Hello. My name is Colin Zurich, members of the Council. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. As I said, my name is Colin. I'm a Public Policy Advisor for the American Kratom Association, a consumer protection advocacy organization. I want to begin by discussing some positive language that I've seen of this bill, primarily the language revolving around 7-OH and synthetic products as well. These products, which contain synthetic 7-OH, mislead consumers into taking products that is not safe, natural nor kratom at that point. The 2% threshold for 7-OH is a regulation that many localities and states, including some such as Rhode Island, which banned kratom and then reassessed and passed the Kratom Consumer Protection Act to implement these changes and keep consumers safe and keep these harmful products off the store shelves while protecting natural kratom products. As you've heard from others today, the language is concerning in some parts of this bill. The labeling of kratom as an intoxicating substance being one kratom in its natural form does not produce any euphoric senses. It does not produce a euphoric high. Kratom, in its natural form, is not a drug. It has a similar effect to caffeine, which you have also heard earlier today as well. Assigning kratom the title of an intoxicating substance does not fit the science beyond the dietary supplement. Additionally, the FDA commissioned a single ascending dose study in February of 2024, which found that kratom, a natural kratom, appears to be well tolerated in humans at all dose levels. Out of 40 people in the study, 2 showed signs of nausea, and this was after consuming over 12g of a single substance within a five-minute period. Of course, you're going to get nauseous. Kratom is a very bitter substance, 2 out of 40. This was an FDA paid for study that showed that it was safe at all levels. This bill shows the Council's intent to regulate, not prohibit. I urge the Council to reassess some of the language involved in this bill, to allow this legislation to truly protect the people of Philadelphia and also to protect kratom consumers who use it to better their lives every single day. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you for your testimony, sir. If you want to state your name for the record and then proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, members of the Philadelphia City Council. My name is Christopher Dini. I am here to speak about Bill No. 260163. I support responsible regulation. I support age restrictions, third- party lab testing, clear labeling, consumer safety standards and enforcement against adulterated, synthetic and deceptively marketed products. But I'm asking Council not to turn regulation into prohibition. I was hit by a car when I was 8 years old, and I've lived with long-term pain, chronic discomfort and challenges that come along with trying to stay functional and productive and present for my family. About 2015, I started drinking natural kratom tea. I drank about 5 grams or one tablespoon. For me, natural kratom gave me a better quality of life. It has been about structure, balance and being able to keep moving forward responsibly. That real concern, the real concern should be synthetic kratom products, adulterated products, and chemically modified compounds being marketed as if they are the same as natural kratom. They are not the same. Natural kratom leaves, the traditional botanical product that has been used for hundreds of years, it comes from the Mitragyna speciosa tree or plant, which is related to coffee. It is used by adults in tea, leaf powder, tincture and capsule form. Synthetic kratom products are different. These can involve isolated alkaloids, altered compounds, manufactured ingredients or enhanced products do not reflect the natural leaf. The bill already recognizes this problem. It prohibits kratom products that contain synthetic mitragynine, synthetic 7-hydroxymitragynine or any other synthetically derived compounds of the kratom plant that is the right direction. The problem is the language requiring FDA approval under Section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Natural kratom leaf is not a pharmaceutical drug. It does not belong in the same approval pathway as a prescription medication. If that language remains, the bill could effectively ban natural kratom leaf in the City of Philadelphia even when the product is tested, labeled age-restricted and free from synthetic compounds. Please amend the bill to separate natural kratom leaf from synthetic, adulterated, chemically modified or deceptively marketed kratom products. Kratom is already regulated by CFR Part 111, which is the FDA's rule for good manufacturing practices for dietary supplements. The FDA did conduct a dose-finding study in 2024, which shows that natural kratom is well- tolerated. Regulate the bad actors, set clear safety standards, require testing and accurate labeling. Keep synthetic kratom products out of the marketplace, but do not take responsible adults backward by banning access to natural kratom leaf. Regulate the marketplace, protect consumers, preserve access to natural pain relief. And I appreciate your time. Thank you.
