HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-11-04 OrdinanceItem Number: 9.a.
a
CITY OF IOWA CITY
"QR T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November 4, 2024
Ordinance amending Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", to address tobacco sales oriented retail
uses. (REZ24-0006) (First Consideration)
Attachments: Memo from City Attorney Goers
PZ Memo - 09.04.2024
PZ 9.4.24 Final Minutes
Ordinance
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 10, 2024
To: City Council
From: Eric R. Goers, City Attorney
Re: Tobacco permit ordinance grandfather rights
You may recall that at your October 1 st formal meeting Council inquired whether an amendment
changing the grandfather rights expiration time from 90 days to one year for cessation of tobacco sales
would constitute a substantive change. After expressing some hesitation, I opined that it was not. I
have been reconsidering that opinion ever since and have now come to the opinion that it is in fact a
substantive change.
The vote to approve the amendment was 3-2, giving indication that the matter was of enough
substance that it garnered vocal opposition and votes in the negative. Since that time, it has been
reported to me that some members of the public in affected areas consider it important enough to
articulate their opposition to the change. Finally, because this may be the subject of future litigation,
out of an abundance of caution, I think it would be the best course to take the conservative approach
and treat the October 15th meeting as the first reading. Absent future changes, I do not see reason to
send the ordinance back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for additional consideration.
As always, please feel free to contact me directly if you have questions or concerns.
Copy to:
Geoff Fruin, City Manager
Kellie Grace, City Clerk
Kirk Lehman, Assistant City Manager
Sue Dulek, First Assistant City Attorney
Tracy Hightshoe, NDS Director
Danielle Sitzman, Development Services Coordinator
Anne Russett, Senior Planner
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 29, 2024
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
From: Eric R. Goers, City Attorney
Re: Zoning Code Amendments to create a Tobacco Retailer use, and create limitations
on where they can be located
Introduction
At their April 2nd, 2024 formal meeting, the Iowa City Council denied several tobacco permit
applications and expressed a desire to give thought and study to what could be done at a local
level to address the proliferation of tobacco retailers within City limits. At their May 7th, 2024
formal meeting, Council passed a moratorium on the issuance of new tobacco permits while
they studied more about what could be done. The moratorium runs until January 1st, 2025.
Council then engaged in several work sessions to discuss how to better address the tobacco
retailers, and the harmful health effects they bring to the community. At their July 16th, 2024
work session they direction the City Attorney to bring forth three draft ordinances for
consideration. Those included the following:
1. A zoning code amendment to impose 500' separation distance requirements between
tobacco retailers and other tobacco retailers, k-12 schools, and university property.
2. A cap on tobacco permits at the present 63.
3. A ban on kratom products.
At their August 6th and 20th, 2024 work sessions, Council discussed the ordinances, ultimately
deciding to proceed with the zoning code ordinance amendment and the creation of the kratom
ban, but not the permit cap. They tweaked the draft zoning code amendment on the topic of
grandfather rights, but otherwise accepted the draft ordinance as presented as appropriate to
send to Planning and Zoning for your consideration. I have attached that draft hereto
(Attachment 1.) Because it is a text amendment initiated by the City Council, the submittal
requirements of Iowa City Code 14-8D-5C do not apply.
Current Regulations
At present, there is no "Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses" under the City's zoning code. Nor are
there any restrictions specific to where tobacco retailers can operate, other than general
provisions related to commercial retail uses.
Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendment (Attachment 1) helps to enhance land use regulations related to
tobacco retailers in an effort to improve public health. This is consistent with advancing the
City's strategic value of safety and well-being for our community members.
The CDC has long concluded that there are significant health concerns related to public
consumption of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine products, and vapor products.
They report that smoking tobacco causes cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung diseases,
diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which includes emphysema and
chronic bronchitis.
In Ordinance No. 15-4634 (codified at Section 6-10-2 of the City Code), the City Council found
that the use of e-cigarettes presents a serious and unknown public health threat and that in the
interests of protecting the health of the public and providing a healthy work -place environment
for its employees the City of Iowa City and prohibited the use of electronic cigarettes in all areas
where it is illegal to smoke tobacco products. Research shows that greater access and
availability of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine products, and vapor products leads
to greater use of those products, and thus greater public harm.
Iowa Code Chapter 453A governs the sale of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine
products, and vapor products within the state of Iowa, all of which are covered by retail tobacco
permits issued by the City. Chapter 453A grants cities the authority to issue retail tobacco
permits located within their city limits. Chapter 453A further grants cities the discretion to issue,
or not issue, tobacco permits within their city limits, pursuant to the city's own policies. For
these reasons, managing the location of tobacco retailers is an appropriate subject of zoning
law.
The proposed amendment contains seven parts, presented in the order in which they appear in
the ordinance, as follows:
1. Amends the table of allowable uses in commercial zones.
2. Amends the table of allowable uses in industrial and research zones.
3. Amends the table of allowable uses in form -based code areas.
4. Creates a new use category — "Tobacco sales oriented", for use in later sections.
5. Provides a definition tracking that use category.
6. Imposes a 500' separation buffer between tobacco retailers and other tobacco retailers,
k-12 schools, and colleges and universities, including all University property. These
provisions are modeled after our separation distance requirements for drinking
establishments.
7. Addresses grandfather rights for those tobacco retailers already operating. Under these
provisions, tobacco retailers would lose their grandfather rights if they have their permit
revoked, allow their permit to expire for more than 60 days, cease the sale of tobacco
products for at least 90 days, or change their use.
Analysis
Staff and Council believe controlling the density of tobacco retailers, as well as keeping them at
least 500' from youthful populations such as those found on and near school properties,
including college property (legal age for tobacco products is 21), will reduce the use of tobacco
products and their related substitutes. Current retailers are protected via the grandfather
provisions so as to prevent the forceful shuttering of businesses, or elements of those
businesses.
The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has an abundance of
information available about the detrimental health effects of both tobacco products and tobacco
alternatives. For more information, see their website here:
https://www.cdc.gov/tabacco/index.html. For more information about the effects of greater
tobacco retailer density, see the following article from the Journal Preventative Medicine, from
their January, 2022 volume: Associations Between Disparities in Tobacco Retailer Density and
Disparities in Tobacco Use, by Allison M. Glasser, MPH, Nathaniel Onnen, PhD, Peter F.
Craigmile, PhD, Elli Schwartz, BS, and Megan E. Roberts, PhD.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih._qov/pmc/articles/PMC8750533/ The journal article also describes an
association between greater exposure to tobacco retailers and their marketing and price
promotions and greater tobacco use.
Anticipated Impact
Staff anticipates that the proposed zoning ordinance will stem the proliferation of tobacco
retailers in areas where there is already high density, such as downtown and along the Highway
1 and 6 corridors. The City has created a map showing the location of current tobacco retailers,
K-12 school property, and property owned by the Regents. Also included are 500' buffers for
both the retailer and school property. The map link can be found here: htt s:llma s.iowa-
cit .org/porta I/aslinstant/basichndex.htmI?a ppid=ef233a2608104fa48ba72e5bf360aca0 Map
layers can be turned on and off via the layer function in the lower right-hand corner. Over time,
density may be reduced by attrition.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that Title 14 Zoning be amended as detailed in Attachment 1 to enhance land
use regulations related to tobacco retailer use and to further implement the City's goals related
to public health.
Attachments
Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments
r
Approved by: _Z:��
Eric Goers, City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Zoning Code Text
Attachment 1
Draft Zoning Code Text
Underlined and/or bold text (within tables) is suggested new language. Strike -through notation
indicates language to be deleted.
Section 1. Amendrnen
1. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled "Base Zones", Article C entitled "Commercial
Zones", Table 2C-1, entitled "Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones", is amended by adding the
following bolded text to the "Retail uses" use category:
Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones
Use
Categories
Subgroups
CO-
1
CN-
1
CH-
1
Cl-
1
CC-
2
CB-
2
CB-
5
CB-
10
MU
Retail uses'
Alcohol sales
oriented retail
PR
PR
P
P
PR
PR
PR
PR
Delayed deposit
service uses
PR
Hospitality oriented
retail
PR
PR
P
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Outdoor storage and
display oriented
P
PR
Personal service
oriented
P
PR
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Repair oriented
P
P
P
P
P
Sales oriented
PR
PR
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Tobacco sales
oriented
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
2. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled "Base Zones", Article D entitled "Industrial and
Research Zones", Table 2D-1, entitled "Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and Research Zones", is
amended by adding the following bolded text to the "Retail' use category:
Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed In Industrial And Research Zones
Use Categories
Subgroups
1-1
1-2
RDP
ORP
Retail
Sales oriented
Personal service oriented
Alcohol sales oriented
Repair oriented
Hospitality oriented retail
S
S
Outdoor storage and display oriented
Tobacco sales oriented
3. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled "Base Zones", Article H entitled "Form -based
Zones and Standards", Table 14-2H-3B-1, entitled "Uses", is amended by adding the following bolded
text to the "Retail' use category:
Table 14-21-1-313-1: Uses
Use
T3NE
T3NG
T3NG-
T4NS
T4NS-
T4NM
T4NM-
T4MS
Specific
Categories
O
O
O
Standards
Retail Uses
Sales
-
P'
-
P'
-
P'
P
Oriented
Personal
-
-
P'
-
P'
-
P'
P
Service
Oriented
Alcohol
-
-
-
-
S'
-
S'
S
14-4B-4B-
Sales
15
Oriented
Hospitality
Oriented
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
14-4B-4B-
18(CN-1)
Tobacco
-
-
PR'
-
PR'
-
PR'
PR
144B-413-
Sales
24
Oriented
Indoor
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PR/S
14-4B-4B-
Commercial
7
Recreational
Uses
General
-
-
-
S'
-
S'
PR
14-4B-4B-
Animal
2(CN- 1)
Related
Commercial
Uses
4. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article A, entitled "Use
Categories", Section 4, entitled "Commercial Use Categories", Subsection I, entitled "Retail Uses", is
amended by adding the following Paragraph 2.(h.):
h. Tobacco Sales Oriented: Any retailer actively engaged in the sale of tobacco products, cigarettes.
alternative nicotine products, or vapor products all as defined_ in Iowa Code Chapter 453A, as
amended, pursuant to a tobacco permit.
5. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 9 entitled "Definitions", Article A, entitled "General
Definitions", Section 1, entitled "Definitions" is amended by adding the following definition:
Tobacco Sales Oriented Use: See "Retail uses" "Tobacco Sales Oriented" as defined in chapter 4.
Article A "Use Categories", of this Title.
6. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article B, entitled "Minor
Modifications, Variances, Special Exceptions, and Provisional Uses", Section 4, entitled "Specific
Approval Criteria for Provisional Uses and Special Exceptions", Subsection B, entitled "Commercial
Uses", is amended by adding the following Paragraph 24, entitled "Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses":
24. Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses: A tobacco sales oriented use as defined in this title must be
separated by a minimum distance of five hundred feet 500' from any other tobacco sales oriented
use, any general educational facility, and any college and university, as defined by this title. For
purposes of the distance separation requirements within this Paragraph, "college and universities"
shall include all property owned by the Iowa Board of Regents. Distance shall be measured along a
straight line from the nearest property line or nearest point of the leased building space) of the
Proposed use to the nearest property line or nearest point of the leased building space) of any
other tobacco sales oriented usegeneral educational facility, or any college or university. For
example, in the case of a tobacco sales oriented use that is located on a lot with multiple leased
building spaces, such as a shopping mall, the distance is measured from the nearest point of the
leased building space occupied by a tobacco sales oriented use to the nearest property line or
leased building space of any other tobacco sales oriented usegeneral educational facility,or
college and university.
7. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article E, entitled
"Nonconforming Situations", Section 5, entitled "Regulation of Nonconforming Uses", is amended to
add the following Subsection H, entitled "Nonconforming Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses":
H. Nonconforming Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses: In addition to the other provisions in this section
the following rovisions apply to nonconforming tobacco sales oriented uses:
1. An "tobacco sales oriented uses" as defined in this title that was legally established priot
to the effective date hereof and that is nonconforming with regard to separation distances required
under this title may continue unless any of the following conditions occur. If any of these conditions
occur, then nonconforming rights cease and the use must convert to a conforming use:
a. The tobacco permit is revoked: or
b. The tobacco permit lapses or is discontinued fora period of sixty 60 days or more; or
c. The tobacco sales oriented use ceases fora period of ninety 90 days or more; or
d. There has been a change of use as defined in Section 14-4E-5B.
MINUTES FINAL
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 4, 2024 —6:00 PM —FORMAL MEETING
E M M A J. HARVAT HALL, CITY HALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Susan Craig, Maggie Elliott, Steve Miller, Scott Quellhorst, Billie
Townsend, Chad Wade
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Hensch
STAFF PRESENT: Eric Goers, Anne Russett
OTHERS PRESENT: Kristian Nixon, Jonathan Lewallen, Dana Haverkamp, Jenna Dyroft
RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL:
By a vote of 5-1 (Wade dissenting) the Commission recommends approval of REZ24-0006 an
amendment to Title 14 Zoning as detailed in Attachment 1 to enhance land use regulations
related to tobacco retailer use and to further implement the City's goals related to public health.
CALL TO ORDER:
Craig called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA:
None.
CASE NO. REZ24-0006
Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", to address tobacco sales -
oriented uses.
