KANSAS CITY CHANGES COURSE TO FLIP A BAN IN FAVOR OF REGULATIONS

A back-and-forth over kratom in Kansas City, Missouri, led to the city creating a set of regulations that favor natural leaf kratom, but more importantly, show the direction that the ‘kratom question’ is headed as science prevails on the plant. 

Originally, the ordinance was designed as a total ban on kratom products, but a committee substitute was adopted that echoed kratom regulations that have typically passed at the state level. Following a hearing that showed all sides of the kratom debate, the council stuck with the substitute and passed the measure to impose regulations on what type of kratom products can be sold in the city, and who can purchase those products. 

The City Council in Kansas City drafted the ordinance to give city officials a mechanism to license retailers that sell kratom and enforce penalties. At the same time, the ordinance will still set reasonable regulations in the city even if the legislature passes laws restricting kratom in the state. 

After months of back-and-forth over the issue of kratom, the full City Council voted to pass the ordinance 12-1 at its Feb. 12 meeting. 

The Path From Prohibition to Regulation

Mayor Quinton Lucas introduced Ordinance 251068 with a press release on Dec. 3 of last year. As introduced, the ordinance included kratom, certain THC products, nitrous oxide and synthetic cannabinoids that are “sold with little oversight at convenience stores, vape shops, and smoke shops.” The first step was a resolution on Nov. 6, 2025, that directed the City Manager to “evaluate kratom regulations in other Missouri municipalities” and recommend “any necessary code amendments to regulate kratom.”

Initially, the ordinance did not make any differentiation between natural leaf kratom and those with artificially enhanced levels of 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), which the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has labeled as a risk to public health.

“The ordinance represents a science-based, community-informed approach to protecting public health while ensuring our neighborhoods remain safe," Lucas said in his press release.

The City Council assigned the matter to the Finance, Governance, and Public Safety Committee. The matter was scheduled to be discussed at the Dec. 9 meeting, but instead was held for more than two months until it was considered at a Feb. 10 meeting. 

By the time the matter was heard in committee, the city had changed course from the text of the original ordinance and created a bill that focused on kratom products and “dangerous chemical inhalants.” More importantly, the updated text made new distinctions on the difference between natural kratom products and concentrated 7-OH products. 

Considerations by the Committee

Lace Cline, the Director of Public Safety for the city, presented the updated ordinance to the committee and explained the logic behind the switch from a total ban to robust regulations. 

That switch includes a section on kratom that prohibits the sale and distribution of semi-synthetic and synthetic products and puts limits on “the retail sale and display of permissible unadulterated kratom products to those under 21.” Cline clarified that “unadulterated is essentially a natural product from the kratom leaf or kratom leaf extract.”

The refined ordinance banned adulterants and limited the amount of 7-OH to 2% of the total alkaloid composition of any product.  

According to Cline, the changes to the city’s ordinance are in line with a law that has been proposed at the state level, and during her presentation to the council, it was clear that Cline had caught up on the prevailing science and practices surrounding 7-OH products. Cline included separate sections for natural kratom products and the products deemed synthetic or semi-synthetic. 

In the section on artificial products, 7-OH was named as the prime culprit, and Cline included information about the FDA targeting 7-OH products, as well as a distinction about the enhanced risk as compared to natural kratom products. Cline also showed an example of a 7-OH product with a serving size that was one-fourth of a small chewable pill. 

Those same instructions also warned customers not to exceed half of a pill in a 24-hour period, which drew a simple conclusion for Cline. 

“If you go back to looking at how small this tablet is, and the recommendation related to chewing a quarter (of the pill), it’s nearly impossible to comply with that,” Cline said. “How can you have the expectation that consumers are only going to chew a quarter of this?” 

Beyond properly highlighting the difference between natural kratom and 7-OH, Cline made it clear that the FDA has turned its attention from natural kratom to the artificially enhanced products, and that is why she was recommending regulations for those natural products. 

When it was time for public testimony, a group of distinct factions formed, representing opinions from across the spectrum of advocates and opponents. 

Some in the audience supported the original ban on all kratom products and cited the same talking points that opponents of the plant have used for years. Those attempts to paint kratom with a broad brush were refuted by advocates in support of natural leaf kratom products, who presented the science behind products with a naturally occurring chemical profile. 

The change in this debate was the group of lobbyists and advocates for 7-OH products. As more states and municipalities have taken up the FDA’s position that 7-OH presents a threat to public health, the producers behind these enhanced efforts have upped their attempts to push back against any sort of kratom regulations. Using vague generalities and anecdotal evidence, a variety of 7-OH proponents tried to skew the science in a way that contradicts what the FDA has said about synthetic or semi-synthetic kratom alkaloids. 

Mac Haddow from the American Kratom Association was one of the many voices that contradicted the narrative presented by those in favor of artificially enhanced products. 

“This is not an industry war; this is about safety for consumers,” Haddow said. “We started advocating for Kratom Consumer Protection Acts in 2019, four years before 7-OH came on the market, but we warned of the dangers of 7-OH, and we called for no greater than 2% of the alkaloid fraction…there is no safety that has been provided about the safety of 7-OH.” 

Ultimately, the committee decided to advance the ordinance as a committee substitute without creating a carve-out for 7-OH products, which led the full council to pass the measure two days later.