California pulls the plug on flawed e-bike project once run by investigated San Diego nonprofit – San Diego Union-Tribune

California pulls the plug on flawed e-bike project once run by investigated San Diego nonprofit – San Diego Union-Tribune

California Kills $30 Million E-Bike Program After Years of Fraud Allegations and Failed Rollouts

California has quietly buried its ambitious electric-bike subsidy program after a San Diego nonprofit's mismanagement left thousands of applicants empty-handed, triggered multiple criminal investigations, and became a case study in government oversight failure.

The California Air Resources Board announced this month it is redirecting $18 million from the California E-Bike Incentive Project to other clean-vehicle programs, effectively ending an initiative that was supposed to put affordable electric bikes in the hands of low-income Californians but instead devolved into a quagmire of crashed websites, falsified data, and allegations of self-dealing.

The program's administrator, a San Diego nonprofit called Pedal Ahead, is now the subject of criminal and civil investigations while its former manager has filed a wrongful termination lawsuit alleging fraud, racial discrimination, and the systematic diversion of public funds to private business ventures.

From Promise to Scandal

When California allocated $10 million for a statewide e-bike incentive program in 2021, it seemed like a win for climate policy. The concept was straightforward: provide vouchers up to $2,000 to help lower-income residents purchase electric bikes, reducing car dependence and greenhouse gas emissions. The state eventually increased funding to over $30 million.

But what should have launched by mid-2022 instead became one of California's most spectacular public program failures.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) selected Pedal Ahead to manage the statewide effort based largely on its local e-bike program with the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). That choice raised immediate concerns among cycling advocates who questioned whether the organization had the capacity or expertise for a statewide rollout.

Their concerns proved prescient.

The Political Connection

At the heart of the controversy lies a web of political relationships that critics say should have disqualified Pedal Ahead from the start.

Edward Clancy, founder of Pedal Ahead and its parent nonprofit Rider Safety Visibility, launched the organization in 2020 with help from then-San Diego County Supervisor Nathan Fletcher. Fletcher, who served on CARB's board from 2019 to 2022, helped secure initial funding for Pedal Ahead through county grants totaling $200,000.

When CARB selected Pedal Ahead in 2022 to administer the state program, advocates privately questioned whether Fletcher's connection had influenced the decision. CARB staff insisted Fletcher had "zero influence," pointing to Pedal Ahead's local experience as the deciding factor.

Fletcher later resigned from both the CARB board and the County Board of Supervisors in 2023 after facing sexual assault allegations from a Metropolitan Transit Systems employee. He has since used campaign funds to pay more than $500,000 in legal fees while denying all allegations.

The political entanglements didn't end there. According to legal claims filed by former Pedal Ahead field manager Rodrigo Rodriguez, Clancy attempted to hire Fletcher as a salesperson for Clancy's for-profit e-bike venture, Pedal Ahead Plus, while simultaneously running the public nonprofit program. Fletcher denied ever working for Pedal Ahead Plus.

Warning Signs Ignored

Long before the state program's spectacular failures, red flags about Pedal Ahead were everywhere.

An investigation by inewsource in 2022 found that only about 50 of nearly 400 local Pedal Ahead participants had logged enough miles to earn their bikes. Many participants reported zero miles or had been inactive for more than a year, despite the program's requirement to ride an average of five miles daily.

The program's financial reporting raised additional concerns. Pedal Ahead's federal tax returns showed revenue and expenses that didn't align with publicly announced government contracts. When questioned, Clancy acknowledged that $1 million in collected funds sat in a bank account but hadn't been included in the nonprofit's declared revenue—a violation of generally accepted accounting principles that require nonprofits to report all revenue.

Despite these problems at SANDAG, CARB moved forward with awarding Pedal Ahead the much larger state contract.

Systemic Failures

The statewide program's launch was delayed more than two years past its scheduled 2022 rollout. When online enrollment finally opened in December 2024, the system immediately collapsed. With 150,000 people trying to access just 1,500 vouchers, the website crashed within minutes.

"It's like getting tickets to a Taylor Swift concert," CARB spokesperson Lisa Macumber told reporters, a comparison that rang hollow for frustrated applicants.

A second enrollment attempt in April 2025 proved even worse. State officials abruptly shut down the system citing a "security threat," publicly apologized, and eventually brought in a new vendor to process applications.

But operational incompetence was the least of the program's problems.