Goers began the staff report with a little bit of the history about why tobacco regulation comes
before the Planning & Zoning Commission as it is not something they are normally tasked with
addressing. At the April 2 City Council meeting the Council voted to deny several tobacco
permits, notifying staff that there was something up and that Council wanted to discuss the issue
of tobacco regulation. Staff came back with a moratorium at their May 7 meeting that put the halt
on all new tobacco permit applications at that point so Council would have time to consider how
to regulate, if at all, tobacco permits. Goers explained that moratorium runs through the end of
this calendar year. Council then engaged in several work sessions, the first being on July 16, at
which Council tasked him with drafting three ordinance amendments. One is a zoning ordinance
amendment that is for their consideration this evening having to do with distance separations
between retailers and each other, and also retailers and either K - 12 schools or University
property. The second ordinance amendment was having to do with putting a cap on tobacco
permits issued throughout the City and the third had to do with banning kratom, an herbal
substance that he is still learning about. Ultimately through a couple of additional work sessions
on August 6 and August 20, Council directed to not to move forward with the permit cap, but to
move forward with the other two ordinance amendments of a kratom band and the zoning
ordinance.
Goers noted the draft ordinance amendment was included in the agenda packet and he worked
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2024
Page 2 of 8
closely with the assistance of the urban planning staff on it. He also just wanted to make it clear
tobacco retailers use is not something that's currently regulated under Iowa City zoning and it is
a use that they've had to create in order to effectuate change that Council would like to consider.
Therefore, there's nothing in the zoning code at present to compare to see how this is going to fit
in with present regulation. The ordinance structure is modeled on alcohol zoning which at
present has a couple of different separation distance measures in the code. One is 500 feet
between drinking establishments, places that have licenses for on -premises consumption (bars),
and the other is 1000-foot separation distance for off -premises consumption (liquor stores or
places that sell alcohol for off -premises consumption). With the alcohol ordinance there are a
couple of other caveats regarding accessory uses and so forth and it gets to be a little tricky but
with tobacco is quite a bit more straightforward, either they have a tobacco permit or they don't.
Staff did include some grandfather provisions, as they are apt to do on zoning measures
because there are a number of retailers that are within 500 feet of each other at present or are
within 500 feet of a school or university property. In the ordinance amendment it is stated that
grandfathered retailers will have 60 days to allow their permit to lapse and if their permit lapses
for more than 60 days they lose their grandfather rights and will have to cease selling tobacco.
Goers noted that could mean a rehabilitation or remodeling project that would close down a shop
and not sell for more than 60 days would also lose grandfather rights and their tobacco permit
revoked.
Goers showed a map that displayed the present location of both school property and current
tobacco retailers, of which there are presently 62. He pointed out the tobacco retailers within a
500-foot buffer around University property or K - 12 school property. He noted in the downtown
area there would likely not be an ability of any new retailers to come in but in other parts of the
City there would be a little bit more opportunity.
In so far as staffing is concerned, because the clerk's office already does tobacco permit
applications and manages all of that, they would likely just continue managing this part of it and
all they would really need to do is type in an address and then see whether it falls under one of
the buffers or if it was in the clear and thus could be approved.
Therefore, staff recommends that Title 14 Zoning be amended as detailed in Attachment 1 to
enhance land use regulations related to tobacco retailer use and to further implement the City's
goals related to public health.
Townsend asked if this is a new issue and are there more tobacco retailers. Goers explained
there has been an increase in tobacco retailers recently, insofar as tobacco retailers include
convenience stores, grocery stores, drug stores, a lot of businesses for which the sale of tobacco
and tobacco products is not their primary concern. Additionally vape shops and everything they
sell would fall under the tobacco licensing. Goers also clarified the tobacco permits cover both
traditional tobacco products like cigarettes and cigars, pipe tobacco, but also vapes, alternative
nicotine delivery systems, but not kratom, that is a separate ordinance amendment.
Wade noted Goers mentioned alternative nicotine products and that the definition of tobacco
sales -oriented business would include any business that sells alternative nicotine products.
Looking at the definition in the Iowa code it seems pretty broad, like it might pull in, for example,
Target which sells nicotine lozenges, is that accurate, and if so, is that the intent of the
ordinance. Goers stated he would need to look to see whether nicotine lozenges fall under the
definition of products that require a tobacco permit. For this ordinance amendment the definition
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2024
Page 3 of 8
is if they need a tobacco permit, then this applies to them. If they do not need a tobacco permit,
then it does not. Wade stated he is just trying to understand whether these restrictions would
apply to something like ZYN which is an alternative to chewing tobacco and would be sold at a
grocery store or pharmacy, it's more of a recreational nicotine product, as opposed to lozenges
and gums which would typically be used for smoking cessation. Goers will look at Iowa Code
Chapter 453A which defines some of those products and can circle back.
Wade also asked if this were to pass would new tobacco shops need to seek approval for a
provisional use from the Board of Adjustment or would they just go to the City Clerk. Goers
stated it would be handed by the City Clerk's office.
Goers noted in the ordinance that there are a number of charts that talk about whether they
would be allowable under certain zones and there he would depend on the planning staff to help
with the process by which they would secure the approvals that they need and if it's a provisional
use, or something like that in a particular zone, planning staff would assist but in so far as the
Clerk's concerned in issuing the tobacco permit, it would just be are they within 500 feet, yes or
no.
Wade asked if there would be any mechanism for an exception to that rule other than
grandfathering. Goers confirmed there would not.
Townsend asked if a company that has been grandfathered in goes out of business or for some
reason can't continue to operate, no one can come in and replace that shop. Goers confirmed
that would only be correct if there is a lapse of a permit of more than 60 days and/or a cessation
of sales for more than 90 days. If a convenience store went out of business, and a month later
got bought up by Casey's or something, Casey's can open up shop and get a permit, that would
be fine. There are 62 permits at present and while Council originally wanted a cap on permits
they chose not to move forward with that. Permits will be allowed so long as they are not within
the 500 feet of another permit.
Miller noticed when looking at the map he was just kind of surprised that Hy-Vee and grocery
stores were on there, he was thinking that vape shops was what they're trying to limit with this
legislation. It doesn't seem like anyone would want to limit having another grocery store within a
certain radius of vape shop. Goers stated there was some discussion of that and City staff met a
couple times with Susan Valetta, who's a Johnson County Public Health Educator, and based on
her research she indicated that she's more concerned with the convenience stores and the
grocery stores because there's greater exposure to children as children go into those places all
the time. Whereas it would be surprising and unusual for a child to wander into a vape store and
it's about exposure and normalizing of use that leads to greater problems down the line. If there's
a higher density and higher availability of exposure, particularly to young people, then they're
more likely to become users.
Miller asked if all or most grocery stores have tobacco permits. Goers hasn't checked on that but
believes most grocery stores have tobacco permits as well as most convenience stores also.
Craig stated then if the Hy-Ve Drug that's on First Avenue, which certainly is within 500 feet of
Regina, if that went out of business, unless someone else came along and bought the business
or secured a permit within 60 days of a lapsed permit they would lose their grandfather rights.
Goers confirmed that was correct.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2024
Page 4 of 8
Craig stated the impetus for this concern from Council is a health one and Goers replied that was
correct.
Goers stated regarding the question about the alternative nicotine products and the list under
State code which is incorporated through this ordinance states alternative nicotine product
means a product not consisting of/or containing tobacco that provides for the ingestion, into the
body of nicotine, whether by chewing (nicotine gum), absorbing, dissolving, inhaling, snorting or
sniffing, or by any other means. Alternative nicotine product does not include cigarettes, tobacco
products or vapor products as each of those also require a tobacco permit, or a product that is
regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. So, it appears that any kind of nicotine gum or
anything like that would require a tobacco permit.
Wade asked if a location had a move because of loss of lease or something like that do they fall
under the new rule as soon as they move locations and have to be greater than 500 feet, and the
grandfathering would no longer apply. Goers confirmed that is correct because zoning regulation
is about the use and not the user. So, if a tobacco retailer wants to move from location B to
location C it has to be outside of 500 feet and eligible.
Wade asked also about an explanation on why locations of education facilities from 18 and
younger and college or universities are the treated the same. Goers stated the law used to be
one only need to be 18 to consume tobacco products but now it is 21 and probably half or more
of the student body at the University of Iowa is under 21.
Craig opened the public hearing.
Kristian Nixon (student, University of Iowa College of Law) was wondering if there's been any
research on the increase in property value that the smoke shop owners might have, since they
already have these locations that are close to the schools. Goers stated they haven't done any
research on that but are cognizant of the changes because of the alcohol one upon which this
tobacco ordinance is largely modeled. The proposed ordinance is kind of locking in some
locations, because if they ever stop that use they will lose those grandfather rights and they are
aware of landlords who require, as part of their lease with their tenants, that they continue to
engage in the sale of alcohol and so forth as to preserve that right. Nixon also asked if there is
currently a limit to how much product they could have, for example could one of these places
expand upwards if they have a tall building. Goers replied that would be an expansion of a non-
conforming use and would not be allowed.
Jonathan Lewallen (student, University of Iowa College of Law) asked if there's been any
consideration to the effect this ordinance could have on currently vacant properties with
infrastructure for gas station use. For example, the closed gas station on Mormon Trek and the
closed gas station downtown. Is there a risk that would be locking out the reopening of those
businesses with this ordinance. Goers is not sure the Council would use the word risk to
characterize that, but yes there is some possibility that if this passes and the use ceases.
Currently there remains a tobacco permit in place for the former Kum & Go at Mormon Trek and
Benton. He doesn't recall if there's one at the intersection of Burlington and Madison.
Dana Haverkamp (student, University of Iowa College of Law) stated as per the Iowa code,
under the alternative tobacco products, or nicotine products, nicotine patches would also fall
under that definition, is there a benefit for restricting the sale of nicotine patches that an
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2024
Page 5 of 8
exception would not be a better idea to allow the sale for reducing the usage of nicotine in the
first place. Goers noted there is an exception for products that are regulated as a drug or device
by the US Food and Drug Administration and if nicotine patches fall under that category it would
not apply. If they do not, and they otherwise fall under the definition of alternative nicotine
products, this ordinance would apply to their application. Haverkamp stated there's no intent to
make an exception for things that are preventative. Goers replied no, the City is bound by the
State's regulations regarding alternative nicotine products and how they are defined. Haverkamp
asked specifically for this new zoning permission why not make an exception for products that
are aimed at reducing the use of nicotine, rather than having a blanket statement preventing this
sale of nicotine and tobacco products. Goers stated the City is defaulting to the State's definition.
There's a reason why some products are regulated and require a tobacco permit and that some
are not and so they're just following the State code in that way. Haverkamp noted the majority of
individuals that start smoking to begin with are individuals who are interacting with already
people that smoke, such as family and friends, things of that nature, so how would they view
restricting the locations themselves as a way that would actually reduce the influence of nicotine
usage in the first place, like in children. The locations in themselves are not typically what's
actually getting them to start smoking in the first place. Goers acknowledged it's difficult to
regulate tobacco use within the home.
Jenna Dyroft (student, University of Iowa College of Law) wanted to put forth the idea that
perhaps this measure might be a little bit counterintuitive, they were speaking about how many
grocery stores sell tobacco products, but primarily this seems like it's targeted at a typical vape
shop, but because it's modeled off of alcohol prohibited measures it's including grocery stores,
etc. She thinks it's worth considering looking at how the City is set up, a lot of the bars and liquor
stores are concentrated in the downtown area and this measure is making it so that it's basically
prohibiting any new stores from being in the downtown area which might encourage people to
open new stores in the peripheral of the City, which would, in effect spread out tobacco use
across the whole City, instead of maybe concentrating it in more of that downtown nightlife area.
Russett noted residential zones do not permit tobacco or alcohol -oriented retail.
Craig closed the public hearing.
Elliott moved to approve REZ24-0006 an amendment to Title 14 Zoning as detailed in
Attachment 1 to enhance land use regulations related to tobacco retailer use and to
further implement the City's goals related to public health.
Townsend seconded the motion.
Quellhorst states he generally supports the proposal but would oppose the motion because he
thinks that they should exclude alternative nicotine products, or at least tobacco cessation
products like gums and lozenges. His concern is that this definition of alternative nicotine
products sweeps pretty broadly and makes it would make it more difficult for businesses like
pharmacies, for example, or Target to enter downtown and other areas. And then, relatedly, the
impetus behind this measure is to protect public health and he doesn't see the same public
health concerns with lozenges, gums and other tobacco cessation products as he does with
vapes and cigarettes, for example. For those reasons he supports the notion behind the proposal
but doesn't support this particular motion.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2024
Page 6 of 8
Wade appreciates Quellhorst catching that because that's something he would not have realized,
the nicotine patches and so on.
Elliott noted they don't know for sure that that's the case, there is an exception perhaps for
nicotine patches and she assumes they're somehow regulated by the FDA.
Wade wouldn't want to get in a situation where a new Walgreens, for example, is interested in
doing business downtown but either couldn't do so or would get caught up in a lot of red tape,
due to this ordinance.
Townsend would be in favor of this, 500 feet is not a long way to walk if someone can't find the
products that they're looking for. Iowa City doesn't need more vape and tobacco shops in the
downtown area there's already an abundance of the vape shops and tobacco shops and places
that offer those things.
Wade's concern is less with another vape shop, which he agrees that they don't need more of
and more that a business that may happen to sell tobacco cessation products, like a Target or
CVS, can't get a tobacco license because of the ordinance. If the City Attorney is of the opinion
that those sorts of businesses wouldn't be prohibited by this ordinance, then he'd be comfortable
supporting it.
Goers noted looking it up, according to the CDC nicotine patches are an FDA approved medicine
and nicotine gum, also, according to the Center for Disease Control, is an FDA approved
medicine. Therefore, both would fall under the exception of alternative nicotine product.
Miller asked just to clarify that would mean that they do not need a tobacco permit to sell it.
Goers confirmed that is his reading of the definition of alternative nicotine products.
