Scranton City Council on Tuesday advanced its proposed citywide ban on sales and possession of kratom, a botanical native to Southeast Asia, and synthetic versions sold in stores in forms that include vapes, powders and capsules.
An initiative led by Councilman Patrick Flynn, the proposed ban is pending in two ordinances: one addressing adults and the other regarding minors. The issue has generally spurred support and opposition since Flynn, council President Tom Schuster, Councilman Mark McAndrew, Councilman Sean McAndrew and Lackawanna County District Attorney Brian Gallagher on April 6 announced the proposed ban at a media event at the Lackawanna County Courthouse.
Opponents generally have argued that a total ban would take away pure-leaf forms of kratom that many people have found helpful for pain relief and other health reasons; and they generally do not oppose banning the much-stronger, addictive and potentially dangerous synthetic versions.
Council proponents of a total ban argue the city cannot distinguish between natural kratom or synthetic versions readily available on store shelves and – absent federal or state regulations that do not exist – the only option for the city to address a growing public health threat from synthetic versions is to ban all forms.
People on both sides generally have spoken in favor of banning all versions of kratom for people under 21.
Councilwoman Jessica Rothchild cast the lone dissent on introducing the companion ordinances on April 7, and again voted no Tuesday on advancing the two pieces of legislation on second readings. She’s not necessarily against a ban, but believes the council-drafted legislation needed further review and discussion beforehand, including from council as a whole in worksessions and from the administration of Mayor Paige Gebhardt Cognetti, to ensure a ban would be practical and enforceable.
Rothchild’s motions to table the two pieces of legislation at both council meetings died for lack of seconds from her colleagues.
“I still believe that it would be irresponsible for us to pass these ordinances as they are,” Rothchild said Tuesday, according an Electric City Television simulcast and video of the meeting posted on YouTube. “I do believe the ordinances need more consideration and more work on them than perhaps anticipated.”
The other council members disagreed.
“At its core right now this comes down to a simple question and that question is: what is the role of local government when faced with an unregulated evolving substance with real-life public health concerns,” Flynn said. “After years and years of inaction at the state and federal level, waiting for a comprhensive framework that may never come is not responsible governance.”
Schuster and Sean McAndrew also said their goal is to protect the public.
“I do believe in general this is a proactive measure by council to prevent some of the nightmares we saw with bath salts and the opioid epidemic,” Schuster said. “Many parties have come together and we’re going to come together again to poke holes in this, to take a look at some of the blind spots and try to get this thing right as we move forward.”
Rothchild noted Cognetti’s administration sent a list of several questions to council about the proposed ban, including what legal research had been done and how it would be enforced. Schuster said he was trying to arrange a meeting with the administration to go over those questions, before the two ordinances get votes on adoption, presumably this coming Tuesday.
Flynn also said that if major concerns arise, he would be amenable to a delay to address them.
“If it comes up that there are some real issues with anything in this ordinance and that we need more time to look at it, I am absolutely open to that,” Flynn said.