20 Thank you. Thank you so much for 21 your testimony. And we do hear and we'll consider all those things brought up at today's hearing. Are there any questions from the committee? (No response.)
Seeing none, thank you so much. Mr. McMonagle, can you please read the next list of commenters.
Can we please have Sean Zamorano, Adam Suib and J.D. McCormick. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Thank you. State your name for the record and then proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon, Councilmembers. My name is Sean Zamorano. I am a United States Navy veteran and a kratom consumer. Over the past years, I have watched this industry change from one that was focused on natural kratom into a marketplace flooded with synthetic and semi- synthetic products like 7-OH. These compounds interact with the opioid receptors in a much more aggressive way than natural kratom. These products can produce intense euphoria, and they leave the body quickly. This is what encourages compulsion and addiction. Natural kratom does not do this. This is why consumers have been able to use it responsibly for things like discomfort, quality of life, and staying away from more dangerous substances. One question lawmakers often ask is why hasn't kratom or why hasn't the federal government acted on kratom. The FDA completed an eight-factor analysis under the standards of the Controlled Substances Act and did not have cause to schedule natural kratom. The World Health Organization also conducted a scientific review and would not recommend an international ban. The DEA has not scheduled natural kratom, but a ban on synthetics is imminent. Natural plain leaf should not be treated the same as synthetics. I am asking City Council to strike this action in this ordinance that kratom must be approved by Section 505 of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. This act is for pharmaceutical drugs. Applying it to a botanical supplement creates a standard that natural plant products cannot meet. And I do understand that you did make a small amendment. I know that you guys have probably received hundreds, if not thousands of emails from kratom consumers just like me. I encourage you to please take them into consideration when making your choice on natural kratom, because it has helped so many people and it saved my life. And in closing, I just want to say that I think me, you, and one other were the only kratom consumers here. And I know there's a lot more in Philadelphia that couldn't show up. But I hope that you guys, I encourage you to ask us some questions. As people who have been consuming natural kratom, it's been 11 years now. I've been consuming kratom and I've been fighting for kratom for almost that long. So thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. And I want to thank you for coming in and for your testimony and for being here for the duration of this proceeding. And you should be aware that we sent out a massive email. We did speak with a number of the kratom associations as well and I think they're here represented, American Healthy Alternatives Association, their Vice-Chairman and we reached out to as many folks as we could find and placed the information on social media as well and asked folks to share. We did receive outreach via email from a number of kratom consumers. And they did not indicate that they would come to the hearing today to provide public testimony and/or written testimony for this proceeding. Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Please state your name for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good afternoon. My name is Adam. I am a father, a business owner, and I am a former heroin addict. Fortunately, I have ten years clean. I was able to change my life. I'm one of the lucky ones. Years ago I overdosed and I had to be revived with Narcan. I tried over and over and over to get clean, rehab meetings, 12-step programs, sponsorship, cold turkey. You name it, I tried it. Sometimes I did put, you know, some decent clean time together, but it just didn't really stick for me. Then somebody introduced me to plain leaf kratom, and that is what changed my life. Since that day, I haven't had a single drink or drug since. I'm a business owner. I have three kids at home that I raise. Kratom helped me become a present father, run my business, live a stable life. What frustrates me is that traditional kratom is now being grouped together with dangerous, highly-concentrated products that have started appearing in the market. 7-OH is one of the big ones. There's a couple different offshoots from that. These are not kratom products. These are totally different things. 