Allegations of Fraud and Discrimination

The most detailed allegations about Pedal Ahead's operations come not from government investigations but from legal claims and a lawsuit filed by former field manager Rodrigo Rodriguez.

In June 2024, Rodriguez filed pre-lawsuit claims—required before suing a government agency—against both SANDAG and CARB. These claims alleged he had "witnessed waste, fraud and abuse" in Pedal Ahead's management of both programs. In February 2025, after the claims went unaddressed, Rodriguez filed a formal wrongful termination lawsuit in San Diego Superior Court against Pedal Ahead and Manpower (the workforce company serving as his employer of record).

The lawsuit, now pending with a hearing scheduled for July 25, 2025, and assigned to Judge Loren Freestone, alleges:

Falsified Data: Rodriguez claims Clancy systematically falsified ridership numbers and participation data provided to government agencies. According to the legal claims, Clancy instructed Rodriguez to overstate enrollment in the pilot project, the number of bikes placed into service, and the number of miles ridden by enrollees. The claims also allege Clancy reissued dozens of bikes to new participants who didn't meet program objectives (such as riding 100 miles per month), making it appear more riders were enrolled than actually participating.

Public-Private Commingling: Rodriguez alleges Clancy repeatedly directed him to perform work for Pedal Ahead Plus, the for-profit venture, while being paid through the public nonprofit contracts. He claims he is owed approximately $40,000 in back pay for SANDAG work and $58,000 for state work—a total of nearly $98,000 in unpaid wages.

Racial Discrimination: The lawsuit alleges Clancy made discriminatory comments about communities the program was meant to serve and explicitly instructed Rodriguez to avoid promoting the program in two Black communities in Northern California—Hunters Point and Richmond—despite contract requirements prohibiting racial discrimination. According to the lawsuit, in June 2023, "Pedal Ahead CEO Ed Clancy told plaintiff to stay away from all Black communities in the Bay Area" and to "push the Black communities to the side and focus on his (Ed Clancy's) for-profit journey and political favors for other locations."

The lawsuit quotes Clancy as saying during a meeting about outreach in Hunters Point: "we should have Rodrigo go up there to the Bay with his barbecue smoker to feed them since all black people love them some barbecue."

Self-Dealing: Rodriguez claims Clancy used his position to steer business toward his for-profit ventures. The claims allege Clancy involved business leader Phil Blair (whose company Manpower provided payroll services to Pedal Ahead) in recruiting business for the for-profit side. According to the claims, during a trip to Northern California, "Mr. Rodriguez heard Clancy asking Blair to lend Clancy funds to hire Nathan Fletcher as a salesperson for their for-profit business (Pedal Ahead Plus)."

Misuse of Funds: The claims allege that GPS tracking equipment was billed to SANDAG but never purchased. "When a participant was sexually assaulted, the GPS information was not available immediately because the GPS subscription for the bike involved had not been purchased," one claim stated.

Rodriguez alleges he began reporting his findings to government funders in early 2024. He was placed on leave a few months later and subsequently terminated—hence the wrongful termination lawsuit seeking compensation for lost wages, future earnings, emotional distress, and adverse employment actions.

CARB has declined to comment on the allegations, citing the ongoing lawsuit. Clancy denied any wrongdoing in a June 2024 interview, saying he was cooperating with investigations, but has not responded to media inquiries since then.

Multiple Investigations, Zero Public Accountability

By mid-2024, Pedal Ahead found itself under scrutiny from multiple agencies:

• The California Department of Justice opened a criminal investigation into allegations of falsified records
• CARB conducted its own civil probe described as a "regular program review" into the organization's management
• SANDAG launched an investigation on February 15, 2024, examining whether Pedal Ahead met contract requirements, with concerns about spending practices and data accuracy
• The California Attorney General's Office listed Pedal Ahead as delinquent for failing to comply with nonprofit regulations

What's most remarkable about these investigations is what hasn't been made public. Despite documented concerns about a nonprofit handling more than $10 million in taxpayer funds:

• No investigation reports have been released by SANDAG, CARB, or the Department of Justice
• No findings have been shared with the public about what investigators discovered
• No one has been charged with any crimes despite criminal probes
• No funds have been recovered despite allegations of misuse

SANDAG closed its review after four months in June 2024, terminated its relationship with Pedal Ahead, took the program in-house, and agreed to pay the nonprofit $3,600 monthly to finish out the contract. The agency has released no report detailing its findings.

CARB has maintained near-total silence. The agency has never publicly commented on its investigation, declined to explain why Clancy was removed from the program, won't specify why Pedal Ahead was ultimately replaced as administrator, and declined to say how much money the organization received or how many vouchers it successfully distributed.