Miller stated he will support this as the intent behind this is reducing the number of vape shops,
especially downtown. His only concern is about what Commissioner Wade brought up with
institutionalizing these locations as forever a vape shop. What happens if this becomes a
problem. Goers replied there could be an ordinance amendment and because this is a zoning
ordinance it would need to come before this Commission again before Council took it up if there
was a change. He also noted insofar as the question about institutionalizing, that was something
at the staff level they considered as well but also have to consider the alternative, and that there
will just be more of them.
Craig stated that's why she's in favor of this zoning change, because it's always a tradeoff, they
have to trade something away to get something that they feel is important enough, and she
thinks in this case, it's a fair trade.
Wade thinks the intention is probably good, the devil is in the details and it may have some
unintended consequences. He also thinks that 90 days without the sale of tobacco products is a
little on the short side and would hate to have a business get hit with a tornado or natural
disaster and then as a result lose their permit and ability to sell.
Wade asked if there is a reason why they did not take a different approach, like a per capita
permit approach, and instead really focused on zoning mechanism. Goers stated one point
Council was considering that, and had him draft one, but ultimately looking at the map they
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 4, 2024
Page 7 of 8
thought that the zoning would really address their concerns and it wouldn't prevent a new
grocery store from going into an area that maybe is underserved at present, part of a food desert
or something. And if that grocery store felt like they needed to sell tobacco in order to pencil out
and make a go of it, that that was probably a net benefit, and they didn't want a permit cap to get
in the way of something like that.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-1 (Wade dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF MEETING MINUTES: JUNE 26. 2024:
Elliott moved to approve the meeting minutes from June 26, 2024. Wade seconded the motion,
a vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0.
PLANNING AND ZONING INFORMATION:
Craig introduced the new Commission member, Steve Miller. Miller stated he is an architect who
is really interested in planning and zoning and looking forward to learning more. His first City
board or commission was public art and he did that for just over two terms.
Russett updated that the two rezonings that were considered in June were both approved by
Council, the 1215 Camp Cardinal Road and 2255 North Dubuque Road for the school district
property.
ADJOURNMENT:
Elliott moved to adjourn, Wade seconded and the motion passed 6-0
Prepared by: Eric Goers, City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030
Ordinance Number
Ordinance amending Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", to address Tobacco
Sales Oriented Retail Uses. (REZ24-0006).
Whereas, Iowa City has seen within its borders an increased presence of retail outlets primarily
focused on retail sales of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine products, and vapor
products; and
Whereas, there are significant health concerns related to public consumption of tobacco,
tobacco products, alternative nicotine products, and vapor products; and
Whereas, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) reports that smoking tobacco causes cancer,
heart disease, stroke, lung diseases, diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
(COPD), which includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis; and
Whereas, according to the CDC, nearly 9 out of 10 adults who smoke cigarettes daily first tried
smoking by age 18; and
Whereas, according to the CDC, smokeless tobacco products can cause mouth cancer, gum
disease, and tooth loss; and
Whereas, according to the CDC, 1.5% of high school students in 2023 were current users of
smokeless tobacco products; and
Whereas, in Ordinance No. 15-4634 (codified at Section 6-10-2), the City Council found that the
use of e-cigarettes presents a serious and unknown public health threat and that in the interests
of protecting the health of the public and providing a healthy work -place environment for its
employees the City of Iowa City and prohibited the use of electronic cigarettes in all areas
where it is illegal to smoke tobacco products; and
Whereas, according to the CDC, in 2023, 2.13 million U.S. middle and high school students had
used e-cigarettes in the past 30 days, including 4.6% of middle school students and 10.0% of
high school students; and
Whereas, Chapter 142D of the Iowa Code, the Iowa Smokefree Air Act, prohibits smoking
tobacco products in certain public spaces, places of employment and outdoor areas, including
enclosed City buildings and vehicles operated by the City, the public grounds immediately
adjacent to City buildings and bus shelters; and
Whereas, as a result of these public health risks, the City has declared additional areas to be
smoke free places including the municipal parking ramps, airport, City Plaza except for alleys
and certain areas within Iowa City parks (see Chapter 10 of Title 6, "Public Health and Safety");
and
Whereas, greater access and availability of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative nicotine
products, and vapor products leads to greater use of those products, and thus greater public
harm; and
Whereas, Iowa Code Chapter 453A governs the sale of tobacco, tobacco products, alternative
nicotine products, and vapor products within the state of Iowa, all of which are covered by retail
tobacco permits; and
Whereas, Chapter 453A grants cities the authority to issue retail tobacco permits located within
their city limits; and
Whereas, Chapter 453A further grants cities the discretion to issue, or not issue, tobacco
permits within their city limits, pursuant to the city's own policies; and
Whereas, it is in the best interest of the City to amend the ordinance to create a new "Tobacco
Retailer Uses" category, and to regulate their locations within the City.
Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa:
Section I. Amendments
1. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled "Base Zones", Article C entitled
"Commercial Zones", Table 2C-1, entitled "Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones", is
amended by adding the following bolded text to the "Retail uses" use category:
Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones
Use
Categories
Subgroups
CO-
1
CN-
1
CH-
1
Cl-
1
CC-
2
CB-
2
CB-
5
CB-
10
MU
Retail uses'
Alcohol sales
oriented retail
PR
PR
P
P
PR
PR
PR
PR
Delayed deposit
service uses
PR
Hospitality oriented
retail
PR
PR
P
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Outdoor storage and
display oriented
P
PR
Personal service
oriented
P
PR
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Repair oriented
P
P
P
P
P
Sales oriented
PR
PR
P
P
P
P
P
PR
Tobacco sales
oriented
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
2. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled "Base Zones", Article D entitled
"Industrial and Research Zones", Table 2D-1, entitled "Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial and
Research Zones", is amended by adding the following bolded text to the "Retail" use category:
Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed In Industrial And Research Zones
Use Categories
Subgroups
1-1
1-2
RDP
ORP
Retail
Sales oriented
Personal service oriented
Alcohol sales oriented
Repair oriented
Hospitality oriented retail
S
S
Outdoor storage and display oriented
Tobacco sales oriented
3. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 2 entitled "Base Zones", Article H entitled "Form -
based Zones and Standards", Table 14-2H-3B-1, entitled "Uses", is amended by adding the
following bolded text to the "Retail" use category:
Table 14-2H-3B-1: Uses
Use
T3NE
T3NG
T3NG-
T4NS
T4NS-
T4NM
T4NM-
T4MS
Specific
Categories
O
O
O
Standards
Retail Uses
Sales
-
-
P'
-
P'
-
P'
P
Oriented
Personal
-
-
P'
-
P'
-
P'
P
Service
Oriented
Alcohol
-
-
-
-
S'
-
S'
S
14-413-413-
Sales
15
Oriented
Hospitality
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
14-413-413-
Oriented
18(CN-1)
Tobacco
-
-
PR'
-
PR'
-
PR'
PR
14-4B-4B-
Sales
24
Oriented
Indoor
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
PR/S
14-413-413-
Commercial
7
Recreational
Uses
General
-
-
-
-
S'
-
S'
PR
14-413-413-
Animal
2(CN- 1)
Related
Commercial
Uses
4. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article A, entitled
"Use Categories", Section 4, entitled "Commercial Use Categories", Subsection I, entitled "Retail
Uses", is amended by adding the following Paragraph 2.(h.):
h. Tobacco Sales Oriented: Any retailer actively engaged in the sale of tobacco products,
cigarettes, alternative nicotine products, or vapor products, all as defined in Iowa Code
Chapter 453A, as amended, pursuant to a tobacco permit.
5. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 9 entitled "Definitions", Article A, entitled "General
Definitions", Section 1, entitled "Definitions" is amended by adding the following definition:
Tobacco Sales Oriented Use: See "Retail uses", "Tobacco Sales Oriented" as defined in
chapter 4, Article A, "Use Categories", of this Title.
6. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article B, entitled
"Minor Modifications, Variances, Special Exceptions, and Provisional Uses", Section 4, entitled
"Specific Approval Criteria for Provisional Uses and Special Exceptions", Subsection B, entitled
"Commercial Uses", is amended by adding the following Paragraph 24, entitled "Tobacco Sales
Oriented Uses":
24. Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses: A tobacco sales oriented use, as defined in this title,
must be separated by a minimum distance of five hundred feet (500') from any other
tobacco sales oriented use, any general educational facility, and any college and university,
as defined by this title. For purposes of the distance separation requirements within this
Paragraph, "college and universities" shall include all property owned by the Iowa Board of
Regents. Distance shall be measured along a straight line from the nearest property line (or
nearest point of the leased building space) of the proposed use to the nearest property line
(or nearest point of the leased building space) of any other tobacco sales oriented use,
general educational facility, or any college or university. For example, in the case of a
tobacco sales oriented use that is located on a lot with multiple leased building spaces, such
as a shopping mall, the distance is measured from the nearest point of the leased building
space occupied by a tobacco sales oriented use to the nearest property line or leased
building space of any other tobacco sales oriented use, general educational facility, or
college and university.
7. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article E, entitled
"Nonconforming Situations", Section 5, entitled "Regulation of Nonconforming Uses", is
amended to add the following Subsection H, entitled "Nonconforming Tobacco Sales Oriented
Uses":
H. Nonconforming Tobacco Sales Oriented Uses: In addition to the other provisions in this
section, the following provisions apply to nonconforming tobacco sales oriented uses:
1. Any "tobacco sales oriented uses", as defined in this title, that was legally
established prior to the effective date hereof and that is nonconforming with regard to
separation distances required under this title, may continue unless any of the following
conditions occur. If any of these conditions occur, then nonconforming rights cease and the
use must convert to a conforming use:
a. The tobacco permit is revoked; or
b. The tobacco permit lapses or is discontinued for a period of sixty (60) days or
more; or
c. The tobacco sales oriented use ceases for a period of ninety (90) days or more;
or
d. There has been a change of use as defined in Section 14-4E-:,B.
8. Title 14, entitled "Zoning Code", Chapter 4 entitled "Use Regulations", Article E, entitled
"Nonconforming Situations", Section 5, entitled "Regulation of Nonconforming Uses",
Subsection F is amended by adding the underlined text and deleting the strikethrough text, as
follows:
F. Discontinuance Of Nonconforming Use: Except as allowed in subsection E,, aPA-G, and
H of this section, a nonconforming use that is discontinued for a period of one year must
revert to a conforming use or, in qualifying situations, a special exception may be applied for
according to the provisions of subsection B of this section.
Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a
whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and
publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of , 2024.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
It was moved by
adopted, and upon roll call there were:
Ayes:
and seconded by
Nays:
Approved by
City Attorney's Office
Absent:
Alter
Bergus
Dunn
Harmsen
Moe
Salih
Teague
the Ordinance be
Item Number: 9.b.
I, CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November 4, 2024
Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning Code, to allow redemption centers in commercial and
industrial zones. (REZ24-0007) (Second Consideration)
Attachments: REZ24-0017 Memo w Attachments
Planning & Zoning Commission Correspondence
PZ 9.18.24 minutes
Ordinance
r
��_..® CITY OF IOWA CITY
R&
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 18t", 2024
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
From: Madison Conley, Associate Planner, Neighborhood & Development Services
Re: Zoning Code Amendment (REZ24-0007) to allow redemption centers in commercial
and industrial zones
Introduction
In 1978 the state of Iowa enacted Iowa's Beverage Containers Control Law, also known as the
"Bottle Bill," which allows consumers to receive their return deposit when returning the empty
beverage container to a store or redemption center. Redemption centers are facilities where
consumers may return empty beverage containers and receive payment for the refund value of
the containers. In June 2022, the Bottle Bill was amended to allow stores, like grocery stores, to
opt out of redeeming containers if there is a redemption center nearby or if other criteria are met.
Some grocery stores have redemption centers affiliated with them. For example, the North Dodge
Hy-Vee located at 1125 N Dodge St. and zoned Community Commercial (CC-2) provides a space
for customers to redeem empty cans and bottles. Additionally, Iowa City has an existing
redemption center known as the Can Shed. This property is located at 611 Hollywood Blvd #3
and located in a General Industrial (1-1) zone; however, they would like to operate within a
commercial zone to expand their services, improve their collection process, and provide easier
access to the community. In order to allow for these changes, a code amendment is necessary.
Staff developed the proposed amendment (Attachment 1) which creates redemption centers as
a land use type, allows the use within commercial and research and industrial zones, and applies
appropriate standards for this use within commercial zones.
Current Regulations
Currently, the Zoning Code (Title 14) does not contain any specific language that assists with
defining, classifying, or regulating redemption centers. Historically, redemption centers located
within grocery stores have been allowed within commercial zones. However, any stand-alone
redemption center related use has been classified under the Waste Related Use category. The
Waste Related Use category is characterized by any uses that receive solid or liquid wastes from
others for disposal on the site or for transfer to another location; uses that collect sanitary wastes;
uses that recycle solid waste or recyclable materials; and uses that manufacture or produce goods
or energy from biological decomposition of organic material. Examples of this land use category
include recycling process facilities, sanitary landfills, limited use landfills, waste composting,
waste transfer stations energy recovery plants, sewage treatment plants, portable sanitary
collection equipment storage and pumping, and hazardous waste collection sites (14-4A-4). This
use is provisionally allowed in the General Industrial (1-1) and Heavy Industrial (1-2) zones.
With this interpretation, stand-alone redemption centers are only allowed in industrial zones. In
reviewing the proposal from the Can Shed, it became apparent to staff that classifying redemption
center uses as very intense industrial land uses comparable to landfills and recycling facilities did
not accurately reflect the intended use or how they proposed to operate.