7-hydroxymitragynine doesn't occur naturally in kratom. There's this misconception that when the leaves come off the tree, 7-OH is kratom. It's not. It's a metabolite. Those products are not what many long-term kratom consumers have been using responsibly for years. Kratom is also not intoxicating in the slightest. It is not legal for sale under a loophole. It's legal for sale under the same conditions as turmeric, fish oil, St. John's- wort, melatonin. These are just things I could think of off the top of my head. I would encourage looking at the Act of 1994. The FDA does not approve creative products like kratom. They remove dangerous products, post-market entry if they are proven to be dangerous, which they have not. Synthetics are dangerous and that is why they are being actively removed and pure leaf is not. If there are concerns about purely kratom products, then I would suggest regulating those products directly, age-gating, lab testing, things like that, manufacturing standards. This ordinance would effectively ban all pure leaf kratom unless it receives FDA approval. And that just fundamentally misunderstands how these products are treated under the law. They don't approve botanical supplements the same way they approve prescription drugs. Their role is to remove the dangerous products. Despite years of scrutiny, kratom in itself has not been federally banned, and the broader scientific and public health landscape does not support this kind of prohibition. HHS did not support federal scheduling. The World Health Organization reviewed kratom and declined to recommend an international ban. Data and research from the CDC, Johns Hopkins, University of Florida and many others do not support this type of action. The data from the CDC alone says, what is it, a little over 90% of the kratom-involved deaths were all polysubstance. So that means if I use fentanyl and I die or if I get in a car accident and I die and my toxicology has kratom, that's now a kratom-involved death. Even though it didn't kill me, it's in my toxicology. So now, it's kratom- involved. And 90% of those were mostly fentanyl. And so, there's a lot of confusion with that. I understand wanting to protect public health. I do too, but creating an ordinance 2 that effectively bans plain leaf kratom because of concerns around concentrated synthetic-style products will hurt people like me and thousands of others in PA. I will admit I'm a little disappointed that there's only three of us here when I know there are thousands of people in Philadelphia that use pure leaf kratom. I personally get emails from people almost every day, how can I get off 7-OH. What is it, the MGM, I hear from these people and they were tricked by these bad actors. They put these drugs in the marketplace and say this is a kratom product. And so, people think they're using just a better way to use these products.
But really, it's something totally different. And I talk to these people every day. So I'm not big when it comes to legal jargon. I don't know what the amendments were that were made, but I'm just hoping that you take this into consideration. Pure leaf kratom is not the same thing as these synthetics. We want these synthetics gone just as much as everybody else. Thank you.
Well, thank you so much for your testimony. And it means a lot to hear all sides of these conversations. And hopefully, we'll get to a point that manages both the usable form of kratom and the synthetic and the other forms that are preying on people really in the guise of helping them, making them put them in the worst position. So thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee? The Chair recognizes Council Majority Leader Gilmore Richardson.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I wanted to thank you also for sharing your perspective and also your story and congratulate you on ten years of sobriety and for starting your business and being able to be there for your family. That's the most important thing in life is our family. So thank you very much for sharing that information. And I wanted to ask you a quick question. Relative to the testing in your business, are you able to test the products? We talked about this earlier. How do you test the products?
Yeah, we send them to a third -- so what we do is we send a sample directly to a third-party lab. And then we keep it, retain the sample. So we send one to the lab and then we keep one. So the lab test does all the testing, and then say a customer reaches out and says, oh, I'm having issues with this product and we get a couple. Then we have that retained sample that we can send back to another lab. So those are just two steps right there that provide protection. And a lot of people think that there's no way to tell the difference between pure leaf kratom and the synthetics. And that's just not true whatsoever.
And I will say in compiling the amendments that we have offered for consideration to the committee from a regulation and enforcement perspective, it would be nearly impossible for the City of Philadelphia to test every single product that is offered in a number of not only convenience stores, shops, stands. It would be nearly impossible for us to test every single product that is being offered. And that's the challenge that we find ourselves in while we are seeking to create a process that will be helpful to what we have been hearing from our community. So I just wanted to ask, and we talked about the testing earlier and notate that for the record. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you again for your testimony. Thank you. Mr. McMonagle, can you read the next set of people to testify for public comment.
Can we please have Brandon Thompson and David Keller. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Thank you all for your patience during this hearing. State your name for the record and you can proceed with your testimony.