The California Department of Justice and Attorney General's Office have not responded to requests for comment on their investigations.

Clancy stopped responding to media inquiries over a year ago. His successor at Pedal Ahead, Scott Anderson, has also declined comment, directing all questions back to the state. The organization's website is now suspended.

The Human and Environmental Cost

Lost in the administrative chaos and criminal allegations are the thousands of Californians who desperately wanted these subsidies. Many were lower-income residents for whom a $2,000 voucher could have been transformative—making clean transportation accessible and reducing their carbon footprint.

The program's collapse also represents a significant setback for California's climate goals. Electric bikes offer a practical, affordable alternative to short car trips, which account for a substantial portion of transportation emissions. Every program failure chips away at public trust in climate initiatives.

The timing is particularly frustrating. While California spent years mired in scandal, other states and cities successfully implemented similar programs. Denver, Vermont, and numerous California localities created functioning e-bike incentive programs, proving the concept works when properly administered.

"We were the first U.S. state or city to approve an e-bike voucher program—and the last to get it working," said Ted Rogers, who runs the website BikingInLA.com and repeatedly tried to secure a voucher. "This whole mess should be investigated by the state."

How Did This Happen?

The Pedal Ahead debacle exposes fundamental failures in government contracting and oversight:

Inadequate Vetting: CARB selected Pedal Ahead based on a local pilot program that was already showing signs of trouble. The organization's application didn't even match what the state wanted—it proposed a "loan-to-own" model when California planned simple purchase vouchers.

Ignored Red Flags: Financial reporting irregularities, conflict-of-interest concerns, and performance problems were all documented before CARB awarded the large state contract.

Political Influence: The close relationship between Clancy and Fletcher, a CARB board member, created at minimum the appearance of impropriety. Whether it affected the selection decision, the connection should have triggered heightened scrutiny.

Slow Response: Even after investigations began in early 2023, Pedal Ahead continued operating the state program and receiving funds for more than a year before being removed.

No Accountability: Despite documented problems and ongoing criminal investigations, no one has been charged, no funds have been recovered, and state officials won't discuss what went wrong or how they'll prevent similar failures.

The Scandal of Secrecy

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this entire debacle is not just what happened, but what the public still doesn't know—and what government officials refuse to disclose.

Think about what we're dealing with: A nonprofit awarded more than $10 million in taxpayer funds is under criminal investigation by the California Department of Justice, civil investigation by CARB, investigated by SANDAG, and sued by a former employee alleging fraud, racial discrimination, and theft of public funds. Yet after all these probes, not a single investigation report has been made public.

This is not how accountability is supposed to work in a democracy.

Why won't SANDAG release its findings? The agency spent four months investigating Pedal Ahead, found sufficient problems to terminate the contract and take the program back in-house, yet has released no report explaining what it found. Taxpayers funded both the original contract and the investigation. They have a right to know what their money revealed.

Why won't CARB explain itself? The Air Resources Board conducted its own "regular program review" and removed Clancy from the program, but won't say why. The agency won't disclose how much money Pedal Ahead received, won't explain what the investigation found, and won't clarify how a nonprofit with documented problems at the local level was selected to manage a statewide program worth tens of millions of dollars. CARB's spokesperson has repeatedly declined to comment, citing ongoing investigations—but those investigations have now stretched for nearly two years with no resolution.

Why won't the Department of Justice act? A criminal investigation opened in early 2024. It's now late 2025. No charges have been filed. No public statement has been issued. The public has no idea what investigators found, whether they believe crimes were committed, or if the probe is even still active. Meanwhile, the statute of limitations is running.

Why won't the Attorney General's Office explain? The AG's office listed Pedal Ahead as delinquent and opened its own probe, but has provided no information about findings or next steps.

This wall of silence serves no legitimate government interest. These agencies are not protecting sources and methods in an ongoing terrorism investigation. They're refusing to disclose what happened to taxpayer money that was supposed to help low-income Californians buy electric bikes.

The refusal to release findings creates several problems:

It prevents accountability. Without knowing what investigators found, the public cannot assess whether anyone should face consequences, whether the selection process was flawed, or whether adequate safeguards existed.

It enables future failures. Other government agencies awarding contracts cannot learn from CARB and SANDAG's mistakes because those mistakes have never been formally documented and shared.