September 18, 2024
Page 2
Proposed Amendments
The proposed amendment includes the following:
1. Creates a new use category — "Redemption Center",
2. Amends the table of allowable uses in commercial and industrial zones,
3. Provides a definition for "Redemption Center",
4. Creates provisional use standards for "Redemption Center", and
5. Outlines minimum parking requirements for "Redemption Center".
Use Regulations
The proposed amendment includes the creation of "Redemption Center" as a use category
characterized as an indoor facility that collects empty bottles and cans from consumers,
distributes payment of the refund value, and may utilize compressing machines. The proposed
accessory uses are offices and off-street parking. This use would include the following exceptions:
recycling processing facilities will continue to be classified as waste related uses, and
establishments that offer beverages for sale are classified as either sales -oriented retail, alcohol
sales oriented retail, eating establishment, or drinking establishment.
The proposed amendment proposes changes to the tables of allowable uses in the commercial
and industrial zones. Staff is proposing that redemption centers be allowed either as a use
permitted by right (P) or a provisional (PR) use subject to additional standards. Table 1 provides
further clarification.
Table 1: Zones Allowing Redemption Centers Either Provisionally or Permitted By -Right.
Zone
Provisional v. Permitted Use
Commercial Office CO-1
PR
Neighborhood Commercial (CN-1)
PR
Highway Commercial (CH-1)
P
Intensive Commercial (CI-1)
P
Community Commercial (CC-2)
PR
Central Business Service (CB-2)
PR
Central Business Support (CB-5)
PR
Central Business CB-10
PR
General Industrial I-1
P
Heavy Industrial I-2
P
Research Development Park (RDP)
P
Office Research Park (ORP)
P
Staff recommends allowing redemption centers by -right in research and industrial zones. Staff
has determined that the size limitations and prohibition on outdoor storage recommended for
provisional uses, which are discussed in the next section, are not needed in these more intensive
zones that allow outdoor storage.
Staff proposes that redemption centers be allowed by -right in the CH-1 and CI-1 zones. Although
these are commercial zones, these zones allow outdoor storage when certain standards like
adequate concealment of materials, setbacks, and screening requirements are met (14-2C-6).
These zones would allow more flexibility with size and outdoor storage of redemption centers
compared to the commercial zones in which this use is provisionally allowed.
Staff recommends allowing redemption centers provisionally in most commercial zones in order
to help protect the surrounding properties by mitigating potential negative externalities associated
with this use. Redemption centers that are allowed provisionally would be required to meet
specific use standards discussed below.
September 18, 2024
Page 3
Use Specific Standards
The proposed amendment recommends that zones where redemption centers are allowed as a
provisional use be subject to the following use specific standards:
1. Size of use limited to no more than 5,000 square feet.
2. Outdoor storage of any materials is not allowed.
The recommended use specific standards include a size limitation of no more than 5,000 square
feet and the prohibition of outdoor storage. Based off the research of other local jurisdictions,
restricting the size and outdoor storage is a common practice. Several jurisdictions in Oregon
have a 5,000 square foot size limitation. Additionally, the City's zoning code already uses 5,000
square feet as a maximum for other uses in commercial zones, such as Indoor Commercial
Recreational Uses in the CO-1 and CN-1 zones and Office Uses in the CN-1 zone. The proposed
size limitation is consistent with other size restrictions in the zoning code.
Regarding the prohibition on outdoor storage, the zones that would allow redemption centers
provisionally already prohibit outdoor storage. However, staff recommends adding this use
standard to provide further clarify to any redemption center business looking to operate in Iowa
City.
Staff is recommending that redemption centers be allowed in all commercial zones, including the
neighborhood commercial zones and zones that apply to the core of the city. Staff determined it
would be appropriate to apply these use specific standards in commercial zones that may abut
residential land uses in order to maintain the character and scale of intensity of the surrounding
properties. To further clarify, staff recommends applying these standards in all commercial zones
except the CH-1 and CI-1 zones where this use would be permitted by right, as well as industrial
zones. Therefore, if a redemption center wanted to increase their footprint or incorporate outdoor
storage, they would have the option to locate in a zone with more permissive standards.
Parking Requirements
The proposed amendment alters the minimum parking standards to include an on -site parking
ratio for redemption center uses. Staff recommends a ratio of 1 space per one thousand (1,000)
square feet of floor area with no required bicycle parking. Staff does not anticipate that this use
will require many parking spaces due to the nature of the business. Patrons will likely visit the
space to quickly receive their redemption and leave. Additionally, this is a minimum requirement.
If a particular redemption center anticipates a greater parking need, providing more parking
spaces would be allowed.
Analysis
Since the City's current regulations do not contemplate redemption centers, staff looked to how
other jurisdictions regulate this land use. Staff developed a list of local jurisdictions (Attachment
2) and analyzed how redemption centers are regulated.
Staff found value in looking to the State of Oregon. In Oregon, redemption centers are most often
considered commercial uses and viewed as some type of service provided to the community.
Many of the Oregon jurisdictions viewed redemption centers as a commercial use, but also felt it
was necessary to implement use specific standards in certain zones. Additionally, staff evaluated
how redemptions centers are regulated in Iowa. In Iowa, redemption centers are typically
industrial land uses, not the commercial land uses that exist in Oregon and envisioned by the Can
Shed. Table 2 summarizes how the cities of Portland, Bend, Gresham, and Des Moines regulate
redemption centers.
September 18, 2024
Page 4
Table 2: Examples of Redemption Center Regulations
City of Portland, OR
Use Classification:
Commercial, Retail Sales and Services, Repair Oriented
Definition:
Recycling Drop Off. A facility for the drop-off and temporary
holding of materials such as paper, cardboard, glass, metal,
plastic, batteries, and motor oil. Processing of materials is
limited to glass breaking and separation. Recycling materials
are not sold to a recycling drop-off center. A recycling drop-off
center is intended for household or consumer use. Use by
commercial or industrial establishments is not included.
Unattended drop-off stations for single materials, such as
newsprint, are also not included.
Zones Allowed:
Allowed in a variety of mixed use and commercial zones,
including general employment and industrial zones.
Use Specific Standards:
None
City of Bend, OR
Use Classification:
Commercial
Definition:
Indoor retail facility approved by the Oregon Liquor Control
Commission facilitating the return of empty beverage
containers and serving dealers of beverages, where any
person may return empty beverage containers and receive
payment of the refund value of such beverage containers.
Zones Allowed:
Allowed in both commercial and industrial zones.
Use Specific Standards:
- If the use is accessory to a primary industrial use, the
size limit cannot exceed 10 percent or 2,500 square
feet (whichever is greater).
- If the total gross floor area of use does not exceed
2,500 square feet, the use is considered primary. If
there are multiple uses that share one building, the
total building area shall not exceed 5,000 square feet.
A single use may occupy 5,000 square feet if approved
through a Conditional Use Permit and comply with
Commercial Design Review Standards.
City of Gresham, OR
Use Classification:
Commercial, Business and Retail Service and Trade
Definition:
An indoor retail facility approved by the Oregon Liquor Control
Commission facilitating the return of empty beverage
containers and serving dealers of beverages, where any
person may return empty beverage containers and receive
payment of the refund value of such beverage containers.
Zones Allowed:
Allowed in a variety of commercial zones, including
neighborhood commercial, downtown, and industrial zones.
Use Specific Standards:
None
City of Des Moines, IA
Use Classification:
Industrial, Industrial Service -Intensive
Definition:
Industrial Services -Industrial: Light uses involving outdoor
storage areas and uses involved in repair and maintenance
directly to business consumers or involving large equipment.
Examples include redemption centers.
Zones Allowed:
Industrial zones
Use Specific Standards:
- No part of the use may be a residential use.
- No odors, gases, noise, vibration, pollution of air, water
or soil, or lighting shall be emitted onto any adjoining
property so as to create a nuisance.
September 18, 2024
Page 5
For intensive uses, the owner or occupant must
provide the neighborhood services director with an
acceptable impacts statement describing the use and
the nature of any odors, gases, noise, vibration, and
other environmental impacts that may be generated by
such use; and certifying that the use upon the property
will be operated in a manner that does not permit any
odors, gases, noise, vibration, pollution of air, water or
soil, or lighting to be emitted onto any adjoining
property as to create a nuisance.
- For intensive uses, the use shall be operated in strict
conformance with the written statement provided to the
neighborhood services director.
- For intensive uses, all outdoor storage areas shall be
designed to allow no part of any stored material,
vehicles, or equipment to encroach into the required
setbacks.
- Outdoor storage of inoperable or unsafe vehicles in
quantities constituting a junk or salvage yard is
prohibited.
Table 2 demonstrates the range of different regulatory approaches that jurisdictions have taken.
For example, the City of Portland considers redemption centers as a "Retail Sales and Services"
use under the commercial category. "Retail Sales and Services" includes providing product repair
or services for consumer and business goods. Portland views redemption centers as a "Repair -
oriented" service and has classified them as "recycling drop-off' which accepts materials like
paper, cardboard, glass, metal, plastic, batteries, and motor oil.
The cities of Bend and Gresham categorize redemption centers as a commercial use. Both
jurisdictions recognize redemption centers as a stand-alone use make it clear that redemption
centers are indoor facilities that facilitate the return of empty beverage containers. This differs
from the City of Portland, which treats this use as a "recycling drop-off' and accepts a variety of
materials other than empty beverage containers.
The City of Des Moines moves further away from the approach that the cities of Bend or Gresham
have taken by considering redemption centers as an "Industrial Service". This jurisdiction finds
redemption centers to be similar to uses that deal with repair, maintenance, and large equipment.
Table 2 shows that while some jurisdictions consider redemption centers as a commercial service,
others, like Des Moines, classify these uses as industrial. This is also how the City of Iowa City
has historically classified these uses. Additionally, there is variation in how cities regulate this use
within commercial zones. On one end, the City of Portland allows the recycling of all types of
materials whereas the City of Gresham focuses on the redemption of empty beverage containers.
Anticipated Impact
Staff has prepared two maps that visually represent how the proposed amendment would apply
to land within the city.
Figure 1 shows the location of the zones where the proposed amendment would allow redemption
centers. Most of the areas are concentrated in the southern portion of the city since most of the
city's commercial and industrial land is in this area. Additional areas where the proposed
amendment would allow redemption centers include the center of the city, Old Towne Village,
Towncrest, and the area near the intersection of N. Dodge St and 1-80. See Attachment 3 for a
larger version of this map.
September 18, 2024
Page 6
Figure 1. Proposed Zones to Allow Redemption Centers
N
I,ti. E
Proposed Zones to Allow Redemption Centers
5
F�
a
'A
CHERCH Sr O EaQNE
��MSOR AVE � JEFFERSON ST � y
�BnRLINGTON ST 7 GOIIR?ST
6ENTON ST f KIRKVJOOn AVE MIISCATIN AVE
6 k�
Legend
Iowa City Zoning
- Community Commercial
0 General Industrial (il)
Mlxad Use (MU)
(Cr2)
Central Business
Heavy Industrial (12)
_ Commercial Office
- Services (Cb2)
Research Development
Park (RDP)
(Col)
�� Neighborhood
- Central business
Support (C65)
Office Researh Park
- (ORR)
Commercial (CN1)
Central business (Cb10)
Q Iowa City Limits
�Highway Commercial(CHI)
Intensive Commercial
4 (CIl)
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
va �sw snneian nomm�nseru,uiemi.,e mrem-vi:�
Figure 2 shows where the proposed amendment would allow redemption centers either as a
permitted use or as a provisional use. The green areas identify the areas where redemption
centers would be permitted by right. The yellow areas reflect land that would require compliance
with the proposed provisional use standards. See Attachment 4 for a larger version of this map.
September 18, 2024
Page 7
Figure 2. Redemption Centers: Proposed Permitted v. Provisional
N
Redemption Centers: Proposed Permitted v. Provisional
W _(�_ E
Legend
Permitted Use: CH-1, CI-1, I-1, I-2, RDP, ORP
0 0.5 1 2
Provisional Use: CO-1, CN-1, CC-2, CB-2, CB-5, CB-10, MU Mlles
Q Iowa City L 'units - """�'„"N°1
Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The vision of the Comprehensive Plan supports a resilient economy that increases tax base,
stimulates job growth, and promotes the overall people's prosperity and progress. The plan
includes a goal to "Increase and diversify the property tax base by encouraging the retention and
expansion of existing businesses and attracting business that have growth potential and are
compatible with Iowa City's economy". A strategy that supports this goal is to provide an attractive
economic environment with streamlined, business -friendly culture by making regulatory and
permitting processes clear, predictable, and coordinated. Allowing redemption center uses in
commercial zones would make it easier for redemption center uses to locate in Iowa City.
One of the plan's economic development goals focuses on "Encouraging a healthy mix of
independent, locally -owned businesses and national businesses" with a strategy that aims to
establish strategies to retain and encourage growth of existing locally -owned businesses. The
Can Shed's proposition to expand to other areas of the community represents an opportunity to
help support local businesses and remove barriers to their growth in the community. The
proposed amendment helps existing businesses to want to stay in the community instead of
looking to relocate to neighboring cities.
The vision of the Comprehensive Plan focuses on protecting and enhancing the environment and
encouraging the responsible use of our natural and energy resources with a goal to "Continue to
track, measure and reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions," and "Raise
awareness and expand opportunities for waste reduction, energy efficiency, stormwater
management and other environmental issues". By allowing redemption centers in more areas of
September 18, 2024
Page 8
the city, community members will have increased access and opportunities to contribute to waste
reduction efforts.
