Spokane Valley council forwards kratom sales ordinance to a second reading after lengthy public debate

The Spokane Valley City Council on Feb. 10 voted to forward ordinance 26-003, a draft proposal that would prohibit the sale and distribution of kratom within city limits, to a second reading after an extended presentation from police and city attorney staff and extensive public testimony.

City Police Chief Dave Ellis and city attorney staff summarized staff findings, saying kratom is unregulated and that some market products contain concentrated synthetic alkaloids and contaminants. "It is currently not regulated, meaning that there's no mandatory labeling, there is no quality assurance, and no recommended doses," Ellis told the council during the staff presentation. Staff noted the draft treats a first violation as a class 1 civil infraction with a $250 fine and a $1,000 fine for each subsequent violation; the draft also includes discretionary language allowing business‑license revocation for repeat offenses.

The presentation identified enforcement challenges if the council were to pursue narrower restrictions instead of a full ban. Staff said lab testing would often be required to confirm product concentration or form and that Spokane County and the state crime lab have substantial backlogs. "Any substance is gonna have to be sent off to the crime lab, to be tested," Ellis said, warning that turnaround delays could impede field enforcement.

Public testimony split sharply. Several speakers described personal or family experiences they said made kratom essential. Jennifer Gilles, who said she has chronic pain, told the council, "Whole leaf Kratom Powder...gave me my life back," and urged regulations that preserve access for people who rely on natural products. Misty Brown and other commenters said synthetic concentrates are the primary problem and urged the council to distinguish natural kratom from synthetic products.

Other commenters and staff urged caution. Public safety concerns, enforcement capacity, and the potential for a patchwork of municipal rules were recurring themes. Spencer Coffin, speaking as a public‑health advocate, recommended a regulatory approach that requires labeling, age limits and third‑party testing rather than a total ban: "The solution to a no‑standards problem is standard," he said.

Council members debated enforceability and local capacity. Council Member Haley questioned whether a city of Spokane Valley’s size could require and verify testing and labeling from all suppliers; Deputy Mayor Hatenberg and others said the city's staffing and enforcement systems are not structured to administer a partial regulatory regime. "We are not structured or have sufficient personnel to handle any type of partial ban," City Manager John Holman told the council when asked about implementation.

Council Member Yeager moved to table the matter for three months to allow on‑site review and additional research; that motion failed on a voice vote. The council then voted to move the ordinance forward to a second reading (the motion to forward was moved from the dais and passed by voice vote). The council did not adopt the ordinance at the Feb. 10 meeting; the second reading will return the item to the council agenda for further action.

What happens next: ordinance 26-003 will appear for a second reading where the council can amend, adopt or take further action. Staff said they would continue to refine language, including possible civil‑infraction penalties, business‑license revocation thresholds and options for narrower consumer‑protection approaches if the council requests them.

Vote and process notes: The council recorded a voice vote to forward the measure to a second reading after public testimony and extended exchange between staff and council. A separate motion to table for three months was offered and defeated. The ordinance remains under council consideration.