and the score sheet. The test consists of four exercises that measure motorcycle control and hazard-response skills. The final two exercises involve speeds of about 15 miles per hour, and the rider is scored on time, distance, and path violations.

The four test exercises are:

1. Cone weave and normal stop.
You start from the marked “T,” weave through five cones, avoid touching or skipping cones, keep your feet up, then make a smooth stop with the front tire inside the box. The front tire cannot touch the painted lines.

2. Turn from a stop and U-turn.
You make a right turn between boundary lines, cross diagonally, then make a left U-turn inside the painted box. The scoring line depends on motorcycle size. A motorcycle of 600cc/40HP or more uses the solid line. A motorcycle under 600cc/40HP uses the dashed line.

3. Quick stop.
You accelerate straight ahead, stabilize speed between 12 and 18 miles per hour before the first line, maintain steady speed through the timing zone, then stop as quickly and safely as possible after the front tire crosses the second line. ADOT states that a rider will not lose points merely because the motorcycle skids, but the rider must remain stopped and not allow the motorcycle to roll.

4. Obstacle swerve.
You accelerate from the same start point, stabilize speed between 12 and 18 miles per hour, then swerve right or left as directed by the examiner. The rider must avoid the obstacle line, stay inside the sideline, avoid touching lines, and stop smoothly.

The passing standard is also published. The ADOT score sheet states that passing equals 0 to 10 total points. The test can be terminated for stalling the engine four times, falling or dropping the motorcycle, committing an unsafe act, failing to understand or follow instructions, point accumulation, excessive time, or the applicant stopping the test.

That should calm some people down. This is not a high-speed road test. It is a controlled skills test. It measures whether you can control your bike at low speed, stop in a box, turn inside a boundary, brake, and swerve.

Those are not bureaucratic tricks. Those are survival skills.

What You Need Before You Show Up

ADOT says the motorcycle used for the skills test must be in good mechanical condition, properly registered, and have the equipment required by Arizona law. Required gear includes eye protection and sturdy footwear that does not interfere with operation of the motorcycle controls. Riders under 18 must wear a properly fastened DOT-approved helmet. ADOT recommends a DOT-approved helmet for riders 18 and older, gloves, long pants, and a jacket or long-sleeve shirt.

A rider who wants an unrestricted endorsement should also pay attention to the motorcycle used for testing. ADOT states that testing on a motorcycle greater than 100cc/7HP is required for an unrestricted license. Testing on a moped, smaller motorcycle, or three-wheel motorcycle can result in a license restriction.

Testing is by appointment only. ADOT lists authorized motorcycle testing offices and states that same-day appointments are not permitted. Testing may be suspended for safety conditions or extreme weather, including temperatures of 105 degrees or above, and motorcycle testing is not conducted after noon during June, July, and August.

That means riders should not wait until the last minute. Summer heat, work schedules, and appointment availability can all create delay. The answer is simple: schedule it, practice for it, and get it done.

Why Riders Fail

Most riders do not fail because they cannot ride down the road. They fail because they have not practiced the exact low-speed skills the test measures.

The test is built around control. Riders lose points for putting a foot down, touching lines, skipping cones, stopping outside the box, missing speed or distance standards, stalling, or losing the path.

That tells us what to practice:

Slow-speed clutch and throttle control.

Head and eye placement during the U-turn.

Controlled braking from 12 to 18 miles per hour.

Swerving without grabbing the brake.

Stopping cleanly without rolling.

Keeping both feet up when balance gets uncomfortable.

That last one is where a lot of riders get exposed. Street riding can hide weak low-speed control. Parking lots do not. The MVD box does not. The examiner does not.

There is no shame in practicing. There is shame in pretending the endorsement does not matter until a traffic stop makes the point for you.

The Better Way: Practice Before the Test

This is where the motorcycle community can help.

Would riders be interested in an ABATE-sponsored Motorcycle Endorsement Practice Day?

Not a substitute for MVD testing. Not a replacement for a Motorcycle Safety Foundation course. Not legal advice. Just a practical skills day for riders who want to clean up the basics before scheduling their MVD test.

A practice day could focus on the exact skills riders need:

Cone weave practice.

U-turn box practice.

Controlled stop practice.

Quick stop practice.

Obstacle swerve practice.

Pre-test checklist review.

Walkthrough of what MVD expects.

A good practice day could also help experienced riders who have been riding for years but never got the endorsement. Those riders may already have road experience, but the MVD test rewards precision. Practicing the pattern before testing can reduce anxiety and increase pass rates.

For younger riders, new riders, and returning riders, it could also create a safety culture that is better than finger-pointing. Instead of saying, “Go get legal,” the motorcycle community can say, “Come practice, get ready, schedule the test, and get legal.”

That is how a responsible rider organization leads.

Take the Test Before the Ticket

The message for this Motorcycle Monday is simple.

Get the endorsement.

The test is short. The cost is small. The skills are basic. The risk of putting it off is not worth it.

Arizona law requires the proper motorcycle license or endorsement. ADOT publishes the testing rules. MVD appointments can be scheduled. The skills are knowable. The scoring standard is public. There is no good reason to keep riding exposed.

A motorcycle endorsement does not make anyone a perfect rider. It does not replace experience. It does not replace common sense. It does not replace training.

But it does do one important thing: it puts you on the right side of the law before the traffic stop, before the citation, before the tow truck, before the impound lot, and before the court date.

So here is the question:

Would you attend a motorcycle endorsement practice day before taking the MVD rider test?

If enough riders are interested, we will build one. ABATE leadership discussed this last night. The ultimate goal is to have every rider in Arizona legally endorsed. It’s one less thing to get hassled about.

Because a 15-minute skills test is a whole lot better than watching your bike leave on a tow truck.

Brought to you by ABATE of Arizona. Your voice at the Arizona Capitol. abateofaz.org

Change the oil. Replace brake pads. Swap tires. Install a battery. Adjust a chain. Replace cables. Troubleshoot an electrical problem. Install lawful aftermarket parts. Take the bike to a trusted independent motorcycle shop instead of a dealership.

For generations, none of that was controversial.

When I was a kid my father taught me to wrench on my own motorcycle. For a biker, it was just something you needed to learn. You learn to wrench or possibly get stuck on the side of the road somewhere. For the old school bikers, do you still carry a pack of matches in your tool roll? IYKYK.

The problem is that modern motorcycles are no longer just mechanical machines. They are computer-controlled vehicles with electronic control units, onboard diagnostics, emissions systems, anti-lock braking systems, ride modes, throttle-by-wire controls, immobilizers, proprietary service tools, software locks, calibration procedures, and, in some models, connected data systems.

That changes the right-to-repair fight.

The question is no longer only whether a rider is allowed to turn a wrench. The question is whether the rider, or the rider’s chosen independent shop, can access the information, tools, codes, data, software, and lawful aftermarket parts needed to complete the repair.

That is why ABATE’s fight for motorcyclists’ right to repair and modify their motorcycles has been on the agenda alongside the Motorcycle Riders Foundation. The Motorcycle Riders Foundation’s 2026 federal agenda expressly lists “Right to Repair/Modify” as a high-priority objective. It also identifies vehicle data ownership as a federal priority, calling for legislative language recognizing that vehicle data belongs to the consumer and that the consumer should decide whether that data is shared.^1

That point matters.