Since the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2013, the city has increasingly focused
on climate action. The city adopted the Climate Action and Adoption Plan in 2018, declared a
Climate Crisis in 2019 and Adopted the Accelerating Iowa City's Action Plan in 2020. The goal
set by these plans is to reduce carbon emissions by 45% from 2010 levels by 2030. The proposed
amendment would help further these goals by promoting waste reduction and contributing to the
community's recycling efforts.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that Title 14, Zoning Code be amended as illustrated in Attachment 1 to allow
redemption centers either as a provisional use subject to use specific standard or permitted use
in commercial and industrial zones.
Attachments
1. Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments
2. Local Jurisdiction Research
3. Map of Proposed Zones to Allow Redemption Centers
4. Map of Permitted vs. Provisional Zones
Approved by: +, • S1`I ,
Danielle Sitzman, AICP, Development Services Coordinator
Department of Neighborhood and Development Services
ATTACHMENT 1
Proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments
Attachment 1
Page 1
Draft Zoning Code Text
Underlined text is suggested new language. Strike -through notation indicates language to be
deleted
Amend Table 2C-1, Principal uses allowed in commercial zones, as follows:
Use Categories
Subgroups
CO-1
CN-1
CH-1
CI-1
CC-2
CB-2
CB-5
CB-10
MU
Redemption Center
PR
PR
P
Amend Table 2D-1, Principal uses allowed in industrial zones, as follows:
Use Categories
Subgroups
1-1
1-2
RDP
ORP
Redemption Center
P
P
P
P
Amend 14-4A-4, Commercial use categories, as follows:
J. Redemption Center Uses:
1. Characteristics: An indoor facility that collects bottles and cans from consumers,
distributes payment of the refund value, and may utilize compressing machines.
2. Examples: Redemption center facilities.
3. Accessory Uses: Offices: off street parking.
4. Exceptions:
a. Recycling processing facilities are classified as waste related uses.
b. Establishments that offer beverages for sale are classified as either sales
oriented retail, alcohol sales oriented retail, eating establishment, or drinking
establishment.
K J. Surface Passenger Services:
L K Vehicle Repair Uses:
Amend 14-4B-4, Specific approval criteria for provisional uses and special exceptions, as follows:
B. Commercial Uses:
24. Redemption Center Uses in the CO-1, CN-1, CC-2, CB-2, CB-5, CB-10, And MU Zone:
a. Redemption center uses are limited to five thousand (5,000) square feet gross
floor area.
b. Outdoor storage of any materials is not allowed.
Amend Table 5A-2, Minimum parking requirements for all zones, except the CB-5, CB-10,
Riverfront Crossings zones and Eastside Mixed Use District, as follows:
Use Categories
Subgroups
Parking Requirement
Bicycle Parking
Redemption Center
1 space per 1,000 square feet of floor area
None required
ATTACHMENT 2
Local Jurisdiction Research
Redemption Centers
wr
Ilt—ity
city
OR
ild-,imi .,
N.-
S.Il
N.-
Ddilitim.
=g .dl, d— not p—lill, . use Categ definition, ., d—l-ipti- of CG l,
Z.— All—d
CG - General C.Id.1 (P)
WA
Pl, ki,
N/A
......
./A
SMC S.b.,b- Mixed Use Community Center
IN
-IR Suburban Mixed Use Regional l- P)
Cedar Rapids,ld-,imi
W — ld
&1mg C11-- Facility: A lot ., parcel of 1.ld, ith ., without building; upon which used
..-Mlk are separated andtemp.rarily stored before [hey are sent[ PF.—Ill
TI M - -difti. -I Ind-l-i.1 Mixed Use
PIN -Public I-il P)
1 per 1rv/a,0M GIFA DR 1 per emploon
yIA ee
largest shift
T 1 11 1
�L - Light Ild-1.1 P)
.,T l'
Go -G—F.1 Ind--1.1 P)
ISW - Ild-1.1, Solid, and L—Fd— W— P)
o"g- City,
OR
Ild-F1.1
N...
IN...
GI- G—F.1 Ild-F1.1 P)
./A
WA
N/A
Auto Parking:
CM1- C...—imll Lillil (Q)
1 PeF — qft/-t building (-ld.Fli
CR- C...—imi Residential(L)
A)
—Yllm,,Pcff.
C— C.—,,imll P)
1 per 20ftffil,t building (-ldk�Fd
R)Hall
R—ii 5Iu
db ... J, gl,,, -1 I-il b,tl,,i,, -d III, PF111-Ilg 11 -111FIIII 11 II-It'e'dpt'.pl
c' - c--imil lt P)
h�
--h -11—
P-11h.d, OR
C.—FdA
and S--
b—kilg and Rdift --Mlk — l.t sold t. . -dill d,.p-.ff -- A Fdfilg
IX -Central Commercial P)
1hol I d
1,oll, ll—
l/�
RIM,lb Parking:
Rl,p.IF
.FiMll
drop-off -- itill Ill, hl,—h.ld F by A F ild-FIA
—blikh-- il l.t ildludl,d. Ul—ldl,ld drop-.ff-tI— far sIhl& ll—Fl. I,
I .
IG1 G-1.1 E.PI.yl, lt (L/C)
�hboffiood —h
—I I lo 00
L..9 Term: 2, .11 per 3,—sgR/net
--prult, A- l.t ildl
CG2 G-1.1 Employment(L/C(
odd,,,on lo - , _
—,h houl, 1
building ,. (-ld.,d A), 2 f 1 Pl,l ),500
1 lo—d E-
IG1 G-1.1 Ind-n. I (L/C)
G
�G2 —.1 Ild-rill, I (L/C)
'�d' I .1-
bl
qft/-t building area
Short T--: 2, 111 per 2,700 ft/la
hbll bu �d
E-no-o,— Ex
H HIll (L/C)
g ,. (-ldl,,d A), 2, ., 1 _ ,,CC
building
,ftffil,t building area (-ldl,,ld 3)
IP - I ld.A,i.1 -1, R—i-d (R))
V UC1 V i-d Use C.— I(R)
b-M
- U El Mixed Use-P 2 �R
:E
VuE2 Mixed u: Ellp�- R�
MU R1-Mi Reside. �:R
U::
:d
�MuR2mid uResidential R
b—
P—...
—blil that n-1 t.-.,d. the
CN1 - N,ghil C1. . . Idmi (All—d (A))
Aut. Parking: Maximum: -/Mcc
Tigard, OR
Commercial
Services
P—i— f i, —l— ll,—illmore than
Ill per -rw,,
CC -Comm nit, C—doi(A)
CG C...dm� G-1,I(A)
Bicycle, Parking: 1.C/L.0
.1 f
lo-d=.
CP P.fi-- /Adliliktti C..._ia'
(A)
Th—
M -CBD2 - Mixed Use C-1l, I —ihl— Di—
fir-T�.o.l.u.0110��—�floo,o�oollh-�u-,.�lh�'-'O.'=l'
(A) m UC - Mil Use C.—Idmi (A)
buid —00 luo refaf
:y bl
0- ofl. 0 :
A
Auto Parking:t
1ho
spaceqft/fl.., ar
—
I.d .... t.iI f.dift—dbyh, D11Li—CCommission f.dith, return
-=,.I Ild-n.1 (C)
L d,,,il P)
�GIL
Ie le1
Rim,lb-kill 1P,12,5—q—,f-t,f
m�
Bend, OR
N/A
empty beverage, .l— and mg 1-1— f b—,, h— ly person r"Pty
d Commercial
NIbeverage,
fl..r.—.riper food truck; 25 percent
—h—
.l— and p,yl,ltf the refund -1- f —, —.g, _lIl_CG-Lb.it
C_G--I C...Ildmi (P)
louo�—h -'hn I
be sheltered under
'beu.ne 'hene1uhl
'he
hrough d I
l
rh_ ildl,pl,ld— structure, .r similar
0' R - Office/Residential t (Limited (Q)
Aut. Parking:
NC-Nl,ighb.,h..dC...11dl,IL)
DRU 11 Low -Rise L)
pmernlfpr',= l'n 1grb
foo.ge 5.
Zllesomed :q
M 3.2 — per L.C1 flfl—
Residential
D RL2 id-ti.1 Low -Rise (L)
ol��=nboe
u:nlgl noo sprnmdoo�e to d,ngf.�d
Maximum: 1.3 — per i,—,ftli—
Business ..d
All indoor retail fidlit—dbyh, Dr,-LiqC.lCommission fl,dlith, return
l
H H
GI -General Industrial (L(
DreLo'o d
Gresham, OR
C.—rdmi
t.iI .—1,
f —pty beverage -l— ..d —mg &A— f bl,—.—, wherey
y=�`DCC
- D.—. . . Commercial C., (Permitted
and Trader.g,.l
empty ,ld r...,,p.y.f the refund fm, b=.g:t.—
IN)
=:u:,, follgll I lus,ne- o —1 T-de
Bicycle Parking:
DTIM - DowntownTr—it Mil P)
'e _ '00 uorele
L..g Term: 2, r 1 per 12,000 ft/fl-r
D MU -D..lt — Mixed U. P)
DRL' 2�=:on:b'noll le-d-lo7,:O�
^tea^d Re.i
area
Short Term: 2, r 1 per 12,000 ft/fl-r
DEM ..lt. . . L.l Mid-Ri- P)
DCL - D—l— C.—rd.1 L.—Ri- P)
BeavertonN/A
C,
Commercial
N/A
IN/A
I
I
I
N/A
I
I
11
Auto Parking;
plo III lollo nd —1 Ill— po--nl
am to I— p.p,ly
fld-fi,) -- hld—ml: Light I— involving outdoor storage .— and use involved in
Vi.i--space per staff
op�—d 1,
1doo-o—am a
Io�' I=mm
Des Moines,
IA
ld-,imi
Industrial
—it,
repair and .—t, directly t. buss —1,mg I.— Iq.ip—ll —plefi
—ldilg h.pI, machine shops; publish and lithography; redemption centers; —,,
11 Industrial Di -id Permitted with
Supplemental Use Rlg.l.ti—(P'))
o'luupoIr
do,lo—no-o,o po I I
1,ppli—1 III, parking f., office
p,fi,-i. (1 space,
Ill
dry-cleaning andiiie
—w cleaning plants; photofinishing laboratories and maintenance and .i,
12 Ild-l-W Di -id (P-)
400 sqft)
—i— that are not otherwise 1—ifimd.
P_d I
Rit,ll, -kill IN!—
R— --1 Ild..r fi.tili— f., obtaining .sd.i Ill,,gyfi—
—.—WS— and Wh.1-1l, (P)
D,b.q.,, IA
M.A-i
solid wane ., tlbd materials. Materials can be reused fi—hl,i—igimi purpose, packaged and
shipped elsewhere, reprocessed f., . different purpose ., converted into l, I. include.
Li Light Industrial(P)
H I -H I— Ild-l-W (P)
l/A
l/A
1 —pl.— shift
l/A
bimfi-lk p ' salvage yard.
V HlV.dil H I.W Ild-l-il, I (P)
a building ., p-imn thereof, than L— — f— , floor
CR %tlilCommercial
�11llDepot:
A.
f., the -Ill_lilg, and _ sorage of waste and ,,
'
C..�''C..P)d
Maximum N..1— f Required Sp.t— 1
Salem, OR
Ill
Waste
Ilk h— into —bl,---f., Th,t— —ydiltJ,P.,I— .tibd
-.
CB- Central (c)
Bw"SalemCentral Business (C)
10M —f-t
l/A
Related
. I 1,
—_ilt.i-d -Wdb-1,id,shd- no ..,Ith-th—yp f"Ztl,d
,uim'. mx'd —(P)
t-
Burch .sI—, tin ldeposited by members f the public d.Rtregular
timi (P)
Bicycle, Parking:
l f., further transferor p--mg elsewhere.
�Cdu
G General Indurtrial (P)
N—
Waste and salvage: This is . t,g.,f., I— that t.11-, A., -11 .— .,
p.,p `If marketing .'
I'— materials, or collect and p—I. tl.bll, .—nol, f., the purpose
M2 - Heavy Industrial (P)
All pnI—odp-ol udid,nO.—I
y pe
C,&,',lill
IA
ld-nmi
Waste and
Salvage,
imgth,n—mi i, them fl--d,.—tldp,,d—
L)E—pl— Off.- hauling facility, yard, t1mg and -_mg facility;
M2P - Planned lld-nmi (P)
ol
�
L-1—
pluuldoo
storage ..d pumping; and hazardous —tl, collectiotn sia. tu.