My name is David Keller. I would like to thank you for your patience. It's been a long day. So I had something I prepared, but I'd like to kind of go a little off book here. My name is Dave Keller. I own a series of stores called Paper and Leaf. I'm a cannabis specific company, specifically hemp-derived cannabinoids. My history and pedigree is actually having worked years 4 in the pharmaceutical industry, 5 develop and operationalizing 6 clinical trials for pharmaceutical 7 compounds before I took the leap 8 over to this. I'd like to kind of 9 introduce a little bit of a 10 personal story. I've heard a lot 11 of things, rhetoric regarding the 12 specific products and whatnot, but 13 really outside of a couple of 14 people talking about kratom, 15 haven't been a lot of kind of advocacy stories. I grew up as Scruff McGruff's right-hand man, like the war on drugs, like eggs in a frying pan, all of it bought in hook, line and sinker. My younger brother had very, very severe emotional issues growing up. He couldn't self- regulate. He was effectively kind of totally cast out in terms of social circles because of mental disorders that he couldn't find relief for in the pharmaceutical industry. He used marijuana in order to be able to rectify that. From his use there, he was able to move into a comfortable spot. He found friends, found his niche and very unfortunately, due to a tragic accident he passed away about years ago. I was 13 severely judgmental towards him 14 growing up for his marijuana use. 15 It's one of my biggest regrets in 16 life. And one of the reasons for 17 that is because of the stigma that 18 regulations, such as what is being 19 proposed, placed on it, that 20 cannabis is evil. Utilization of 21 cannabis is evil. There's no real therapeutic use. It's recreational, and only that in a total sense. My business was started to responsibly sell these products to individuals for effectively therapeutic use. Now, you can make the argument that, well, Pennsylvania has a medicinal marijuana industry for that. True; however, there are a great number of product segments that the medicinal marijuana industry in Pennsylvania doesn't service that the hemp industry does, such as beverages and gummies and things of that nature. There's difficulties in terms of getting medical cards, and that is where companies like mine with similar floor plans of what Craig had defined, which is the anti-smoke shop. So I'm going to be brief here because honestly, I need to get home for my kids. It sounds like the issue here is not so much the availability of the products. I've heard a lot of supporters for this bill and a lot of opponents, and I think a lot of people, including us, this bill, which is very, very well-intentioned and I support it, these smoke shops, trust me, I dislike them probably even more so than you or a lot of people that spoke in support of this bill. However. The issue that we have here is a retailer issue, not so much a product issue. This bill eliminates the product piece, but the retailer piece is going to remain. So let's say we remove 7-OH. Let's say we remove THC products from these retailers. They're going to move on to something else. They're going to move on to a new designer drug that's even less regulated than what's already on the marketplace. A reputable hemp dispensary, if you will, for the most part self-regulates. Every single product that I have is tested in an ISO-certified lab. Every single product I have does have a QR code on it. Every single product that I carry is not in such an excessive dose that it can cause harm to the people that purchase it. And there are many, many operators like myself out there that are not these stores. These stores are the problem, not the product itself. So I think we need to come up with a legislative solution that actually limits the exposure of these stores to the people, rather than the product category itself.
And I'll give you an example of why I'm not just speculating on this. Ohio very recently passed a hemp ban, and I'm involved in several different Ohio groups that involve hundreds of different retailers. And that ban, I can say a lot of these retailers that did operate these types of stores simply looked for the next thing that they can push onto their customers legally. I don't want that for Philadelphia. I've lived in Philadelphia and that is where this is going to head. If this passes, as it stands, it's a game of Whack-a-Mole. And in order to be able to come out on top, we need to deal with putting guardrails on the retail establishments rather than the product categories themselves. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name for the record and proceed.