Right to repair is not just about tools in the garage anymore. It is about ownership.

What President Trump Actually Signed

I saw a few news articles yesterday and got excited. This morning, I was a little let down. On June 29, 2026, President Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum titled Lowering the Cost of Living by Promoting the Freedom to Fix.^2

That memorandum is not a statute. It is not the REPAIR Act like I was hoping it would be. It is not a complete federal right-to-repair law for motorcycles, cars, trucks, riders, drivers, or independent repair shops.

It is narrower than that. Sorry Clydeman. I was more hopeful than I should have been.

The memorandum directs the Environmental Protection Agency to issue guidance within 30 days clarifying what individuals may do to conduct emissions repairs on their own vehicles, consistent with the Clean Air Act.^3 It also directs EPA to consider faster pathways for aftermarket emissions-parts certification and to consider deprioritizing civil tampering enforcement against individuals who, in good faith, attempt to repair their own vehicles back to original configuration.^4

For motorcycle owners, the most useful takeaway is narrow but real: the federal government is signaling that a rider who is trying to restore a motorcycle to lawful operating condition should not be treated the same as someone selling or installing emissions defeat devices.

That is a meaningful policy direction.

It is not a blank check.

What the Memorandum Does Not Do

The memorandum does not legalize emissions deletes.

It does not authorize removing catalytic converters from street bikes.

It does not legalize aftermarket tuners whose principal effect is to bypass, defeat, or render emissions systems inoperative.

It does not require motorcycle manufacturers to give independent shops full diagnostic software.

It does not force manufacturers to unlock service tools, calibration functions, ECU access, immobilizer systems, proprietary repair platforms, or telematics data.

The Clean Air Act still matters. Federal law prohibits manufacturing, selling, offering to sell, or installing any part or component intended for use with a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine when the principal effect is to bypass, defeat, or render inoperative an emissions-control device or design element, if the person knows or should know the part is being used for that purpose.^5

Federal law also recognizes that manufacturer-branded parts are not required for lawful maintenance or repair. It further provides that repair or replacement of an emissions device is not prohibited when the device is restored to proper function.^6

That is the line riders need to understand:

Lawful repair is protected. Emissions defeat is still legally risky.

EPA’s own 2020 tampering policy states that the Clean Air Act’s tampering and defeat-device prohibitions apply to highway motorcycles, off-road motorcycles, motor vehicles, nonroad vehicles, and engines.^7 The same policy states that those prohibitions apply for the life of the vehicle, regardless of whether the emissions warranty or regulatory useful life has expired.^8

In plain English, an old bike is not exempt just because it is old. A bike is not outside federal emissions law just because it is out of warranty. A rider does not get a legal pass because the motorcycle is paid off.

The better argument for riders is not a right to defeat emissions systems. The stronger argument is a right to lawfully maintain, repair, diagnose, restore, and keep a motorcycle on the road without being forced into dealer dependency.

Why Motorcycles Are Part of the Federal Right-to-Repair Fight

Some right-to-repair news coverage talks only about cars. Motorcycle owners should not let that wording push them out of the debate.

Federal law defines a “motor vehicle” as a vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, except a vehicle operated only on rail lines.^9 That definition is broad enough to include street motorcycles.

The federal REPAIR Act, H.R. 1566, uses that federal motor-vehicle definition.^10 The bill is designed to ensure consumers have access to vehicle data, critical repair information, and repair tools so they can choose where and how to maintain, service, and repair their vehicles.^11

That language should matter to motorcycle owners.

The REPAIR Act would prohibit a motor-vehicle manufacturer from using a technological or legal barrier that impairs a vehicle owner’s ability to access vehicle-generated data, critical repair information, repair tools, compatible aftermarket parts, or the ability to diagnose, repair, and maintain the vehicle in the same manner as a dealer.^12

The bill also defines “critical repair information and tools” to include technical and compatibility information, wiring diagrams, parts catalogs, repair procedures, training materials, software, technology, diagnostics, service information, and calibration or recalibration information needed to return a motor vehicle to operational specifications.^13

For modern motorcycles, that is the real fight.

A rider’s right to repair means little if the repair cannot be completed because a manufacturer-controlled software gate blocks the final step. A rider may replace the mechanical part and still be stuck if the bike requires a proprietary reset, calibration, reflash, relearn procedure, security authorization, or diagnostic tool that only a dealer can access.

That is not real ownership. That is conditional access.

What Riders and Independent Shops Need

A practical motorcycle right-to-repair policy should cover more than ordinary hand tools. It should include access to the information and systems needed to complete lawful repairs on modern motorcycles.

That includes service manuals, wiring diagrams, diagnostic trouble codes, factory-level code definitions, ECU diagnostic procedures, ABS diagnostic procedures, throttle-body adaptation and reset procedures, immobilizer and key-related service procedures, lawful software updates required to complete repairs, calibration and recalibration information, parts compatibility data, repair data transmitted through onboard diagnostic ports or telematics systems, and lawful aftermarket parts that do not defeat emissions or safety systems.

That list may sound technical, but it reflects what riders and independent motorcycle shops are already facing.

More motorcycle systems are electronic. More repairs require scan tools. More components require pairing, resetting, calibration, software validation, or manufacturer-controlled service information. A rider can still own the motorcycle, pay the insurance, buy the tires, pay the registration fee, and put gas in the tank, yet be locked out of a repair because the data or tool is controlled somewhere else.

That is why right to repair and vehicle data ownership now belong in the same conversation.

The data issue is not theoretical. Recent reporting on federal right-to-repair legislation has focused on the concern that narrower vehicle bills may omit stronger REPAIR Act language giving owners and independent mechanics access to vehicle data.^14 Those reports have also noted that modern vehicles can collect information such as where they travel, how fast they move, and how hard they brake, with much of that information controlled through manufacturer systems.^15

That issue is not limited to cars.

Motorcycles are moving in the same direction. If the right-to-repair debate leaves motorcycles out, riders will face the same data-access problem with less public attention and fewer repair options.

Why Independent Motorcycle Shops Matter

Independent motorcycle shops are part of the riding community.

They are where riders take older bikes that dealers may not prioritize. They are where many riders go for brand-specific knowledge, touring setups, vintage repair, diagnostic help, performance work, tire service, electrical troubleshooting, and basic maintenance. They are also essential for riders who live far from a franchised dealership.

For many motorcyclists, the independent shop is not a backup option. It is the only realistic option.

That is why a right-to-repair policy that protects only the individual owner but leaves independent repair facilities without meaningful access is incomplete. A rider’s right to repair must include the right to choose a qualified independent shop.

Automotive industry reporting has noted that automakers and dealer groups remain divided from aftermarket advocates over repair-data access. One reported industry figure states that roughly 75 percent of post-warranty repairs already occur at independent shops.^16 That number confirms the market reality: owners already rely on independent repair.

The dispute is whether law will protect that choice as vehicles become more software-driven.