ATTACHMENT 3
Map of Proposed Zones to Allow Redemption Centers
N ,r
Proposed Zones to Allow Redemption Centers
w E
x
HWY 80 co V
J i+
f7j�
v
- MELROSEAVE,
' a hXk
sit
«
L o
w Of
Legend
U J,
o=
Iowa City Zoning
Community Commercial
General Industrial (I1)
Mixed Use (MU)
(CC2)
- Heavy Industrial (I2)
Commercial Office
Central Business
L� Services (CB2)
Research Development
0
(CO1)
Park (RDP)
Neighborhood
Central Business
Support (CB5)
Office Researh Park
0
(ORP)
Commercial (CN1)
0 Central Business (CB10)
Q Iowa City Limits
Highway Commercial
- Intensive Commercial
(CH1)
(CI1)
AW;Q
o<
z B
m
)31
5\�
m
0
IT
Se.
ry
e
5/
W cc
0 a
W
o
COURT ST
HERBERT
HOOVER HWY
AMERICAN1 7 A
��,� � ��_ � _,LEGION Rn11j1 11 L.1
420
ST SE
COLLISTE
BLVD
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
Data: https://maps.iowa-city.org/server/rest/services/GeneralData/IC_Zoning/
FeatureServer
Prepared by: Sanzida Rahman Setu, Planning Intern, NDS
Date: September 10, 2024
ATTACHMENT 4
Map of Permitted vs. Provisional Zones
N
Redemption Centers: Proposed Permitted v. Provisional
00
HWY80 _.w
I
m R'
- i �0
IWV RD MEtMSEAVE
r?o W O
wir
Aff
A 'tea
s
Legend
Permitted Use: CH-1, CI-1, I-1, I-2, RDP, ORP
Provisional Use: CO-1, CN-1, CC-2, CB-2, CB-5, CB-10, MU
0 Iowa City Limits
U)-
W
0
m
PARK RD
CHURCH ST 0,
F-
- Q z
r Q
�
O
N'- �'rAti Ua4
' p
9 �
�
20
420
ST SE
'
i
1
�Q
MCC OLLISTER '
BLVDs> _
w
J
O
PRE
sue%
0 0.5 1
2
Miles
Data: https://maps.iowa-city.org/server/rest/services/GeneralData/IC_Zoning/
FeatureServer
Prepared by: Sanzida Rahman Setu, Planning
Intern, NDS
Date: September 10, 2024
Planning & Zoning Commission
Correspondence
Submitted 9-18-24
CLJ shed
plastic-alumin um•glass
W3
r' V A
A Clean
caNew Model
n
www.canshed.com
A Modern Look
Sleek Storefront
Can Shed's latest model revolutionizes
redemption centers, merging efficiency
with style. Its sleek design and advanced
technology enhance both service speed
and aesthetics, offering a clean and
welcoming experience that raises the bar
for customer satisfaction.
Retail Focus
Can Shed's new model will focus on
bolstering its presence in retail settings
in order to capture more customers,
coalesce with municipalities, and change
the public's expectations regarding
redemption centers.
Sealed Floor
Finishes
Can Shed will. install and maintain a
sealed floor finish to preserve all
concrete floors during its tenancy.
IE
Sound -dampening
Panels
Can Shed will implement sound -
dampening panels in order to
maintain an orderly retail
environment for its customers,
co -tenants and landlords.
00000
IT,iII
A Dedicated
Team
The Can Shed team understands the
importance of a clean -look. Its staff
is committed to upholding the retail
standards set forth by city zoning
ordinances, landlords and co -tenants.
CL� shed
plastic- aIumin um•glass
VHERE IT MAKE;
ENTS TO RECYC
ac Lukins
(319) 389-3051
isaacga canshed.com
www.canshed.com
Planning and Zoning
September 18t", 2024
Page 1 of 9
CASE NO. REZ24-0007
Consideration of an amendment to Title 14, Zoning Code, to allow redemption centers in
commercial and industrial zones.
Conley began the staff report with some background information on why this code amendment is
being proposed. Iowa's beverage containers control law, which is commonly known as the bottle
bill, allows consumers to receive the return deposit when returning empty beverage containers to
a store or redemption center. In June 2022, amendments were made to the bottle bill which
allows stores to opt out of redeeming containers if a redemption center is nearby, or if other
criteria are met. Redemption centers are facilities where consumers may return empty beverage
containers and receive payment for the refund value of those containers. Sometimes redemption
centers can be affiliated with some grocery stores as in the North Dodge HyVee, which is located
in a CC-2 (Community Commercial) zone. Iowa City also has the Can Shed which is an existing
redemption center located at 611 Hollywood Boulevard, Unit Three, located in a General
Industrial (1-1) zone. The Can Shed would like to operate within a commercial zone in order to
expand their services, improve their collection processes and provide easier access to the
community. As a result, staff is proposing this code amendment to allow redemption centers to
exist in commercial and industrial zones.
Currently, the zoning code does not contain any specific language that assists with defining,
classifying or regulating redemption centers and redemption centers are allowed in some grocery
stores and therefore have been allowed in commercial zones already. However stand-alone
redemption center related uses have historically been classified as a Waste Related Use. The
Waste Related Use category in the zoning code is characterized by any uses that receive solid
or liquid waste from others for disposal on the site or for transfer to another location; uses that
collect sanitary waste; uses that recycle solid waste or recyclable materials; and uses that
manufacture or produce goods or energy from biological decomposition of organic materials.
Some examples of Waste Related Uses include recycling processing facilities, sanitary landfills,
limited use landfills, waste composting, hazardous waste collection, etc. Waste Related Uses are
currently allowed provisionally in the General Industrial (1-1) and Heavy Industrial (1-2) zones.
For the purposes of the Can Shed the intended use and operation of this facility is not
comparable to the types of intense industrial uses seen in the Waste Related Use category,
therefore staff is proposing a code amendment which creates a new use category called
Redemption Center, amends the table of allowable uses in commercial and industrial zones,
provides a definition for Redemption Center, creates provisional use specific standards and
outlines minimum parking requirements for this use category.
The proposed amendment focuses on creating a new use category, Redemption Center which
would be placed under the Commercial Use category in the zoning code. Redemption Centers
would be characterized as an indoor facility that collects bottles and cans from consumers,
distributes payment of the refund value and may utilize compressing machines. Examples of
Redemption Center facilities accessory uses include offices and off-street parking. This use
would include the following exceptions: recycling processing facilities will continue to be
classified as a Waste Related Use, establishments that offer beverages for sale are classified as
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 18, 2024
Page 2 of 7
either sales -oriented retail, alcohol sales -oriented retail, eating establishment or drinking
establishment. The characterization of this use category helps define and regulate what
Redemption Centers would look like if this proposed amendment were to be adopted in Iowa
City.
Conley next shared the proposed zones that would allow this use. Redemption Centers would be
allowed in commercial and industrial zones, either as a use permitted by right or a provisional
use subject to additional use standards. The additional standards for this use would help protect
surrounding properties and mitigate potential negative externalities associated with this use. In
addition to be being permitted by right in all commercial and industrial zones, staff is
recommending that Redemption Centers be permitted by right in the Highway Commercial (CH-
1) and Intensive Commercial (CI-1) zones, since one of the additional standards proposed
discusses the allowance of outdoor storage and both zones allow outdoor storage when certain
criteria are met, such as concealment of materials, setbacks and screening requirement.
Staff has created use specific standards for Redemption Centers to adhere to when provisionally
allowed in the commercial zones listed in the table. The proposed use specific standards are as
follows, first, size of use limited to no more than 5000 square feet, and two, outdoor storage of
any materials is not allowed. Staff determined it would be appropriate to apply these use specific
standards in commercial zones that may abut residential land uses to help maintain the
character and scale of intensity of the surrounding properties. Conley noted also the location
jurisdiction research that staff conducted demonstrates the size restriction in many of the cities
and also the prohibition of outdoor storage as a common practice. There are several jurisdictions
in Oregon that utilizes the 5000 square foot maximum. Additionally, the Iowa City zoning code
has a size limit for other commercial zone uses such as a size limit for indoor commercial
recreational uses in the CO-1 and CN-1 zones as well as office uses in the CN-1 zone.
Additionally, staff developed a proposed minimum park ratio of one space per 1000 square feet
of floor area with no bicycle parking required. The justification for this parking ratio in is that a lot
of the patrons that visit redemption center facilities will likely leave the space fairly quickly after
they drop off their cans and receive their deposit so due to the nature of the business, staff does
not anticipate that this use will require many parking spaces. Additionally, if the redemption
center does find that they need more parking than the minimum, they are able to add more if
they see fit.
Conley next reviewed the analysis section. Since the City's current regulations do not really
consider redemption centers staff developed a list of local jurisdictions to analyze how other
areas regulate this use. Specifically, staff found value in analyzing jurisdictions in the state of
Oregon and Iowa. In Oregon, redemption centers are most often considered a commercial use,
viewed as a service provided to the community. This use is allowed in a variety of commercial
and industrial zones. Then in Iowa, redemption centers are typically categorized as an industrial
use, not as the commercial land uses that exist in Oregon and envisioned by the Can Shed and
primarily the zones that this use would be allowed in is solely industrial. Some of the Oregon
cities that they looked at were Portland, Bend, Gresham, Tigard and a couple more. In Iowa staff
looked at Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Cedar Falls and a couple others. The local jurisdiction
research demonstrates the range of different regulatory approaches for redemption centers.
These jurisdictions highlight specific differences in how each city has decided to regulate
redemption centers in their zoning code. For this presentation Conley wanted to focus on the City
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 18, 2024
Page 3 of 7
of Portland, City of Bend and City of Gresham, as well as the City of Des Moines. Staff found
there were two main approaches taken by these local jurisdictions, either categorize redemption
centers as an existing use or to create a new use category. To start, the City of Portland chose to
view redemption centers as an existing commercial use in their zoning code under the Retail
Sales and Services category. Specifically, this use is considered repair -oriented and classified as
a recycling drop-off. The City of Portland defines recycling drop-off as a facility for the drop-off
and temporary holding of materials such as paper, cardboard, glass, metal, plastic, batteries and
motor oil. The Cities of Bend and Gresham take a different approach and they decided to
implement this land use as a standalone use category under the commercial use category in
their zoning code. Both cities chose to define redemption centers as an indoor facility that
facilitates the return of empty beverage containers. This differs from the City of Portland because
they do not accept such a large range of materials and only focus on the collection of empty
beverage containers. In Iowa, the City of Des Moines moves further away from both previous
approaches by considering redemption centers as an example of an Industrial Service. The City
of Des Moines code characterizes Industrial Service uses as uses that deal with repair,
maintenance and operation of large equipment. Overall, the variation of all these different
approaches demonstrates how drastically different each of these cities have chosen to regulate
redemption centers and also serve as a good example for staff to understand how to regulate
redemption centers in the proposed amendment.
Staff then looked at the use specific standards for this land use in each jurisdiction. Some cities,
for example, did not have any use specific standards, while others did. The City of Portland and
the City of Gresham do not have any additional use specific standards, but the City of Bend
decided to implement a size limit for 10%, or 2500 square feet, if the use is accessory and if it is
a single use it may occupy around 5000 square feet if approved through a conditional use permit.
The City of Des Moines includes standards that aim to mitigate any negative externalities of
industrial services. Therefore, analyzing the use specific standards of redemption centers in
other jurisdictions helped staff envision how the additional use standards would be appropriately
implemented into Iowa City zoning code. It's also important to consider the anticipated impact of
this proposed amendment so staff prepared two maps that visually represent how the proposed
amendment would apply to the land within the City. The first map shows the location of the zones
where the proposed amendment would allow redemption centers. Most areas are concentrated
in the southern portion of the City, since most of the City's commercial and industrial land is in
that area, and areas where the proposed amendment would allow redemption centers include
the center of the City, Old Town Village, Towncrest, and the area near the intersection of North
Dodge and 1-80. The second map shows where the proposed amendment would allow
redemption centers, either as a permitted or provisional use.
Next staff looked at the proposed amendment's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The
Comprehensive Plan includes a vision statement that supports a resilient economy, increases
tax base, stimulates job growth and promotes the overall people's prosperity and progress.
Additionally, the proposed amendment supports the following goals and strategies that are found
in the economic development section of the Comprehensive Plan. One of those goals is to
increase and diversify the property tax base by encouraging the retention and expansion of
existing businesses and attracting businesses that have growth potential and are compatible with
Iowa City's economy. A strategy that supports this goal is to provide an attractive economic
environment with streamlined business friendly culture by making regulatory and permitting
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 18, 2024
Page 4 of 7
processes clear, predictable and coordinated. The second goal would be encouraging a healthy
mix of independent locally owned businesses and national businesses. The strategy that
supports this is to retain and encourage growth of existing locally owned businesses is allowing
Redemption Centers uses in commercial zones which would make it easier for Redemption
Centers uses to locate in Iowa City. The Can Shed's proposition to expand to other areas in the
community represents an opportunity for the City to help support local businesses and remove
barriers to their growth in the community. The proposed amendment helps existing businesses to
also want to stay in the community instead of looking to relocate to other neighboring cities.
Another part of the vision statement includes protecting and enhancing the environment and
encouraging the responsible use of natural and energy resources. Environmental goals such as
to continue to track, measure and reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions,
raising awareness and expanding opportunities for waste reduction, energy efficiency,
stormwater management and other environmental issues. The goals that the proposed
amendment would also support if redemption centers are allowed in more areas of the City are
community members will have increased access and opportunities to contribute to waste
reduction efforts. Since the IC2030 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2013 the City has
increasingly focused on climate action. The City adopted the Climate Action and Adoption Plan in
2018 and a Climate Crisis was declared by the City in 2019 and adopted the Accelerating Iowa
City's Action Plan in 2020. These plans create a goal to reduce carbon emissions by 45% from
2010 levels by 2030 The proposed amendment would help further these goals by promoting
waste reduction and contributing to the community's recycling efforts.
Staff recommends that Title 14, Zoning Code be amended to allow redemption centers either as
a permitted use or a provisional use subject to use specific standards in commercial and industrial
zones.
Hensch is curious about why it's provisional for some of the commercial areas because before
the legislature did their misdeed and changed the law, all the convenience stores and grocery
stores accepted returns so why not be consistent with that. Conley responded by saying that
based off the local jurisdiction research that staff conducted, in addition to looking at the
provisional uses allowed in the zoning code, it seemed to be consistent and allowed the City the
ability to implement regulations that would help mitigate the negative externalities. Russett added
that the redemption centers that exist now in commercial zones are associated with some other
type of retail -oriented use, and with this amendment they are looking at stand alone, larger
facilities.
