Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Policy Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garden Grove council tables ordinance to ban kratom, agrees to split nitrous‑oxide rules
Summary
After heated public comment and council debate about youth risk, small‑business impacts and enforceability, the Garden Grove City Council voted 7–0 to table a proposed ordinance banning sales of kratom and restricting recreational nitrous oxide, directing staff to return in two weeks with separated ordinances and more data.
Garden Grove, Calif. — The Garden Grove City Council on Feb. 10 voted to table for two weeks a proposed ordinance that would add chapters 6.48 and 6.50 to the municipal code to prohibit sales of kratom products and restrict recreational use and retail sale of nitrous oxide.
The substitute motion to postpone — adopted in a 7–0 roll‑call vote — instructed staff to separate the kratom and nitrous‑oxide provisions into two ordinances and to return with additional data about enforcement, lab testing and comparative local measures. The council cited concerns about enforcement practicality, potential consequences for small retailers, and the need for clearer local or state standards.
City Attorney Omar Sandoval told the council the draft ordinance would “have a full prohibition against the sale of kratom products” while offering a narrower approach for nitrous oxide because state law already allows certain industrial and food‑service exceptions. Sandoval cautioned that enforcing a partial restriction on kratom (for example a 21+ rule tied to alkaloid content) would be difficult without laboratory testing to verify alkaloid concentrations in products sold locally.
Public commenters gave sharply divergent views. Steven Mintosh, a resident who said he is a chronic pain patient, asked the council to avoid an outright ban and consider an AB 1088‑style approach: “I... express my opposition to prohibiting the sale of kratom in the city,” he said, urging age limits and restrictions on synthetic concentrates. By contrast, other speakers and some council members raised public‑health concerns and argued for stronger local action to prevent youth access.
Opponents on the council warned that a ban could impose disproportionate costs on small businesses and lead to uneven enforcement. “I would not vote this ordinance up,” one council member said during debate, saying the city lacked the infrastructure to test and police product concentrations and was risking unintended consequences.
Several council members said they were comfortable moving forward with a standalone ban on recreational nitrous oxide distribution but wanted more information before deciding the fate of kratom regulations. The substitute motion — which passed unanimously — sets a two‑week return date and directs staff to present separate ordinance drafts and supporting data.
Next steps: staff will compile enforcement cost estimates, any available hospital or public‑health data cited by county or state agencies, examples of nearby city ordinances, and recommended language for separate measures. The item is scheduled to return to the council in two weeks.