Motorcycle owners should pay attention because the same logic applies to bikes. If manufacturers control the diagnostic tools, software access, repair data, reset procedures, and calibration functions, independent shops can be squeezed out without a formal ban. The market can be narrowed by code, subscription, access terms, or tool restrictions.

That is why ABATE’s federal work with the Motorcycle Riders Foundation matters. The Motorcycle Riders Foundation lists support for H.R. 1566 and S. 1379, the REPAIR Act, among its federal legislative priorities.^17 ABATE’s role is to keep the motorcycle owner in that discussion and make clear that right to repair must protect riders, not only car owners. This was one of the priority discussions we had in Washington DC during Bikers Inside the Beltway this year.

The Policy Line ABATE Defends

The right-to-repair position for motorcyclists should be clear:

A rider who owns a motorcycle should have the lawful ability to maintain, diagnose, repair, restore, and modify that motorcycle, and to choose an independent repair shop, so long as the motorcycle remains compliant with applicable safety and emissions law.

That framing matters because it separates lawful repair from emissions defeat.

ABATE does not need to defend illegal tampering to defend riders. ABATE defends property rights, consumer choice, independent repair, rural access, small business, competition, affordability, aftermarket parts, vehicle data ownership, and the practical ability to keep motorcycles safely and lawfully on the road.

The federal government’s June 29 memorandum may help clarify lawful emissions repair and aftermarket-parts certification. It may also signal that a rider trying in good faith to restore a motorcycle to original configuration should not be treated like a bad actor. That is a useful step.

But it is not enough.

The fight is with Congress. The REPAIR Act is the stronger vehicle because it addresses the deeper issue: access to data, tools, software, diagnostics, and critical repair information. For motorcycles, that is where the fight is going.

What Motorcycle Owners Should Watch

Riders should watch every right-to-repair bill for five issues.

First, does the bill expressly cover motorcycles, or does it use a motor-vehicle definition broad enough to include street motorcycles?

Second, does it cover vehicle-generated repair data, or does it stop at ordinary service information?

Third, does it protect independent repair facilities, aftermarket tool companies, and owner-designated repair providers?

Fourth, does it include software, diagnostics, calibration, recalibration, wiring diagrams, service procedures, and parts compatibility information?

Fifth, does it preserve emissions compliance while protecting lawful repair?

If those pieces are missing, the bill may carry the right-to-repair label while leaving motorcycle owners with little practical relief.

The Bottom Line

Motorcycle owners should be able to legally fix their own motorcycles.

They should be able to use lawful aftermarket parts. They should be able to choose an independent shop. They should be able to access the repair information and tools needed to return a bike to safe and lawful operating condition. They should not be locked out of their own machines because a manufacturer controls the software, tool, data stream, or calibration procedure.

Right to repair is no longer only about wrenches.

It is about who controls the motorcycle after the rider buys it.

ABATE and the Motorcycle Riders Foundation keep this issue on the federal agenda. Riders should not wait until every repair runs through a manufacturer-controlled digital gate before speaking up.

The test is simple:

Can the owner, or the owner’s chosen shop, lawfully diagnose, service, repair, calibrate, and return the motorcycle to compliant operating condition without being blocked by a manufacturer-controlled barrier?

If the answer is no, then the right to repair exists only on paper.

ABATE is fighting to make sure it exists in the garage.

Support ABATE of Arizona and the Motorcycle Riders Foundation.

Ride safe. Ride Free.

References

1. Motorcycle Riders Foundation, 2026 Legislative Agenda, Right to Repair/Modify and Data Ownership priorities.

2. Lowering the Cost of Living by Promoting the Freedom to Fix, Presidential Memorandum, White House, June 29, 2026.

3. Id.

4. Id.

5. Clean Air Act § 203(a)(3)(B), 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a)(3)(B).

6. 42 U.S.C. § 7522(a).

7. EPA, EPA Tampering Policy: The EPA Enforcement Policy on Vehicle and Engine Tampering and Aftermarket Defeat Devices Under the Clean Air Act 1–5 (Nov. 23, 2020).

8. Id.

9. 49 U.S.C. § 30102(a)(7).

10. Right to Equitable and Professional Auto Industry Repair Act, H.R. 1566, 119th Cong. § 2 (2025).

11. Id.

12. Id.

13. Id.

14. The Cool Down, reporting on criticism of the Motor Vehicle Modernization Act and omitted REPAIR Act data-access provisions.

15. Id.

16. CBT News, reporting on the right-to-repair dispute between automakers, dealer groups, and aftermarket advocates.

17. Motorcycle Riders Foundation, Federal Legislation Issues, listing support for H.R. 1566 and S. 1379.

House Bill 2114, sponsored by Representative Teresa Martinez and signed into law by Governor Hobbs on June 22, 2026, does three things that matter for riders. First, it keeps $1 from each motorcycle registration fee flowing into the Motorcycle Safety Fund. Second, it directs that money toward motorcycle education, awareness, training, and scholarships. Third, it ties motorcycle registration renewal to lawful motorcycle licensing, with a temporary registration path for riders enrolled in approved training.¹

That may sound like a technical transportation bill.

It is not.

HB2114 is a rider-funded safety policy. It says, in plain terms, that money paid by motorcyclists for motorcycle registration should only be used for motorcycle safety. That is the right policy principle. Riders already pay into the system. The public benefit comes when those dollars are used to reduce crashes, expand training access, educate drivers, and support riders who may not otherwise be able to afford a motorcycle education course.

This matters because motorcycle safety is not just a rider issue. It is a roadway issue, a driver education issue, a rural access issue, and a state government accountability issue.

Arizona riders should understand what HB2114 does, why the Motorcycle Safety Fund matters, and what needs to happen next.

The Motorcycle Safety Fund Is Not Just Another State Account

Under HB2114, the Motorcycle Safety Fund is established in A.R.S. § 28-2010 and administered by the Director of the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety. The fund consists of money deposited from motorcycle registration fees, along with gifts, grants, and donations. The State Treasurer invests fund money, and any investment earnings are credited back to the fund.²

The key funding mechanism is simple: ADOT must deposit $1 from each motorcycle registration fee into the Motorcycle Safety Fund.³

That one-dollar amount is modest. Nobody should pretend it solves every motorcycle safety challenge in Arizona. But the policy behind it is important. The Legislature recognized that motorcyclists are a distinct roadway population with distinct safety risks. Riders pay into a dedicated fund, and those dollars are supposed to support motorcycle-specific safety work.

That is better than burying rider money in a general transportation account where it can disappear into broader spending priorities.

HB2114 also includes protective language. Fees, assessments, or other levies collected and deposited into the Motorcycle Safety Fund are held in trust. The money may be used only for purposes prescribed by statute and may not be transferred by the Legislature to fund general state operations or general fund obligations.⁴

That trust language is one of the most important parts of the bill.

Riders should care about that because dedicated funds are only meaningful if they stay dedicated. It is easy for government to create a special fund. It is harder to keep that fund from being treated as spare cash when budget pressure appears. HB2114 sends the right message: motorcycle safety dollars should stay with motorcycle safety.