It protects the guilty. If Clancy or others committed fraud, misused funds, or engaged in discriminatory practices, the lack of public investigation reports makes it harder to build political and legal pressure for consequences.

It punishes whistleblowers. Rodriguez filed detailed allegations, lost his job, and filed a lawsuit—yet the government agencies he notified have never publicly validated or refuted his claims. He's left hanging while officials stay silent.

It erodes trust. Every day these agencies refuse to release findings, they tell the public that transparency doesn't matter and that government officials can fail spectacularly without having to explain themselves.

Some officials might argue that ongoing investigations or pending litigation prevent disclosure. But criminal investigations don't require complete secrecy for years on end—the public deserves periodic updates. And civil litigation doesn't prevent agencies from releasing factual findings about how public money was spent. Indeed, many government investigation reports are released even when related litigation is pending.

The California Public Records Act exists precisely to prevent this kind of stonewalling. Citizens and journalists should be filing records requests demanding:

• All investigation reports from SANDAG, CARB, the Department of Justice, and the Attorney General's Office
• All communications between these agencies about Pedal Ahead
• All financial records showing exactly how much money Pedal Ahead received and how it was spent
• All records related to the selection process that awarded Pedal Ahead the state contract
• All reports Pedal Ahead submitted to government agencies about program participation and outcomes

If agencies refuse these requests, requesters should appeal and, if necessary, sue. Taxpayers have a right to know what happened to their money.

California officials love to talk about transparency and accountability—Governor Newsom frequently touts California as a model of good government. But this case exposes that rhetoric as hollow. When a politically connected nonprofit receiving millions in public funds collapses amid fraud allegations, and multiple government agencies investigate but refuse to tell the public what they found, that's not accountability. That's a cover-up.

What's Next?

CARB says it plans to hire a new contractor to manage what remains of the program, though $18 million has now been redirected to other initiatives. State officials claim they remain "committed to moving forward with the incentives" but have provided no timeline for when or how that might happen.

The status of criminal and civil investigations remains unclear. Neither the California Department of Justice nor the Attorney General's Office has announced any charges against Clancy or Pedal Ahead. Rodriguez's wrongful termination lawsuit is pending in San Diego Superior Court with a hearing scheduled for July 2025.

Meanwhile, Clancy—a former political consultant who once wore a wire for the FBI investigating illegal campaign contributions and worked for former San Diego Mayor Bob Filner before Filner was forced to resign in a sexual harassment scandal—has maintained his silence.

The irony is bitter: A program designed to help lower-income Californians access clean transportation and fight climate change instead became a vehicle for alleged fraud, enriching a politically connected operator while leaving the intended beneficiaries with nothing but frustration.

As one program administrator noted, even a "soft launch" distributed only 80 applications across the entire state—a pathetic output for $30 million in funding and years of effort.

The California E-Bike Incentive Project may be dead, but the questions it raises about oversight, accountability, and the vulnerability of government programs to exploitation remain very much alive. Even more troubling is what this case reveals about official secrecy: when government programs fail spectacularly, the agencies involved seem more committed to protecting their reputations than serving the public interest.

As one program administrator noted, even a "soft launch" distributed only 80 applications across the entire state—a pathetic output for $30 million in funding and years of effort.

Until SANDAG, CARB, and the Department of Justice release their findings, the full story of how Pedal Ahead was able to mismanage millions in taxpayer funds—while government officials either looked the other way or covered up their mistakes—remains hidden.

That secrecy is not just bad policy. It's a betrayal of the public trust and an invitation for the next scandal.

---

Sources

Primary Legal Documents

Rodriguez v. Pedal Ahead, et al., San Diego Superior Court, Case filed February 2025, hearing scheduled July 25, 2025 before Judge Loren Freestone. (Referenced in multiple news reports; case details from San Diego Union-Tribune reporting)

Rodriguez, Rodrigo. Legal claims filed against SANDAG and California Air Resources Board, June 2024. (Referenced in San Diego Union-Tribune reporting; actual claim documents not publicly available)

Government Agency Statements

California Air Resources Board. Statements to media regarding California E-Bike Incentive Project, 2024-2025. (No formal investigation reports released to public)

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). Statements regarding Pedal Ahead contract review, February-June 2024. (Investigation began February 15, 2024; no formal investigation report released to public)

California Attorney General's Office. Listing of Pedal Ahead as delinquent nonprofit, 2024. (No comment on criminal investigation)

California Department of Justice. Criminal investigation opened 2024. (No charges filed; no investigation report released to public)