Hensch asked if then it's provisional use and additional standards are required, are there any
additional standards other than the two listed (5000 square feet and no outdoor storage). Conley
stated those are the two that staff are proposing. Hensch asked how those additional standards
would be applied or determined. Russett explained those would go before the Board of
Adjustment staff and would need to be determined as part of this text amendment. Hensch
asked what if the Commission or City Council were to propose additional standards in the future.
Russett stated they would have to go through another text amendment process.
Elliott asked if the City knows of any issues with the current situation where they're in commercial
zones within another building. Conley is not aware of any.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 18, 2024
Page 5 of 7
Quellhorst asked why the areas of Office, Research and Research Development Park are
included in the permitted versus provisional use category, it seems to be an odd use in that zone.
Conley stated there's not a lot of areas that are zoned Office, Research and Research
Development Park and those use categories allow kind of quasi -industrial uses in those zones so
staff felt it appropriate to allow it as a permitted use.
Craig wondered why the current location isn't sufficient, it is a pretty centrally located space.
Conley noted currently the Can Shed is located in the general industrial zone and they are just
wanting to expand to other areas of the City.
Elliott noted she does see people on bicycles that look like they're going to redeem their cans so
why no bicycle parking required.
Quellhorst noted in this case the Redemption Centers definition is like an automated redemption
centers, like at a HyVee with the machines versus a staffed redemption centers. Conley stated it
depends on how the City wants to define it, but they chose that redemption centers would be
defined as a staffed facility. Russett noted the definition doesn't expressly state that it needs to
be staffed, that's something that is hard to regulate through zoning, but the Can Ched will speak
to their proposal. They are proposing that it to be staffed, but also function similarly to ones with
the automated machines. Goers stated the other thing he would note is on the exceptions,
particularly the second bullet point, establishments that offer beverages for sale are classified,
etc. and if something falls into one of those categories it would not be considered a redemption
center under this definition.
Townsend stated regarding the North Dodge HyVee having a redemption center that has not
been operational for some time, if they wanted to restore that, as the machines are still there,
could they. Conley replied yes, that would still be permissible.
Craig noted they talk consistently about cans but there are also glass redemption, does the Can
Shed take glass or are they proposing to take glass. Russett confirmed yes, the Can Shed will
take anything that has a deposit.
Townsend has a comment or a concern that why can't she go to any store that she pays deposit
on bottles and cans and take them back to that place. Hensch stated that was the Iowa
legislature and their wisdom in changing the law.
Hensch opened the public hearing
Austin Geasland (Realtor, Q4 Real Estate) represents the Can Shed in their real estate
expansion throughout the corridor area. One thing he wanted to bring up is the space that they
are currently negotiating is on Gilbert Street, the old South Maple building and the space is 5500
square feet. Staff's amendment proposal is 5000 square feet maximum and while they
understand the logic and the reasoning there, in an effort to keep this deal alive and not lose it, is
there a way that they could structure the business and the layout to 5000 square feet of
redemption center and leave the other 500 square feet for employee offices, employee break
rooms, etc. That is a concern he has with the current wording of the amendment.
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 18, 2024
Page 6 of 7
Troy Willard (owner, Can Shed) stated what they're trying to do is raise their visibility, expand
their services for which they need more space than the building they're currently in, they're
maxed out. The current location is only about 2800-3,000 square feet. They have added a mobile
app where people can drop off bags of containers outside of staffed hours so they need an area
to drop those off as well. They also want to upgrade the equipment, the current automated
machines only allow cans to be put in one at a time but there's a technology out there for more of
a bulk dump. They take up about 25% of the time to count all the containers through and there's
also a bigger footprint for that type of machinery. Another reason for wanting to move is the
building Geasland was talking about has a lot more parking and there is a parking crunch where
they're currently at, and that is some of the motivation to move. Willard confirmed the North
Dodge HyVee hasn't redeemed containers since about 2020, back then and after the pandemic,
the Can Shed started doing more direct business representing HyVee as the redemption spot in
the City and took on all the responsibility for all the stores. Walmart is at the very end of using
their machines, they've used up their useful life and they have no interest in replacing them and
adding extra cost into their business model. He also wanted to note he understands the logic and
the explanations about the square footage thing and that would be a clarification he would want
to know before he makes any hard and fast decisions about leasing or buying space or building a
building. Also one of the natural progressions of the bottle bill in other states is they have been
taking it from carbonated and alcoholic beverages and moving to all beverage containers, which
would include water bottles, sport drinks, any type of non -carbonated container so he is trying to
look forward to that expansion and the space needs for that as well.
Craig asked if they would be moving their facility and just still have one. Willard confirmed that
was correct, they just need one that is more accessible and bigger and nicer. The new location
is only four blocks but it's in a major intersection and closer to the bank they use to grab money
to pay out to the customers so there's a lot of considerations going into that space there.
Criag asked if they work directly with commercial establishments, like a restaurant that sells cans
of beer, etc. Willard confirmed they do have business routes that they run, a couple times a
week to pick up cans and bottles from the downtown bar scene and any of the restaurants. They
generally cover an area anywhere from about 40 to 45 miles in and around Cedar Rapids.
They're mainly in Johnson County and Linn County, they spill into Iowa County a little bit as well
as Cedar County, Jones County, and Benton County.
Criag asked about the business model how do they make money if someone pays five cents for
a can and then gets the five cents back. Willard stated it is getting into some nuanced areas but
as a consumer buying stuff at HyVee, the distributor, Coke, Pepsi, Budweiser, originates the
deposit. When they sell it to the store, they collect the nickel from the store. The store collects a
nickel from the consumer and then the consumer gets their nickel back from the Can Shed or the
store. Then when the Can Shet takes the cans back to Coke, Pepsi or whatever distributor he
gets his nickel back and they pay him three cents on top of that. One of the misconceptions is
somehow the State's involved with that but it's totally managed financially through private
enterprises.
Craig asked what Coke does when they get their cans back. Willard explained they smash them
up, bail them up and recycle them. He noted they redeem about 106 million containers a year
through their five locations. They also go out and represent distributors and pick up other
Planning and Zoning Commission
September 18, 2024
Page 7 of 7
redemption centers and bring that material back to the facility in Cedar Rapids and combine it all
to make sure it's going back to end users and markets. Aluminum can turn into aluminum cans
again, the plastic has changed over the years, a lot of times it was being made into carpet
products but now it's going back to a bottle -to -bottle processing facility in Wisconsin. The glass
goes to Kansas City, there's a company down there that pulls all the brown glass out to make
beer bottles for Boulevard Brewery and the rest of it goes to a fiberglass insulation plant and gets
made into insulation.
Hensch closed the public hearing.
Craig moves to recommends that Title 14, Zoning Code be amended to allow redemption
centers either as a permitted use or a provisional use subject to use specific standards in
commercial and industrial zones.
Elliott seconded the motion.
Quellhorst noted it sounds like the Can Shed folks might want a space limit for provisional zones
in excess of 5000 square feet, is that something that staff would want to look into further or are
they still comfortable moving ahead with the 5000 square foot recommendation. Russett noted
they could still operate a 5000 square foot redemption center within that 5500 square foot space
they are looking at, the additional 500 square feet would just have to be used for some other
purpose, like their administrative purposes. However, if the Commission wants to increase it to
5500 staff doesn't really have any concerns with that either. She stated the one benefit of
sticking with 5000 is simply for consistency with how other size regulations are included in the
zoning code, 5000 is a very common number when looking at size limitations for uses.
Hensch noted right now it's limited to redeemable beverage containers but if the Iowa legislature
expands that to water bottles and other things they would have to come back and amend the
text. Russett stated yes, they would evaluate that at the time.
Hensch is in favor of approving this because this is truly an example of where they can facilitate
the public good. With the reduction of the redemption centers from what they formerly had; he
would have to guess that the amount going into the landfill has increased dramatically.
Additionally, a better location would make it better for the consumer in Iowa City and would be a
very positive action.
A vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.
Prepared by: Madison Conley, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5132
Ordinance No. 24-4940
Ordinance amending Title 14, Zoning Code, to allow redemption centers in
commercial and industrial zones. (REZ24-0007).
Whereas, the Iowa's Beverage Containers Control Law was amended in June 2022 to allow
stores to opt out of redeeming containers if there is a redemption center nearby or if other criteria
are met; and
Whereas, there is interest from a local business that operates a redemption center to expand
services, improve collection processes, and provide better access to the community; and
Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan includes a goal that aims to increase and diversify the property
tax base by encouraging the retention and expansion of existing businesses that are compatible
with Iowa City's economy and a strategy focused on creating an attractive economic environment
with streamlined, business -friendly culture by making regulatory and permitting processes clear;
and
Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan includes a goal that focuses on encouraging a healthy mix of
independent, locally -owned businesses and national businesses and a strategy focused on
retaining and encouraging the growth of existing locally -owned businesses; and
Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan includes a goal to raise awareness and expand opportunities
for waste reduction, energy efficiency, stormwater management and other environmental issues;
and
Whereas, the City Council adopted the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan in 2018 and declared
a Climate Crisis in 2019; and established a goal to reduce carbon emissions by 45% from 2010
levels by 2030; and
Whereas, the proposed amendments allow redemption centers to locate throughout the
community in commercial and industrial zones; and
Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the Title 14 Zoning
Code amendments at its meeting on September 18, 2024; and
Whereas, it is in the City's best interest to adopt this ordinance.
Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa:
Section I. Iowa City Code Title 14 "Zoning Code" is hereby amended by deleting the strikethrough
text, adding the underlined text, and renumbering subsequent paragraphs accordingly:
A. Amend Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed In Commercial Zones in Section 14-2C-2:
Commercial Zones, Land Uses Allowed, by adding the following underlined text:
Ordinance No. 24-4940
Page 2
Table 2C-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Commercial Zones
Use Categories
Subgroups
CO-1
CN-1
CH-1
CI-1
CC-2
CB-2
CB-5
CB-10
MU
Redemption Center
PR
PR
P
P
PR
PR
PR
PR
PR
B. Amend Table 2D-1: Principal Uses Allowed In Industrial And Research Zones in Section 14-
2D-2: Industrial And Research Zones, Land Uses Allowed, by adding the following underlined
text:
Table 213-1: Principal Uses Allowed in Industrial And Research Zones
Use Categories
Subgroups
1-1
1-2
RDP
ORP
Redemption
Center
P
P
P
P
C. Amend 14-4A-4: Commercial Use Categories, by adding the following underlined text and
deleting the following text with a strikethrough:
J. Redemption Center Uses:
1. Characteristics: An indoor facility that collects bottles and cans from consumers
distributes payment of the refund value, and may utilize compressing machines.
2. Examples: Redemption center facilities.
3. Accessory Uses: Offices; off street parking.
4. Exceptions:
a. Recycling processing facilities are classified as waste related uses.
b. Establishments that offer beverages for sale are classified as either sales
oriented retail, alcohol sales oriented retail, eating establishment, or drinking
establishment.
JK. Surface Passenger Services:
KL. Vehicle Repair Uses:
D. Amend 14-413-413: Commercial Uses, by adding the following underlined text:
24. Redemption Center Uses in the CO-1, CN-1, CC-2, CB-2, CB-5, CB-10, And MU Zone:
a. Redemption center uses are limited to five thousand (5,000) square feet gross floor
area.
b. Outdoor storage of any materials is prohibited.
Ordinance No. 24-4940
Page 3
E. Amend Table 5A-2: Minimum Parking Requirements For All Zones, Except The CB-5, CB-10,
Riverfront Crossings Zones And Eastside Mixed Use District in Section 14-5A-4: Minimum
Parking Requirements, by adding the following underlined text:
Table 5A-2: Minimum Parking Requirements For All Zones, Except The C113-5, C113-10, Riverfront
Crossings Zones And Eastside Mixed Use District
Use Categories
Subgroups
Parking Requirement
Bicycle Parking
Commercial uses:
Quick vehicle
servicing
...
Redemption Center
1 space per 1,000 square feet of floor area
None required
Retail
...
...
Section II. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section III. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a
whole or any section, provision or part thereof no adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval, and
publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this 4th day of November
M
Attest:
City Clerk
2024.
Approved by
City Attorn 's ffice — 10/09/2024
Ordinance No. 2 4 - 4 9 4 0
Page 4
Moved by Dunn , seconded by Alter , that the
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS
x
X
X
X
-x
X
X
First Consideration:
ABSENT:
October 15, 2024
Alter
Bergus
Dunn
Harmsen
Moe
Salih
Teague
VoteforPassage: AYES:A1ter, Bergus, Dunn, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Second Consideration: ------------------
Moved by Dunn , seconded by Bergus , that the rule requiring ordinances to be
considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be
finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted
upon for final passage at this time.
AYES: Alter, Bergus, Dunn, Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague
NAYS: None
ABSENT: None
Date Published: November 14, 2024
Item Number: 10.b.
CITY OF IOWA CITY
COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November 4, 2024
Ordinance amending Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety", to create a new Chapter 11,
entitled "Kratom", to prohibit its sale and distribution. (Pass and Adopt)
Prepared By: Eric Goers, City Attorney
Reviewed By: Kirk Lehmann, Asst. City Manager
Fiscal Impact: None
Staff Recommendation: No recommendation
Commission Recommendations: N/A
Attachments: Ordinance
City Council correspondence from David Berg and Mac Haddow - American
Kratom Association, and Susan Vileta - Health Educatior, Johnson County
Public Health
Executive Summary:
At their July 16, 2024 meeting, the City Council directed the City Attorney to draft an
ordinance banning the sale and distribution of kratom products within City limits, in an effort
to protect the health, safety, and welfare of area residents. After reviewing the draft
ordinance at their August 6th and 20th meetings, Council decided to proceed with the kratom
ban, as part of a larger discussion on regulating tobacco retailers.