Jackson Essex. I'd like to start off with a little bit of history about myself. I've been a harm reduction advocate for most of my life. When I was at Ithaca College, I 6 helped to draft a medical amnesty 7 policy, which was later adopted by 8 the state of New York and has 9 saved, in my opinion, many people's 10 lives. It's something that's 11 important to me on a personal 12 level. 13 Beyond that, I've been 14 in the retail sphere for 18 years 15 now. I don't just work at this job 16 because it's a paycheck. I work 17 here because I believe in the 18 products we sell. I truly do believe they help people. Much as we were talking about, I am from the company Craig was advocating for earlier. Anti-smoke shop is a good way to put it. We are not here to push these things as intoxicating substances. We are not here to sell these things to children. They do not have bright, colorful packaging. We are here mainly for people like the two gentlemen who spoke earlier who have had substance abuse issues in the past, or even for people who haven't, who need something to help them get through the day and haven't found something from the pharmaceutical industry that can do that. I have agreed with a lot of the things I've heard here today even from people who are very much in favor of the bill, especially around regulation. One thing that I kept noticing was people saying for the last couple of years, for the last few years, kratom has been well-known in the harm reduction community for the last 30 years. It's not a new thing to us. 7-OH has been horrible for the harm reduction community. It has led to kratom bans in many states, in townships, counties. We're not fans. I would like nothing more than to see it taken off the shelves. And I would also like to see more regulation around what retailers could sell it. I do also agree with some of the legislation around where these stores could be. I think that that's apt and appropriate. At the same time we've had some talk about what would that look like, how would testing be accomplished. I see no reason not to put the onus on the companies who want to sell these products. Have a licensing program where you need to have third party testing that's sent into the city before you can get your license. Rather than kind of letting things pop up and play Whack-a-Mole. I'm also a man about town in Philadelphia. I check in with a lot of the local smoke shops. I know a lot of those business owners, speak to them on a weekly basis. I know people who also believe in what they do and do things above board. I also know people who are selling things under the counter. They are not going to stop because of a bill like this, not with the enforcement that Philadelphia can afford to put out, making it so that there are trusted stores where people know what they're getting, know what's tested, makes those stores less appealing. So, yeah, in short I don't think I worry that this would be tantamount to a total ban, that that would lead to people who are using it for harm reduction, no 1 longer being able to access these products. And I'd urge the Council to take a moment, reassess. And if you'd like, come on down to our store. I'd be happy to email anybody our schedule. And I would love to talk to you a bit more.
9 Thank you. Thank you so much for 10 your testimony. 11 Are there any questions 12 from the committee? 13 The Chair recognizes 14 Council Leader Gilmore Richardson. 15
Thank you. Thank you 17 very much, Mr. Chair. 18 Thank you both for your 19 testimony. I had a very quick 20 question because I could not hear 21 what you were saying at the end 22 very well. You said something 23 about your store. Did you say a 24 store? I didn't hear --
Yes, I manage two stores. One in Wynnefield Heights here in Philadelphia and one over in Media.
Okay. All right. Thank you. I didn't hear what you said. Thank you very much.
Seeing none, is there anyone else to testify on this bill, on the list? If not, if you do want to testify and you haven't had time, please make your way up to the table. (Witnesses approached witness table.)
Thank you. Just state your name for the record and then you can proceed with your testimony.
