Senate committee advances kratom regulation bill to appropriations after amendments

The Senate Finance Committee voted unanimously to send Senate Bill 72 to the Committee on Appropriations after sponsors accepted two technical amendments intended to limit duplicate product registrations and preserve local authority.

The bill, sponsored by Sen. Janet Mullica and co‑prime Sen. Byron Pelton, would create a state registration system for kratom products sold in Colorado, require third‑party testing and standardized labeling, cap certain intoxicating alkaloids and bar products marketed to minors. Mullica said the proposal targets “chemically altered kratom commonly involved in tragedies” and aims to “make the marketplace safer and more transparent.”

Supporters included public‑health and consumer‑safety groups and family members who said unregulated, concentrated extracts had led to deaths. David Bridal (testified as a surviving family member) described losing his son to a combination of a concentrated kratom extract and an over‑the‑counter sleep aid and called SB 72 a “first step” that would have prevented that product from being available.

Opponents — including retailers, small manufacturers and kratom consumers — praised parts of the bill, such as a ban on synthetic 7‑hydroxy mitragynine extracts, but warned that the bill, as drafted, would impose heavy compliance costs and a large state administrative program that could push small sellers from the regulated market. Retail witnesses said many Colorado shops already use third‑party testing and Good Manufacturing Practice standards and asked the committee to shift costs to manufacturers or to accept industry auditing alternatives.

The committee adopted two sponsor amendments before the final vote. L001 reduces redundant registrations for multiple package SKUs and clarifies that local governments may adopt regulations that are at least as protective as state law. L002 adds requested labeling language from consumer groups. After those changes the committee voted unanimously to move the bill forward.

Sen. Mullica said she will continue discussions with stakeholders to refine implementation details, including fees and timelines, and with the state Department of Revenue on administrative needs. Jimmy Reed, the department’s legislative affairs director, said the department supports the bill’s goals but asked for additional time to work out implementation, rulemaking and enforcement details.

The vote on the motion to send SB 72 to Appropriations was recorded as unanimous in committee. The bill now goes to the Appropriations Committee for further review and potential funding for implementation.