Denham Springs council tables proposed ban on sale of kratom after extended discussion

Denham Springs City Council members introduced an ordinance to ban the retail sale of kratom but voted to table further consideration for one month to collect more information from state legislators and public-health authorities.

The Police Chief, describing kratom as “one of the latest crazes” sold at convenience stores, told the council other nearby municipalities have adopted local bans and that some state bills are under consideration. “The Mayo Clinic has deemed them unsafe and ineffective,” the Police Chief said, arguing the city should consider restricting sales to keep potentially harmful, unregulated products away from minors.

Councilman Lamb Williams said he wanted more time to review state action and research. “Iwould like to amend the agenda item to have the hearing on July 28,” Lamb Williams said, and later moved to table the introduction for one month so councilmembers could receive additional information from Representative Chad Boyer and other sources. The motion to table passed unanimously.

Why it matters: council discussion centered on whether a local ban would duplicate or conflict with pending state legislation (including House Bill 253, referenced during debate) and whether a local prohibition would merely shift sales outside city limits. Several councilmembers and staff raised concerns about synthetic products sold under the kratom name and the absence of local testing capability.

Discussion details: the Police Chief explained that kratom products range from unprocessed plant material to synthetic mixtures and that some municipalities (the chief cited Walker, Zachary and Gonzales) have already restricted sales. Councilmembers asked whether harms were observed when kratom was used alone or in combination with alcohol and other drugs; the chief said some local incidents involved multiple substances. Councilmembers also discussed the limits of city authority if only sales — not possession — were prohibited, and whether mail-order or online sales could undermine a local ban.

Outcome and next steps: Councilman Lamb Williams moved to table the ordinance’s introduction for one month; the motion passed with all members voting yes. Staff will gather additional documentation from the state representatives and public-health sources, and the item was tabled until the councilmeeting one month later (the council discussed a May 13 date as the one-month target). The council also discussed the possibility of reintroducing a revised ordinance or scheduling a public hearing once more information is available.

No formal ordinance language was adopted at the meeting; the councilaction was procedural (tabling to permit further review).