Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Scranton council introduces ordinance to curb kratom sales and synthetics after extended public comment
Loading...
Summary
After hours of public testimony from users and opponents, the Scranton City Council introduced two ordinances restricting commercial kratom products and synthetics; proponents urged preserving natural leaf use while some council members demanded clearer enforcement and testing plans before further action.
Councilman Flynn introduced two related ordinances on April 1 that would regulate the sale and distribution of kratom and its active alkaloids, including mitragynine and 7‑hydroxymitragynine (7‑OH), and would prohibit sales to minors and certain concentrated or chemically altered derivatives.
The introduction followed more than an hour of public comment during which users described kratom leaf as an essential tool for managing chronic pain and recovery. "It actually saved my life," Stan Dombrowski told the council, saying he used natural leaf kratom to wean off prescription opioids. Jean Kucharski, a recent Scranton homebuyer, said she would be forced to consider leaving the city if access to leaf kratom were removed.
Flynn said the ordinance responds to a market that currently lacks consistent manufacturing standards, testing, labeling or dosing guidance. "This ordinance is not about criminalizing individuals," Flynn said, describing the measure as civil in nature and focused on regulating commercial sales rather than prosecuting individuals. He argued municipal tools are limited and that state or federal standards would be preferable, but said waiting for higher-level action would leave the city unable to address immediately available, increasingly potent products.
Councilwoman Doctor Rothschild said she had received short notice and had substantive unanswered questions about enforcement logistics, laboratory testing, whether the Scranton Police Department had been consulted and how penalties would be imposed. Rothschild said she supports targeted actions on synthetic derivatives but asked for more time to vet the draft and said she would move to table the item for further discussion once it was formally introduced. She raised a specific drafting question after reading the text: it appears to allow fines of $300 and up to 90 days' incarceration; Rothschild asked whether jail time would follow only repeated violations, or could apply immediately under the current draft.
That motion to table was made publicly but, when formally offered, received no second and therefore did not proceed. After further remarks by council members about due process and the role of the district attorney in reviewing enforcement, the council approved introduction into committee by voice vote ("the ayes have it"). Flynn and others said the ordinance will return for further readings and amendments where unanswered questions — including specific enforcement mechanics, testing protocols, and whether plain leaf would remain available — can be addressed.
Several public commenters asked the council to coordinate with state legislators because patchwork local bans could push sales to neighboring municipalities. Multiple people referenced active Pennsylvania bills (SB 233, HB 2058 and SB 899) that target synthetics and propose age restrictions; several commenters urged the city to mirror the language of state proposals rather than enact a sweeping citywide ban that could restrict natural leaf products used by some residents.
Council members also noted the involvement of the county district attorney's office in drafting and advising on the proposed ordinance, and the chair said the council would pursue follow-up briefings so that enforcement practices and the city's practical authority are clarified before any final vote.
The ordinance has been introduced into committee; the council did not vote on final passage. Further readings and amendments are expected before any final vote.