What the Money Can Be Used For

HB2114 directs the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety to use Motorcycle Safety Fund money in two main ways.

First, up to 75 percent may be used to support voluntary motorcycle education, awareness, training, and other programs. The money may also cover materials for motorcycle safety, education, and awareness programs.⁵

Second, up to 25 percent may be used for scholarships for motorcycle driver education programs for people from rural or low-income areas in Arizona. The stated purpose is to increase access to motorcycle training programs.⁶

That 75/25 structure matters.

The first category supports broad safety activity. That can include rider education, driver awareness campaigns, public materials, training partnerships, and outreach. The second category focuses on access. It recognizes that the cost and availability of training are real barriers, especially for rural riders and lower-income riders.

That is where the bill becomes more than a funding bill. It becomes a fairness bill.

Training is easy to recommend from a desk in Phoenix. It is harder for a rider in a rural community who has to travel, miss work, pay course costs, and arrange transportation. If the state wants more licensed, trained riders, then access has to be part of the policy design.

HB2114 gets that part right.

Why Training Access Matters

Motorcycle safety policy often gets reduced to slogans. Slow down. Wear a helmet. Pay attention. Get trained.

Those points are not wrong, but they are incomplete without access.

NHTSA reports that 6,228 motorcyclists were killed nationally in 2024, representing 16 percent of all traffic fatalities. NHTSA also reports that, per vehicle miles traveled, motorcyclists in 2024 were almost 27 times more likely than passenger car occupants to die in a crash and almost five times more likely to be injured.⁷ Those numbers explain why motorcycle safety cannot be treated as a side issue.

Arizona has its own problem. ADOT reported 219 motorcyclist fatalities in 2024. That was down from 262 in 2023, but 219 deaths is still a serious number. ADOT also reported that Arizona had 1,228 traffic fatalities across all roads in 2024, meaning motorcyclists represented a significant share of roadway deaths.⁸

The training issue becomes even more direct when licensing is considered. NHTSA reports that over 35 percent of motorcycle operators involved in fatal crashes in 2024 were riding without valid motorcycle licenses.⁹ That does not mean licensing alone prevents crashes. It does mean that lawful licensing and rider education belong in the same policy conversation.

HB2114 connects those issues. It supports motorcycle education and creates a registration renewal requirement tied to lawful motorcycle operation. Under new A.R.S. § 28-2014, ADOT may renew a motorcycle registration only if at least one registered owner is licensed to legally operate a motorcycle in Arizona. A 30-day temporary registration is available if the person shows valid proof of enrollment in an ADOT-approved motorcycle training program. Trust-owned motorcycles are addressed through trustee licensing, and business-owned motorcycles are excluded from the requirement. The law takes effect after December 31, 2026.¹⁰

That is a serious change.

For properly licensed riders, the change may be minor. For riders who own motorcycles but never completed the licensing process, it creates a deadline and a path. Get licensed, or enroll in approved training and use the temporary registration route.

That is not just compliance. It is a policy push toward trained and lawful riding.

Rural Riders Need More Than Advice

The scholarship provision is one of the strongest parts of HB2114 because it acknowledges geography.

Arizona is not just Phoenix and Tucson. Riders live in Mohave County, Yavapai County, Cochise County, Navajo County, Apache County, La Paz County, Gila County, and every point between. A motorcycle training course that is reasonable for someone in the Valley may be out of reach for someone in a rural area.

Distance changes everything.

A rider may support training but still face travel costs, scheduling barriers, lost wages, course fees, and limited nearby course availability. A low-income rider may own an older motorcycle and use it for transportation, not recreation. A rural rider may have fewer training locations within a reasonable distance. A younger rider may be trying to do the right thing but lack the money to pay for a course.

The scholarship language in HB2114 is a practical answer to that problem.

It does not merely say, “Go get trained.” It creates a funding lane to help more riders do it.

That is the right approach. If Arizona is going to require or encourage lawful motorcycle licensing, then the state should support access to training. Policy should not become a paperwork trap for people who lack nearby options or disposable income.

The Fund Also Helps Educate Drivers

Motorcycle safety is not only about riders.

Drivers need education too.

NHTSA states that drivers must understand the safety challenges motorcyclists face, including size, visibility, and motorcycle riding practices such as downshifting and weaving so drivers can anticipate and respond properly.¹¹ That point matters in Arizona because many rider safety problems start with driver behavior: inattention, left turns, unsafe lane changes, following too closely, distracted driving, speed, and failure to see motorcycles.

ADOT’s 2024 crash data also points to driver behavior as a major roadway safety issue. ADOT reported that speed that was too fast for conditions or above the lawful limit was involved in crashes leading to 417 fatalities and 20,722 injuries in 2024. ADOT also reported at least 8,289 drivers involved in collisions while engaged in some type of distracted driving behavior, while noting that distracted driving figures are likely undercounted.¹²

Motorcycle safety messaging must reach those drivers.

That is why the 75 percent side of the Motorcycle Safety Fund matters. Training riders is one part of the solution. Educating drivers is the other part. A driver who does not understand how motorcycles move, stop, filter, accelerate, or position themselves in traffic is a risk to every rider nearby.

Motorcycle awareness campaigns should not be generic. They should explain real roadway scenarios: left-turn conflicts, blind spots, lawful lane filtering, safe following distance, intersection risk, and the consequences of distracted driving around motorcycles.

HB2114 gives the state a dedicated funding tool to support that kind of education.

Now the question is whether the money will be used well.

The Policy Win Is Only the First Step

Passing HB2114 is a win. It is not the finish line.

The next phase is oversight.

Riders should ask several basic questions:

How much money is in the Motorcycle Safety Fund?

How much is spent each year?

Which organizations receive grants?

How many riders receive scholarships?

How many scholarship recipients are rural riders?

How many are low-income riders?

Which counties are served?

How many riders complete training?

How does the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety measure whether funded programs are reducing risk?

Are driver awareness materials being updated to reflect current Arizona law?

Are motorcycle dealers, clubs, training schools, and rider groups helping distribute information?

Those questions are not hostile. They are responsible.

Dedicated funds work best when the public can see where the money goes and what outcomes the spending produces. Riders should support the fund, but they should also expect transparency. If rider-paid dollars are being used for rider safety, the state should be able to show the results.

What Rider Organizations Should Do Next

Motorcycle organizations should treat HB2114 as the beginning of a broader safety and advocacy campaign.

First, they should educate riders on the new registration requirement. The law does not take effect until after December 31, 2026, but riders should not wait until renewal season to learn about it. Clubs, dealers, training schools, and advocacy groups should start explaining the rule now.

Second, they should help riders find approved training programs. A law that pushes riders toward training only works if riders know where to go.

Third, they should work with the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety to shape public awareness materials. Riders know where the real risks appear. They should help define the message.

Fourth, they should track scholarship access by geography. If the scholarship money does not reach rural Arizona, the purpose of the bill will be weakened.

Fifth, they should push for simple reporting. A yearly public summary should identify fund revenue, administrative costs, program grants, scholarship awards, counties served, and measurable outcomes.

Sixth, they should connect HB2114 to broader motorcycle policy. The fund should support safety education related to distracted driving, lane filtering, driver awareness, training access, and lawful motorcycle operation.