News Reporting

McDonald, Jeff. "California pulls the plug on flawed e-bike project once run by investigated San Diego nonprofit." San Diego Union-Tribune, November 1, 2025. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/11/01/california-pulls-the-plug-on-flawed-e-bike-project-once-run-by-investigated-san-diego-nonprofit/

McDonald, Jeff. "Pedal Ahead manager fired after reporting fraud, abuse sues for wrongful termination." San Diego Union-Tribune, February 23, 2025. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/02/23/pedal-ahead-manager-fired-after-reporting-fraud-abuse-sues-for-wrongful-termination/

McDonald, Jeff. "'People are frustrated': State e-bike grant applying process bungled yet again." San Diego Union-Tribune, May 3, 2025. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/05/03/people-are-frustrated-state-e-bike-grant-applying-process-bungled-yet-again/

McDonald, Jeff. "After troubled rollout, state sets new date for e-bike subsidies." San Diego Union-Tribune, April 25, 2025. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/04/25/after-troubled-rollout-state-sets-new-date-for-e-bike-subsidies/

McDonald, Jeff. "Pedal Ahead founder is out as state e-bike program operator, but questions and reporting discrepancies persist." San Diego Union-Tribune, December 27, 2024. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/12/27/pedal-ahead-founder-is-out-as-state-e-bike-program-operator-but-questions-and-reporting-discrepancies-persist/

McDonald, Jeff. "E-bike nonprofit CEO accused of faking program data, mixing public and private business." San Diego Union-Tribune, June 18, 2024. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/06/18/e-bike-nonprofit-ceo-accused-of-faking-program-data-mixing-public-and-private-business/

McDonald, Jeff. "After collecting millions in public money, San Diego e-bike charity now facing multiple investigations." San Diego Union-Tribune, June 16, 2024. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/06/16/after-collecting-millions-in-public-money-san-diego-e-bike-charity-now-facing-multiple-investigations/

Curry, Melanie. "What the Heck Is Going on with the State E-bike Incentive Program?" Streetsblog California, July 25, 2024. https://cal.streetsblog.org/2024/07/25/what-the-heck-is-going-on-with-the-state-e-bike-incentive-program

Kevitt, Damian. "California (Finally) Launches E-Bike Program." Streets Are For Everyone, December 13, 2024. https://www.streetsareforeveryone.org/blog/california-finally-launches-e-bike-program

Toll, Micah. "What went so horribly wrong with California's e-bike incentive program?" Electrek, August 1, 2024. https://electrek.co/2024/08/01/what-went-so-horribly-wrong-with-californias-e-bike-incentive-program/

Rogers, Ted. "CA Ebike Incentive management firm accused of major misconduct." BikinginLA, February 20, 2025. https://bikinginla.com/2025/02/20/ca-ebike-incentive-management-firm-accused-of-major-misconduct-and-king-trump-kills-new-york-congestion-pricing/

"Former employee sues San Diego E-bike nonprofit CEO for fund misuse." CBS 8 San Diego, February 20, 2025. https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/local/e-bike-nonprofit-sued-for-corruption/509-150d9f45-3da0-4910-80d0-2f9a9d0be8c6

Schaub, Zoe and Bethany Brookshire. "San Diego's Pedal Ahead program will expand despite low participation." inewsource, December 22, 2022. https://inewsource.org/2022/12/22/pedal-ahead-electric-bike-program-california/

Niebla, Crystal. "E-bike program for Californians to launch spring 2024." inewsource, February 21, 2024. https://inewsource.org/2024/02/21/pedal-ahead-free-electric-bikes-california-low-income-poverty-public/

"Supervisor Nathan Fletcher & Rider Safety Visibility Launch Pedal Ahead Electric Bicycle Community Program." Rider Safety Visibility, September 22, 2020. https://ridersafetyvisibility.com/rsv-to-launch-pedal-ahead-2020/

"California's E-Bike Incentive Program: What's the Hold-Up?" Xnito, April 24, 2025. https://xnito.com/blogs/our-news/californias-e-bike-incentive-program-whats-the-hold-up

Note on Public Records

This investigation is hampered by the lack of publicly available documentation from government agencies. Despite multiple investigations by SANDAG, CARB, the California Department of Justice, and the California Attorney General's Office, no formal investigation reports have been released to the public. The most detailed allegations come from legal claims and court filings by former employee Rodrigo Rodriguez, as reported in news coverage. State agencies have declined to comment on ongoing investigations or release findings.