Cities Keep Writing Their Own Kratom Rules While The Federal Order Waits

While federal regulators finish a comment period on a national 7-OH threshold, city councils in Florida and Washington spent July drafting kratom ordinances of their own — and in most cases going considerably further than the federal proposal would.

The pattern is consistent across both states: local officials say they are not willing to wait for a legislature or an agency, and they are using municipal police power to act first.

Ocala Directs Staff To Draft A Ban

At its Tuesday meeting on July 21, the Ocala City Council agreed to move forward with developing an ordinance that would ban the sale of kratom within city limits, WCJB reported. No formal vote was recorded; the council reached a consensus to direct the work forward.

Mayor Ben Marciano framed the decision as a refusal to defer to Tallahassee. "I personally believe in the next year or two the state will have to address it, but why wait," he said, according to WCJB. "We have lives that are being lost."

The station reported that the council heard suspected overdose reports shared by the Ocala Police Department and testimony from residents. The Kratom Council has not independently reviewed those reports, and the department's figures were not published in the coverage.

Washington Cities Move In Sequence

In Washington, the activity has been concentrated in Grant County. On the night of July 2, the Ephrata City Council voted 6-1 to prohibit the sale, distribution, and advertising of kratom and kratom-derived products inside city limits, the Columbia Basin Herald reported. The ordinance takes effect 60 days after passage and treats violations as civil infractions carrying escalating penalties from $248.05 to $1,293.55, with possible revocation of a business license.

Grant County Health Officer Dr. Alexander Brzezny told the council that "the commercial kratom marketplace contains products posing an imminent hazard to public safety."

The lone dissenting vote came from Councilmember Matt Moore, who objected to the mechanism rather than the goal. "I fully support what the health district and everyone is trying to do," Moore said, per the Herald. "My issue from the beginning has been this is not the direction regulation is normally meant to go."

Moses Lake Weighs Two Versions

Twelve days later, on July 14, the Moses Lake City Council took up the question with two competing drafts in front of it, the Columbia Basin Herald reported. One would ban kratom sales, distribution, and advertising outright with civil penalties attached. The other would permit sales but prohibit purchase or receipt by anyone under 21.

City Administrator Rob Karlinsey cautioned that nothing was being decided that night. "It's a first presentation, so the council will provide direction and not formally adopt anything," he said.

The Herald reported the discussion was initiated by the Grant County Health District and the county health officer, the same office that appeared before Ephrata's council two weeks earlier.

Why Cities Are Acting Alone

The legal basis for this wave is straightforward, and a May analysis by the Municipal Research and Services Center laid it out. Writing for MRSC on May 11, Linda Gallagher noted that Washington cities are relying on Article XI, Section 11 of the state constitution, which authorizes a local government to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws."

That authority becomes decisive because there is nothing at the state level to conflict with. Gallagher noted that the Washington State Legislature did not pass kratom-related bills in 2026, leaving no state statute prohibiting or regulating the botanical — and therefore no state framework preempting a municipal one.

MRSC catalogued the ordinances already on the books before this month's activity: Spokane (Ordinance C36820, effective April 8, 2026), Spokane Valley (Ordinance 26-003, effective March 16, 2026), Othello (Ordinance 1647, effective May 1, 2026), and Cle Elum (Ordinance No. 1719, a permanent ban following a temporary moratorium). The stated purpose of the Spokane ordinance, per MRSC, is "to protect the public health and safety of Spokane residents by prohibiting the sale and distribution of kratom" and similar products.

The Retail Objection

Retailers subject to these ordinances have raised process and economic concerns. Henry Abdel, owner of Empire Smoke Shop in Ephrata, told the Columbia Basin Herald that the city did not communicate the ban to affected businesses before passing it, and described the expected commercial effect: "It's going to affect my sales. If sales go down, then that means I can't pay my landlord, and I would have to shut down my business."

The Ephrata ordinance was approved on an expedited schedule, compressing the window in which businesses could respond before the vote.

Wider Than The Federal Proposal

The scope gap between these local rules and the pending federal action is significant. The DEA's July 6 notice of intent would temporarily schedule 7-hydroxymitragynine only above a specified concentration threshold — more than 0.050 percent on a dry weight basis for botanical material — leaving material below that line outside its reach.

Most of the municipal ordinances passed this year draw no such distinction. Ephrata's covers kratom and kratom-derived products generally. Ocala's council directed staff toward a ban on kratom sales, not on concentrated derivatives specifically. Only the alternative Moses Lake draft, which would restrict purchase by anyone under 21 while leaving adult sales intact, resembles the regulate-rather-than-prohibit model that state Kratom Consumer Protection Acts have followed.

Whatever the federal agencies decide after the comment period closes on July 31, it will not disturb these ordinances. A concentration threshold set in Washington, D.C. does not preempt a city's authority to prohibit a product outright within its own limits.