That is how a bill becomes a working policy.

What Lawmakers Should Understand

HB2114 passed with broad support. The bill passed the Senate 26-1 on third reading and later passed the House 54-1 on final reading before being signed by the Governor.¹³ That should matter to lawmakers. Motorcycle safety is not a fringe issue. It is capable of drawing broad support when the policy is practical, rider-funded, and connected to public safety.

Lawmakers should also understand that motorcycle riders are not asking for special treatment. They are asking for a fair application of money they already pay into the system.

A rider-funded safety account should support rider safety.

A training requirement should come with training access.

Driver awareness should include real education on how motorcycles operate.

Rural riders should not be left behind because the training system is easier to reach in Maricopa County than in other parts of the state.

That is the policy balance HB2114 tries to strike.

The Bottom Line

The Motorcycle Safety Fund matters because it connects money, accountability, and safety.

It is rider-paid.

It is motorcycle-specific.

It supports education, awareness, training, and scholarships.

It protects dedicated money from being swept into general state operations.

It recognizes that rural and low-income riders need access, not just advice.

It also gives Arizona a chance to build a better motorcycle safety strategy. Not one based only on penalties. Not one based only on slogans. One based on training, driver awareness, lawful operation, access, and measurable outcomes.

That is why HB2114 matters.

The work now is to make sure the fund does what the law says it is supposed to do.

Arizona riders helped secure the policy. Now they need to watch the money, help shape the programs, and make sure the next rider who wants to get trained has a real path to do it.

Ride Safe. Ride Free.

Sources

1. H.B. 2114, 57th Leg., 2d Reg. Sess. (Ariz. 2026); Governor Katie Hobbs, Legislative Action Update (June 22, 2026).

2. H.B. 2114, 57th Leg., 2d Reg. Sess. (Ariz. 2026), amending A.R.S. § 28-2010(A).

3. Id. § 28-2010(B).

4. Id. § 28-2010(D).

5. Id. § 28-2010(C)(1).

6. Id. § 28-2010(C)(2).

7. Nat’l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., Motorcycle Safety: Helmets, Motorists, Road Awareness (2026).

8. Ariz. Dep’t of Transp., Traffic Fatalities in Arizona Dip for Second Year in a Row (July 9, 2025).

9. Nat’l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., Motorcycle Safety: Helmets, Motorists, Road Awareness (2026).

10. H.B. 2114, 57th Leg., 2d Reg. Sess. (Ariz. 2026), adding A.R.S. § 28-2014 and setting effective date after Dec. 31, 2026.

11. Nat’l Highway Traffic Safety Admin., Motorcycle Safety: Helmets, Motorists, Road Awareness (2026).

12. Ariz. Dep’t of Transp., Traffic Fatalities in Arizona Dip for Second Year in a Row (July 9, 2025).

13. H.B. 2114, 57th Leg., 2d Reg. Sess. (Ariz. 2026), bill history and roll calls.

This bill is now law. It changes how Arizona treats illegal lane splitting and improper same-lane passing by motorcycle riders. More importantly, it takes conduct that many riders may have thought of as a traffic ticket and moves it into reckless driving territory.

That is not a small change.

Under HB2941, operating a motorcycle in violation of A.R.S. § 28-903(B) or A.R.S. § 28-903(C) is now classified as reckless driving under Arizona law. That means illegal lane splitting is not being treated as a minor traffic infraction. It is being treated as a criminal misdemeanor.

Let’s slow that down for a minute.

Arizona already has a lane filtering law. It is narrow. It is specific. It is not the same as lane splitting. Riders can legally filter only under very limited conditions. Traffic must be stopped. The road must have at least two adjacent lanes in the same direction. The posted speed limit must be 45 miles per hour or less. The motorcycle must be traveling no more than 15 miles per hour. The rider must be operating a two-wheeled motorcycle. The maneuver must be safe.

That is legal lane filtering.

Lane splitting is different. Splitting between moving traffic, passing cars inside the same lane outside the legal filtering rule, or riding between rows of vehicles when the legal conditions are not met is not protected by Arizona law.

HB2941 makes that line matter more than ever.

Before, a rider might have looked at this as a citation risk. Now, the rider is looking at reckless driving. That means possible jail time, criminal fines, probation, license consequences, and, for repeat offenses, mandatory jail and a one-year suspension.

That is the part every Arizona rider needs to understand.

This law does not repeal legal lane filtering. It does not take away the narrow filtering rights Arizona riders fought for. But it does raise the cost of getting it wrong.

Legal Filtering Is Still Legal

The first thing to make clear is this: HB2941 does not ban legal lane filtering.

Arizona riders still have the ability to filter when they stay inside the existing law. That matters because the public often gets this wrong. Drivers get it wrong. Media outlets get it wrong. Sometimes riders get it wrong.

Legal lane filtering is not reckless driving.

Legal lane filtering means the rider is moving between stopped vehicles under Arizona’s narrow statutory conditions. That can be a useful safety tool. Anyone who rides in Arizona traffic understands the risk of being trapped at the back of stopped traffic with a distracted driver coming up from behind. A motorcycle does not have the same rear-end protection as a car or truck. Filtering gives a rider a lawful way to move out of that danger zone when the conditions are right.

But the law has limits.

If traffic is moving, you are not filtering under the Arizona statute. If the road is posted over 45 miles per hour, you are not filtering under the statute. If you are traveling more than 15 miles per hour, you are outside the legal protection. If you are on a freeway, you are outside the legal protection. If you are forcing your way between vehicles when it cannot be done safely, you are outside the legal protection.

That is where HB2941 comes in.

The bill says that when a motorcycle operator violates A.R.S. § 28-903(B) or (C), that violation is reckless driving. In plain English, if you split lanes illegally or pass inside the same lane illegally, Arizona law now treats that as reckless driving.

That is the new risk.

First Offense: This Can Now Be a Criminal Case

A first reckless driving offense in Arizona is a class 2 misdemeanor.

That means a rider convicted under this new framework could face up to four months in jail, a fine of up to $750 before surcharges, and probation. The judge can also require surrender of the driver license to a police officer. The conviction is reported to ADOT. The judge may suspend driving privileges for up to 90 days.

That is not just “pay the ticket and move on.”

This is a criminal misdemeanor. It can show up in background checks. It can affect employment. It can affect insurance. It can affect professional licensing. It can affect people who drive for work. It can affect people who already have other traffic issues on their record.

For riders, this means the old casual attitude around lane splitting needs to end. Arizona is not California. Arizona does not have general lane splitting. Arizona has limited lane filtering. Those are different legal concepts, and HB2941 puts criminal consequences behind that distinction.

A rider who understands the law can still filter legally.

A rider who assumes all lane splitting is fine because “Arizona allows it now” can end up with a reckless driving charge. A rider who just doesn’t care and splits anyway should expect to be arrested.

That misunderstanding is going to hurt people if we do not educate the riding community.

Repeat Offense: Mandatory Jail and a One-Year Suspension

The repeat-offense provision is where this gets serious.