Thank you. My name is Bonnie Halda. Good afternoon and thank you for giving me an opportunity to testify. I'm testifying as part of public comment and as a resident of Philadelphia. I'm not representing any organization or any other type of agency. Again, my name is Bonnie Halda. I live in Society Hill. I've lived in Philadelphia for a little over 35 years. When I first moved here in the 1990s, it was a different city. And as I lived here, worked here, and really made a commitment to being a true Philadelphian, I saw Philadelphia change. I saw it improve. I saw businesses come in that interested me. I saw more residents come in. I saw vibrancy, festivals, amenities and it really became a special place to me to live and work. However, recently what I've really seen is a proliferation of the smoke shops, the illegal nuisance businesses. So my comments today are about the bill 14 that is the illegal smoke shop accountability bill. I'm not really commenting on the intoxicating substances, but I do realize they are linked. I am very concerned about the proliferation of these illegal nuisance businesses, primarily on South Street and Old City. I live right in between those two neighborhoods and I think that these businesses have really been a detriment to everything that the progressive city is trying to be. I think that they have made some of the areas less desirable, less welcoming and have really had an impact on the quality of life, and that's for residents such as myself, but also visitors, especially this year with the 250th. With Philadelphia welcoming people from all over worldwide, we need to have welcoming neighborhoods. We need to emphasize the quality of life for businesses, for residents and for visitors. Lastly, I have been very involved in my community. I've been volunteering for a lot of things that involve the quality of life. One of my most recent volunteer initiatives has been with the Head House Square, and thanks to the generous funding that we've received from the city. I watch now as Head House is starting to be renovated, starting to be improved and I think that this area Head House Square can really serve to be a real center for revitalizing a part of our city that really needs it. And I think that the smoke shops could be very much a detriment to that forward progress that we're trying to make. So thank you for your time.
Thank you so much for your testimony. Any questions from the committee? (No response.)
Is there anyone else here who did not get a chance to testify and wants to testify on Bill Nos. 260162 or 260163? (No response.)
Seeing none, there being no further questions from the members of the committee and no other witnesses to testify, I'll ask that there's anyone present to hearing whose name we have failed to call, that wishes to offer testimony on these bills and resolutions we consider today? (No response.)
Hearing none, I want to thank all the panels of witnesses for their participation. We will now go into a public meeting on Bill No. 19 260167 -- oh, I'm sorry. As for the record, we are holding Bill No. 260167 at the call of the Chair. As we're in our public meeting, the Chair will now recognize Councilmember Gilmore Richardson for a motion to the amendment to Bill No. 260465.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 260465. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 11 260465 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
Thank you. The Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Jones seconds. The motion has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill No. 260465 be approved. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it. And the motion carries. An amendment to Bill No. 5 260465 has been approved. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Gilmore Richardson for a motion on Bill No. 260465 as amended.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 14 260465 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Jones seconds. The motion has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 260465 as amended be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Gilmore for a motion to the amendment to Bill No. 22 260163.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I offer an amendment to Bill No. 260163. A copy of the amendment has been circulated to all members of the committee. I move that the amendment to Bill No. 7 260163 be approved. (Duly seconded.)
Chair notes for the record that Councilmember Jones seconds. The motion has been moved and properly seconded that the amendment to Bill 14 No. 260163 be approved. All those in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. An amendment to Bill No. 1 260163 has been approved. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Gilmore Richardson for a motion to Bill No. 260163 as amended.
Thank you, 8 Mr. Chairman. 9 I move that Bill No. 10 260163 as amended be reported from 11 this committee with a favorable 12 recommendation and further move 13 that the rules of Council be 14 suspended as to permit first 15 reading of this bill at the next 16 session of Council. 17 (Duly seconded.) 18
19 Chair notes for the record that 20 Councilmember Jones seconded. The 21 motion has been moved and properly 22 seconded that Bill No. 260163 as 23 amended be reported from this 24 committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Chair recognizes Councilmember Gilmore Richardson for a motion on Bill No. 260162.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that Bill No. 22 260162 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules of Council be suspended as to permit first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. (Duly seconded.)
For the record, Councilmember Jones seconds the motion. It has been moved and properly seconded that Bill No. 2600162 be reported from this committee with a favorable recommendation and further move that the rules be suspended as to permit the first reading of this bill at the next session of Council. All those in favor signify by saying aye. (Aye.)
Ayes have it and the motion carries. That will conclude our business before the Committee on Commerce and Economic Development today. Thank you all very much for your attendance and participation.
Good job, Chairman. Thank you. - - - (Committee on Commerce and Economic Development concluded at 3:35 p.m.) - - - C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence noted are contained fully and accurately in the stenographic notes taken by me in the foregoing matter, and that this is a correct transcript of the same. _______________________________ TANEHA CARROLL