If a rider has a qualifying prior conviction within 24 months, a new reckless driving conviction becomes a class 1 misdemeanor. That is the most serious misdemeanor class in Arizona. It can carry up to six months in jail and up to $2,500 in fines.

But the bigger issue is the mandatory penalty.

For a qualifying repeat offense, the person must serve at least 20 days in jail. The court cannot simply waive it. The person is not eligible for probation, pardon, suspension of sentence, or release on any basis until those 20 days are served.

ADOT must also suspend the person’s driving privilege for one year.

That is a major consequence.

The prior offense does not have to be reckless driving alone. The statute looks at a list of qualifying prior offenses, including reckless driving, certain homicide or assault offenses involving a vehicle, aggressive driving, racing, DUI, extreme DUI, and aggravated DUI.

So, a rider with one of those prior convictions in the last 24 months has much more exposure if convicted again under this reckless driving framework.

Think about what that means in the real world.

A one-year suspension can affect whether someone gets to work. It can affect whether they can take kids to school. It can affect whether they can care for a spouse or parent. It can affect whether a veteran gets to appointments. It can affect whether a small business owner can keep operating.

The law does allow a restricted license option after at least 45 consecutive days of suspension have been served, but that is not automatic relief. It is a restricted license through ADOT, and it comes with limits.

The practical message is simple: do not put yourself in that position.

Work and School Release Does Not Make This Minor

Arizona law does allow a court to authorize work or school release in some situations. If a person is sentenced to jail and is employed or a student, the court may allow that person to continue working or attending school for up to 12 hours per day, five days per week.

That may sound like a cushion.

It is not.

You are still serving a jail sentence. You are still going back to jail when work or school is over. You are still dealing with a criminal conviction. You are still dealing with the cost, stress, and disruption that comes with it.

That is why riders need to stop thinking about illegal lane splitting as just a traffic issue. HB2941 puts it in a different category.

Group Rides and Aiding and Abetting

There is another piece of this law that motorcycle clubs, riding groups, event organizers, and road captains should understand.

Arizona reckless driving law includes aiding and abetting. A person who knowingly aids or abets someone else in reckless driving can also be charged. For a first offense, that is a class 2 misdemeanor. For a second or later offense within 24 months, it can become a class 1 misdemeanor.

That does not mean every person in a group ride is responsible for what every other rider does.

But it does mean groups should be careful.

If a ride plan encourages illegal lane splitting, if riders are told to move between traffic outside the legal filtering rules, if people block traffic to let others split lanes illegally, or if the ride culture pushes riders into conduct that violates A.R.S. § 28-903(B) or (C), there may be exposure beyond the individual rider.

This is where leadership matters.

Road captains should brief riders before the ride. Clubs should make the rule clear. Legal filtering is legal. Illegal lane splitting is not part of the ride plan. Riders are expected to stay inside Arizona law.

That protects the riders. It protects the organization. It protects the event. It protects the motorcycle community’s credibility.

Why This Law Matters Politically

There is a reason this bill deserves discussion beyond the penalty chart.

Motorcycle policy always sits at the intersection of freedom, safety, public perception, and enforcement. When riders ask for legal protection, lawmakers look at how the community handles responsibility. When riders defend lawful filtering, the argument is stronger if the community also rejects reckless conduct.

That does not mean we accept every heavy-handed penalty without question.

HB2941 is a strong enforcement tool. It takes a motorcycle-specific lane-use violation and places it inside reckless driving. That is a major policy choice.

Reckless driving usually carries the idea of serious disregard for the safety of people or property. HB2941 makes a violation of these motorcycle lane-use provisions reckless driving as a matter of law. That may make sense in cases where a rider is splitting lanes through moving traffic at unsafe speeds. It may make sense when a rider is creating real danger.

But there will be edge cases.

What happens when a rider is accused of filtering slightly above 15 miles per hour? What happens when traffic is barely moving and the rider believes the cars are stopped? What happens when an officer does not understand the difference between legal filtering and illegal splitting? What happens when a driver complains because the driver does not like motorcycles filtering, even when the rider was inside the law?

Those are real questions.

The law is now on the books. The next fight is making sure it is applied correctly.

Enforcement Needs to Be Precise

Law enforcement needs to get this right.

There is a clear legal difference between a rider lawfully filtering through stopped traffic on a surface street and a rider splitting between moving cars on the freeway. Those are not the same thing. Treating them the same would be bad enforcement and bad policy.

The facts matter.

Was traffic actually stopped? What was the posted speed limit? Was the motorcycle traveling no more than 15 miles per hour? Were there at least two adjacent lanes moving in the same direction? Was the rider on a two-wheeled motorcycle? Was the maneuver safe?

Those are the questions that should be asked before this becomes a reckless driving case.

Officers should be trained on the difference between filtering and splitting. Prosecutors should review the facts before moving forward. Courts should require proof that the rider was actually outside the lawful filtering exception.

Motorcyclists should not be criminalized for conduct Arizona law still allows.

At the same time, riders should not expect sympathy if they are blasting between moving cars and calling it filtering. That is not filtering. That is illegal lane splitting, and under HB2941, it is reckless driving.

Both things can be true.

What Riders Should Do Now

The first step is simple: learn the rule.

If you ride in Arizona, you should know the filtering law cold. You should not have to guess. You should not rely on what someone told you at a gas station, on Facebook, or in a riding group.

Legal filtering requires stopped traffic, a road posted at 45 miles per hour or less, at least two adjacent lanes in the same direction, a two-wheeled motorcycle, a speed of 15 miles per hour or less, and safe movement.

If one of those pieces is missing, do not assume you are protected.

Second, educate the people you ride with. This should be part of every group ride briefing. It should be in club safety materials. It should be posted by motorcycle rights organizations. It should be discussed by instructors, dealers, and rider coaches.

Third, document your rides where appropriate. A helmet camera or motorcycle camera can matter if you are accused of illegal conduct when you were actually filtering legally. Video can answer questions about traffic movement, speed, lane structure, and driver behavior.

Fourth, do not let drivers define the law. Some drivers hate filtering because they think riders are cutting the line. That is not the law. Arizona allows legal filtering because motorcycles face different risks in stopped traffic. A driver’s frustration does not turn legal filtering into reckless driving.

Fifth, track enforcement problems. If riders begin seeing improper citations, inconsistent charging, or law enforcement confusion, that needs to be documented. Rider organizations should collect incident reports, court outcomes, body-camera footage where available, and examples of misapplication.

Data beats complaints. Documentation beats rumors.

What Drivers Need to Understand

Drivers also need to learn the law.

If a motorcycle is legally filtering, do not block it. Do not open a door. Do not swerve. Do not crowd the lane. Do not try to teach the rider a lesson. That kind of behavior can injure or kill someone.

Legal filtering is not an invitation for road rage.

Drivers may not like it. That does not matter. Arizona law allows it under narrow conditions.

The flip side is also true. Riders do not get to use the filtering law as a free pass to split lanes wherever they want. The law is narrow. Drivers should expect riders to follow it. Riders should expect drivers to understand it.

That is how this works.

The Bigger Motorcycle Rights Lesson

HB2941 is a reminder that motorcycle rights work is not just about stopping bad bills. It is also about making sure good laws are understood and existing laws are applied correctly.

Arizona’s lane filtering law was a win for riders. But every win comes with the need for education. If the public does not understand the law, riders get blamed. If law enforcement does not understand the law, riders get cited. If riders do not understand the law, they create bad cases and bad headlines.

That is why ABATE and the broader motorcycle rights community have work to do here.

We need to continue to defend legal filtering. Which we do.

We need to educate riders on the limits.

We need to push back against drivers who think they can use their vehicles to police motorcycles.

We need to make sure police agencies understand the statute.

We need to track whether HB2941 is being used against actual dangerous conduct or whether it becomes a trap for riders who are trying to follow the law.

That is the advocacy lane.

Bottom Line

HB2941 changes the stakes.

Illegal lane splitting in Arizona is now reckless driving. That means criminal misdemeanor exposure, possible jail, fines, probation, license suspension, and serious repeat-offense penalties. For a qualifying repeat offense within 24 months, the law can mean mandatory jail and a one-year license suspension.

Legal lane filtering remains legal.

That distinction is everything.

If traffic is stopped, the road is posted at 45 miles per hour or less, there are at least two adjacent lanes in the same direction, you are on a two-wheeled motorcycle, you are traveling no more than 15 miles per hour, and the movement is safe, you are inside Arizona’s filtering law.

If not, you may be looking at reckless driving.

Riders need to know the line. Groups need to teach the line. Law enforcement needs to enforce the line correctly. Drivers need to respect the line.

The motorcycle community fought for legal filtering because it made sense for rider safety. We should defend it. But we also need to be honest with riders: HB2941 means the penalty for getting this wrong is no longer minor.

Know the law before you ride.

If you have questions, feel free to reach out and ask.

The short version is this: beginning after December 31, 2026, Arizona will tie motorcycle registration renewal to lawful motorcycle licensure. At least one registered owner of a motorcycle must be legally licensed to operate a motorcycle in Arizona before ADOT may renew that motorcycle’s registration. If the owner is not yet licensed but is enrolled in an approved motorcycle training program, ADOT may issue a 30-day temporary registration. The law also protects the Motorcycle Safety Fund, keeps the $1 motorcycle registration contribution dedicated to rider safety, and creates a statutory pathway for scholarships for rural and low-income riders who need help accessing motorcycle training.

That matters.

For years, Arizona riders have paid into a fund meant to support motorcycle education, awareness, training, and safety. HB2114 strengthens the link between the dollars motorcyclists contribute and the rider-focused programs those dollars were meant to support. It also sends a clear message: motorcycle safety policy should be built around training, access, accountability, and keeping rider-generated dollars in rider-focused programs.

What HB2114 Actually Does

HB2114 does five basic things.

First, it creates a new motorcycle registration renewal requirement. After the effective date, ADOT may renew a motorcycle registration only if at least one registered owner is licensed to legally operate a motorcycle in Arizona. This means a person who owns a motorcycle but has no motorcycle license or endorsement will need to correct that before renewing the registration.

Second, it gives new or unlicensed riders a limited bridge. If the person shows valid proof of enrollment in an ADOT-approved motorcycle training program, ADOT may issue a 30-day temporary registration. That is not a permanent substitute for a motorcycle endorsement. It is a short window to get into training and move toward compliance.

Third, it addresses motorcycles held in trust. If the registered owner is a trust, a trustee named in the trust must be legally licensed to operate a motorcycle in order to renew the registration. That protects ordinary estate-planning arrangements without leaving the statute toothless.

Fourth, it exempts motorcycles owned by a business. Business-owned motorcycles are not subject to the new licensing-linked renewal requirement. That distinction matters for dealerships, fleets, training providers, and other commercial ownership arrangements.

Fifth, it protects and directs the Motorcycle Safety Fund. The law keeps the $1-per-registration deposit into the fund and directs how the money may be used. Up to 75 percent may support voluntary motorcycle education, awareness, training, and related materials. Up to 25 percent may support scholarships for motorcycle driver education programs for people from rural or low-income areas. Up to 10 percent may be used for administrative costs.

The fund-protection language may be the most important part of the bill. HB2114 states that fees, assessments, or other levies collected and deposited into the Motorcycle Safety Fund are held in trust and may be used only for the purposes prescribed by statute. The money may not be appropriated or transferred to fund general state operations or meet general fund obligations.

That is a direct win for motorcyclists.

The Licensing Requirement: What Riders Need to Know

The most immediate rider-facing change is the new registration renewal rule. If you already have a motorcycle endorsement or motorcycle license, this law should not change much for you. You keep renewing as usual.

If you own a motorcycle but do not have the legal authority to operate one, the law changes your posture. You will need to obtain the proper motorcycle license or endorsement before renewal after the effective date. For most adult riders who already hold a regular driver license, that means adding a motorcycle endorsement. For a person who does not hold a regular driver license, Arizona provides a stand-alone Class M motorcycle license.

This is where the bill creates a direct policy line: Arizona will no longer treat motorcycle registration renewal as completely separate from legal motorcycle operation. The state is saying that if a motorcycle is being kept in the stream of registered highway use, at least one registered owner must be legally qualified to operate it.

Critics may argue that ownership and operation are not the same thing. That is true. A person can own a vehicle and never personally drive it. A collector may own bikes. A spouse may register a motorcycle. A family member may hold title for estate or financing reasons. HB2114 softens that concern by requiring only one registered owner to be licensed, by creating a rule for trusts, and by exempting business-owned motorcycles.

That is a narrower rule than a blanket prohibition on ownership. The law does not say every owner must be endorsed. It does not say every motorcycle must be operated by its owner. It does not create a helmet mandate. It does not increase the $1 contribution to the Motorcycle Safety Fund. It does not create a new rider tax. It ties renewal to having at least one legally qualified motorcycle operator among the registered owners.

That is the policy tradeoff.

The 30-Day Temporary Registration Window

HB2114 also recognizes a practical issue: new riders often buy or acquire a motorcycle before completing the endorsement process. Some riders need a short registration window while they enroll in training, complete the course, and finish the licensing process.

The law gives ADOT authority to issue a 30-day temporary registration when the person shows valid proof of enrollment in an approved motorcycle training program.

That matters because it prevents the law from becoming a dead end for new riders. Without the temporary option, a person could be caught in a cycle: unable to renew or register because they are not endorsed, yet unable to move forward in a practical way while entering training. The 30-day temporary registration gives the rider a defined path.

It is not a loophole. It is a bridge.

Riders should treat that temporary registration as a compliance window, not as a workaround. Once the temporary period runs, the rider still needs to complete training and obtain the proper license or endorsement. For new riders, the practical advice is clear: do not wait until renewal month to start the process. Find an approved motorcycle training course, enroll, keep proof of enrollment, complete the course, and update your license.

Trusts and Business-Owned Motorcycles

HB2114 includes two ownership-structure provisions that riders should understand.

If a motorcycle is owned by a trust, a trustee named in the trust must be legally licensed to operate a motorcycle before ADOT may renew the registration. This matters for riders who use trusts for estate planning, family ownership, asset planning, or succession purposes. A motorcycle held in trust is not exempt from the licensing-linked renewal requirement. The law looks to the trustee.

Business-owned motorcycles are treated differently. The new licensing-linked renewal requirement does not apply to motorcycles owned by a business.

That exemption makes sense as a matter of administration. A dealership may own many motorcycles. A training provider may own motorcycles used by students. A company may own motorcycles for business purposes. Requiring a natural person registered owner to hold a motorcycle endorsement would not map cleanly onto every business ownership structure.

For individual riders, the message is direct: do not assume a trust avoids the requirement. If the motorcycle is in a trust, make sure at least one named trustee is legally licensed to operate a motorcycle in Arizona.

The Motorcycle Safety Fund: Why the Money Piece Matters

The Motorcycle Safety Fund is where HB2114 becomes more than a registration bill.

Arizona law already directed $1 from each motorcycle registration fee into the Motorcycle Safety Fund. HB2114 keeps that structure, then tightens how the money may be used.

The bill directs fund dollars toward voluntary motorcycle education, awareness, training, and related materials. It also authorizes scholarships for motorcycle driver education programs for people from rural or low-income areas. That is important because training access is not equal across Arizona. A rider in Phoenix or Tucson may have more course options than a rider in a rural county. A rider with stable income may absorb course fees more easily than a young worker, veteran, student, or low-income rider trying to get legal and trained.

HB2114 recognizes that safety policy cannot be built only for people who already have access. If Arizona wants more riders trained, the state has to make training reachable. Scholarships for rural and low-income riders are a practical step.

The bill also limits administrative costs to up to 10 percent. That matters because special funds can lose public trust when too much money disappears into internal overhead. A cap keeps the focus on rider-facing safety work.

The core principle is simple: rider dollars should serve rider safety.

Fund Protection: The Quiet Victory in HB2114

The strongest language in HB2114 is the fund-protection language.

The bill states that fees, assessments, or other levies collected and deposited into the Motorcycle Safety Fund are held in trust. It also states that the money may be used only for statutory purposes and may not be transferred or appropriated to pay for general state operations or general fund obligations.

That is a major advocacy win.

Dedicated funds are often attractive targets during budget stress. When government faces a shortfall, money sitting in a special fund can look like a convenient backstop. Riders know what that means: they pay a fee for motorcycle safety, then watch the money drift away from motorcycle safety.

HB2114 says no.

This is the part of the law riders should pay close attention to. The licensing requirement will get most of the public discussion because it changes what some owners must do before renewal. The safety fund protection may have the longer policy life. It guards the purpose of the money. It gives rider advocates a statutory hook if future budget negotiations attempt to raid the fund. It also creates a cleaner accountability standard for how the money is spent.

If motorcycle money is collected for motorcycle safety, it should stay with motorcycle safety.

Why This Matters for Rider Advocacy

HB2114 shows what effective motorcycle policy can look like when the frame is not anti-rider regulation, but rider-centered safety.

Too often, motorcycle bills fall into one of two categories. The first category is punitive: more restrictions, more penalties, or more assumptions that riders are the problem. The second category is symbolic: awareness language that sounds good but does not change systems, training access, or funding protection.

HB2114 is different. It takes an existing rider-paid fund and strengthens the connection between that money and rider-focused use. It creates a scholarship path for riders who may need help accessing training. It protects the fund from diversion. It also addresses unlicensed ownership in a way that leaves room for new riders, trusts, and business ownership.

That does not mean every rider will love every part of the bill. Some will dislike the registration renewal tie. Some will question why ownership status should depend on licensure. Those are fair policy concerns. But the final version is narrower than a broad ownership restriction. It applies to renewal. It requires only one registered owner to be legally licensed. It permits a 30-day temporary registration for those enrolled in approved training. It exempts business-owned motorcycles. It addresses trusts.

The result is a bill that balances rider accountability with training access and fund protection.

What Riders Should Do Before January 1, 2027

Riders should use 2026 as a compliance year.

If you already have a motorcycle endorsement, check your license and make sure the endorsement is visible and current. If your motorcycle is jointly titled or registered, make sure at least one registered owner has the legal authority to operate a motorcycle in Arizona.

If you own a motorcycle and do not have a motorcycle endorsement, do not wait until renewal time. Start the licensing process. Arizona allows a person who already has a driver license to add a motorcycle endorsement. A person without a regular driver license may obtain a stand-alone Class M motorcycle license. Approved motorcycle training can help riders move through the process and, in some circumstances, may allow a rider to avoid separate written or road testing.

If your motorcycle is held in a trust, review the trust ownership structure. Make sure a named trustee is legally licensed to operate a motorcycle. Do not assume that because the motorcycle is in a trust, ADOT will treat it like a business-owned motorcycle. The statute treats trusts and businesses differently.

If you are a new rider, enroll in training early. Keep proof of enrollment. The 30-day temporary registration option depends on proof of enrollment in an approved motorcycle training program.

If you are in a rural or low-income area, watch for scholarship availability once the funding structure is in place. One of the best parts of HB2114 is that it recognizes training access as a real issue. Riders outside the largest metro areas should not be left behind.

What ABATE, Rider Groups, and Advocates Should Track Next

The signing of HB2114 is not the end of the work. It is the start of the next phase.

Rider advocates should track how ADOT applies the renewal requirement. Clear instructions will matter. Riders need to know what proof ADOT will accept, how joint ownership will be handled, how trust-owned motorcycles will be reviewed, and how temporary registrations will be processed.

Advocates should track how the Governor’s Office of Highway Safety uses the Motorcycle Safety Fund. The statute creates categories, but the real-world value will depend on spending decisions. Are the dollars reaching training programs? Are scholarships being used by rural riders? Are low-income riders learning about the program? Are administrative costs staying within the cap? Are safety materials reaching drivers as well as riders?

Advocates should also push for transparent reporting. The state should be able to show how much money enters the fund, how much is spent, where it goes, how many riders receive scholarships, how many courses are supported, and whether rural counties are being served.

That is the next accountability fight.

A fund-protection statute is only as strong as the oversight behind it. HB2114 gives rider advocates a stronger legal position. Now the motorcycle community needs to make sure the law produces measurable benefit.

The Bottom Line

HB2114 is a meaningful rider safety law because it does three things at once.

It pushes unlicensed motorcycle owners toward legal operation.

It expands the role of motorcycle safety education and training scholarships.

It protects rider-paid safety dollars from being diverted to unrelated state spending.

For riders who are already endorsed, the registration piece should be simple. For owners without an endorsement, the message is clear: get licensed before renewal after January 1, 2027. For new riders, training enrollment can provide a temporary 30-day registration path, but that is only a bridge. For rural and low-income riders, the scholarship language may open doors that were previously closed. For rider advocacy groups, the trust-fund protection is a strong tool for future budget fights.

This is what practical motorcycle policy should look like: protect the money riders pay, expand access to training, respect lawful riders, and build safety policy around education rather than punishment.

HB2114 is not the final word on motorcycle safety in Arizona. It is a solid step in the right direction.

Ride safe. Ride free.