Background / Analysis:
Kratom is listed as a "drug of concern" by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration. The
federal Food and Drug Administration has concluded from available information, including
scientific data, that kratom is a new dietary ingredient for which there is inadequate
information to provide reasonable assurance that such ingredient does not present a
significant or unreasonable risk of illness or injury. Based on determinations by the FDA,
kratom is not lawfully marketed as a dietary supplement and cannot be lawfully added to
conventional foods. There are no drug products containing kratom or its two main chemical
components that are legally on the market in the U.S. The FDA has not approved any
prescription or over-the-counter drug products containing kratom or its two main chemical
components. Correspondence is included in Council packet.
Prepared by: Eric Goers, City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030
Ordinance Number
Ordinance amending Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety", to create a
new Chapter 11, entitled "Kratom", to prohibit its sale and distribution.
Whereas, kratom is listed as a "drug of concern" by the federal Drug Enforcement
Administration; and
Whereas, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has warned people not to use kratom
because of possible harm it can cause; and
Whereas, according to the Mayo Clinic, kratom hasn't been shown to be safe or to treat any
medical conditions; and
Whereas, according to the Mayo Clinic, poison control centers in the United States received
more than 3,400 reports about use of kratom from 2014 through 2019; and
Whereas, according to the Mayo Clinic, kratom has known side effects, including nausea and
vomiting, liver damage, high blood pressure, dizziness, hallucinations, delusions, depression,
tremors, and seizures; and
Whereas, according to the Mayo Clinic, when a pregnant person uses kratom, the baby may be
born with symptoms of withdrawal and need treatment; and
Whereas, municipalities in Iowa have the authority to preserve and improve the safety, health,
and welfare of its residents; and
Whereas, it is in the best interest of the City to prohibit the sale and distribution of kratom within
City limits.
Now, therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Iowa City, Iowa:
Section I. Amendments
1. Title 6, entitled " Public Health and Safety", is amended by adding the following Chapter 11,
entitled, "Kratom":
Chapter 11
Kratom
6-11-1: Definitions.
As used in this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
Distribute: To furnish, give away, exchange, transfer, deliver or supply, whether or not for
monetary gain or other consideration.
Kratom product: Any part of the plant Mitragyna speciosa, whether growing or not, or any
food product, food ingredient, dietary ingredient, dietary supplement, or beverage that
contains any part of the plant Mitragyna speciosa or any extract, synthetic alkaloid, or
synthetically derived compound of such plant or its leaf including, but not limited to, any
powder, capsule, pill, beverage, or other edible product.
Sell or sale: To furnish, exchange, transfer, deliver, or supply for monetary gain or other
consideration.
6-11-2: Sale or distribution of kratom prohibited:
Ordinance No.
Page 2
It is unlawful to sell, advertise for sale, offer for sale, or distribute, directly or indirectly,
any kratom product, or item labeled as a kratom product, in the City.
6-11-3: Penalties:
Any violation of this chapter shall be considered a simple misdemeanor or a municipal
infraction punishable by a civil penalty of seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00) for a first
offense and one thousand dollars ($1,000) for second and subsequent offenses.
Section 11. Repealer. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this
Ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 111. Severability. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be
invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a
whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional.
Section IV. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and
publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this day of , 2024.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved by
City Attorn AsOffice — 09/24/2024
Ordinance No.
Page 3 —
Moved by , seconded by_________, that the
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Alter
Bergus
Dunn
Harmsen
Moe
Salih
Teague
First Consideration: October 1, 2024
Vote for Passage: AYES: Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague
NAYS: Alter
ABSENT: Bergus , Dunn
Second Consideration: October 15, 2024
VoteforPassage: AYES: Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague
NAYS: Alt -or, Rarg�, nimn
/I\C 111011�
Date Published:
Moved by , seconded by , that the rule requiring ordinances to be
considered and voted on for passage at two Council meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be
finally passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived, and the ordinance be voted
upon for final passage at this time.
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Ordinance No. _
Page 3
Moved by Harmsen , seconded by Moe , that the
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Alter
Bergus
Dunn
Harmsen
No vote taken
Moe
Salih
Teague
First Consideration: October 1, 2024
Vote for Passage: AYES: Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague
NAYS: Alter
ABSENT: Bergus, Dunn
Second Consideration: October 15, 2024
Vote for Passage: AYES: Harmsen, Moe, Salih, Teague
NAYS: Al tar, Rargiic _ Tlnnn
ni `)029011=
Date Published:
Kellie Grace
From: David Berg <davidberg98642@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 6:48 PM
To: *City Council
Subject: Kratom killed my son - please consider wisely!
A
* * Thi�s-emai' originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or
attachments. **
Hello, I heard through a friend that there is a hearing tonight with the objective to consider the pros and cons of
regulating or outlining the purchase of Kratom. I will be up front, I am not a resident of your city, but I have become a
vocal advocate for the restriction of Kratom sales. It has been just two weeks under a year since we got a knock on our
door on a beautiful Friday afternoon, a Chaplin was there and he informed us that our 20 year old beautiful son had died
in his sleep. We were completely floored, he had no history of illegal drug use and was in perfect health. He was a
beloved brother and son, the oldest of our five children. It took six agonizing months to get the testing back to prove
that he died from Kratom toxicity, which is what happens when you take Kratom over a prolonged period of time. it
slowly becomes less and less effective, and so a person must increase their dosage in order to get the same effects. In
our sons case, he used it for energy and to combat anxiety, and although he never admitted it, I know now from study
that it causes euphoria when used higher doses, and I'm sure he liked that feeling. it is available at gas stations, tobacco,
shops, and online, with very little oversight. The FDA has said that this substance has many concerns and should not be
used until further testing can be done, so I implore you to help take measures so that another family in your city doesn't
get that same knock on a beautiful Friday afternoon and have their lives completely shattered
ff
I am more than happy to share more of my story by email or phone call, my phone number is (360) 857-8787.
Respectfully,
David Berg
Sent from Gmail Mobile
CAN k*w
AMERICAN KRATOM ASSOCIATION
4 a A M E R I CA N K R ATO M
13575 Heathcote Blvd STE 320
ASSOCIATION
�s'so
Gainesville. VA20155
cl l%'O
www.americankratom.org
October 6, 2024
-, o
Mayor Bruce Teague
Iowa City City Council
4,`=
410 E Washington St
_ co `
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mayor Teague and Members of the Iowa City Council:
I write on behalf of the American Kratom Association (AKA) following the City CounciI's
vote on October 1, 2024, to advance the proposal to ban kratom in Iowa City for future
consideration. We heard the Council members concerns about the safety profile of
kratom, and we would like to assure you that the AKA will provide additional,
scientifically backed information to help address these concerns. Our organization is
fully committed to ensuring that any deliberations about kratom are informed by the
latest research and evidence regardingkratom's safety and responsible consumer use.
However, the immediate purpose of this letter is to address a matter of grave concern
that has surfaced during the public comment process on this issue. We have received
reports from several Iowa City residents whose identities were misappropriated in
fraudulent emails that were submitted in opposition to the proposed kratom ban. These
emails falsely presented the individuals as opponents of the ban, when in fact, they did
not write or authorize those communications. The AKA takes such illegal conduct very
seriously, as it undermines the integrity of the democratic process and erodes trust in
the public discourse on important policy decisions.
The AKA regularly engages in advocacy campaigns in response to local government
entities considering regulations or bans on kratom. In this instance, the AKA sent an
advocacy alert that contained the names and email addresses of the Iowa City City
Council and encouraged those Iowa residents to contact each member of the Council.
We did not initiate a national campaign because we believe the actions of the Iowa City
City Council would have an impact on both City residents and residents of the state of
Iowa. The AKA has never asked any pro-kratom advocate to falsify attribute an
advocacy message or misappropriate the identity of any other person.
The AKA will file a formal complaint with the Iowa City Police Chief regarding these
incidents. We will fully cooperate with the investigation and will request a digital copy of
every email submitted to the Council so that the IP addresses associated with these
fraudulent submissions can be trace to their source. It is crucial to identify whether
these actions were taken by a well-intentioned pro-kratom advocate who resorted to
illegal methods or by an anti-kratom advocate attempting to sabotage the credibility of
our advocacy efforts. Regardless of the motivation, such actions are unacceptable and
must be thoroughly investigated.
Mayor Bruce Teague
Iowa City City Council
October 6, 2024
Page 2 of 2
Unfortunately, this is not the first time we have encountered such unethical tactics.
During an advocacy campaign with the Virginia Board of Pharmacy, my identity, as the
AKA Senior Fellow on Public Policy, was misappropriated in fake comments, and other
high -profile kratom advocates experienced similar fraudulent activities.
In a separate and particularly egregious case, a prominent anti-kratom trial lawyer
deliberately doctored a photograph, replacing the original image of me with U.S.
Senator Joe Manchin where he then inserted his image over Senator Manchin, all in an
effort to falsely imply a personal friendship between himself and me for the apparent
purpose of undermining my credibility in the kratom community.
The AKA believes that it is vital to protect the integrity of public policymaking from these
kinds of bad actors. We lookforward to working with the City Council and the Iowa City
Police Department to ensure that the ongoing deliberations regarding kratom are based
on factual, transparent, and legally sound inputfrom all stakeholders.
Thankyou for your attention to this serious matter. We will continue to provide
additional information regarding the safety of kratom, and we hope to engage in
constructive dialogue with the Council in the weeks ahead.
Sincerely,
/ * k4kr�
Mac Haddow
Senior Fellow on Public Policy
American Kratom Association
Email: mh.a.dd.owP-americ_an-kCatom org
Phone: (571) 294-5978
cc: Megan Alter, Councilor, At -Large
_
Laura Bergus, Councilor, District A,'
Andrew Dunn, Councilor, District C
Shawn Harmsen, Councilor, District B--
Josh Moe, Councilor, At -Large
Mazahir Salih, Mayor Pro Tem, At -Large
co
Dustin Liston, Police Chief
Geoff Fruin, City Manager
Eric Goers, City Attorney
Kellie Grace
From: Susan Vileta <svileta@johnsoncountyiowa.gov>
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2024 10:32 AM
To: *City Council
Subject: Kratom
1
RISIt
** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or
attachments. **
Unfortunately I will not be able to attend the City Council meeting next week, but wanted to share the following. It's
true that compared to deaths from other drugs, a smaller number of deaths have been linked to kratom products and
those nearly all involve other drugs or contaminants. However, substituting one addictive drug for a different one that is
unregulated would not be considered harm reduction in the sense it's meant.
From my review, while many people anecdotally say Kratom helped them stop using Opioids, they still use Kratom
often/daily. While there is some research saying it could be a possible harm reduction agent, there needs to be
significantly more research conducted and regulation implemented. It is an unregulated addictive product that hasn't
been shown to be safe or approved to treat any medical conditions. The FDA has warned people not to use kratom
because of possible harm it can cause. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration calls kratom a drug of concern.
In addition, we should be mindful that some people believe kratom can be helpful for them, and therefore, they might
feel ignored/unvalued if it is banned. If you proceed with a ban, it is important to couple it with outreach about evidence
based treatment and support available in Johnson County. Community Family Resources and Johnson County Public
Health can assist with this outreach and education.
Thanks,
Susan Vileta
https_//www.fda.2ov/news_ev_ents/�pubLic-health=focus/fda=and-kratom
United Nations, Commission on Narcotic Drugs. Summary�f assessments, findin s and
recom_manda#ivns.Qf.h 4! World�la_lth._.0. r_ga.Rit1o�'s [WHQyxpgmmlS e on Drug
Dependence (EC-D-D 11-15-0-0-t-ober 2021. Vienna; 9-10 December 2021. Report No.
E/CN.7/2021 /CRP.12
Post S, Spitler HA, Chounthirath T, Smith GA. Kratom exposures reporters to United States poison control
centers:.2011-2QJ7. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2019;57(10):847-854. doi:10.1080/15563650.2019.1569236
Henningfield JE, Grundmann O, Babin JK, Fant RV, Wang DW, Cone EJ. Risk of death associated with
kratom useC-QMPared to apio[ds. PrevMed. 2019;128:105851. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105851
United Nations, Expert Committee on Drug Dependence. Pre -review report: Kraiorn (Mytragyna
speclo��),1�itragynine_and 7-hy._Qxy.tr�gynine. 11-15 October 2021. Geneva.
1
Leong Bin Abdullah MFI, Singh D, Swogger MT, Rahim AA, Vicknasingam B. The prevalence of psychotic
symptoms in Icratflm (Mitragyna speciosa korth) users in._Malaysia. Asian J Psychiatr. 2019;43:197-201.
doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2019.07.008
Kronstrand R, Roman M, Thelander G, Eriksson A. unintentiarlaLfa.ta,l_intoxicafions with mitragynine a -ad
0-desmethyltramado1 from the herbal blend I.<_.ry�tvn. JAnal Toxicol. 2011;35(4):242-247.
d o i :10.1093/a n atox/35.4.242
How was your experience today? Your feedback will help us improve!
Susan Vileta I She, Her, Hers
Health Educator
Johnson County Public Health 855 South Dubuque Street I Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone: 319-356-6040 1 Direct Line: 319-688-5910
svileta(cr?,johnsoncountyiowa.clov https://www.mohnsoncountviowa.gov/department-of_public-health
1b'V
�'k QU ITLI N E
MY LIFE My QUIT
GREATER IOWA CITY, INC.
2024Ambassador
PLEASE BE GREEN
Notice of Confidentiality: This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s)
or entity to whom it is addressed. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it from your
system.
This message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18
U.S.C. sections 2510-2521, and contain information intended for the specified individual(s) only. This
information is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review,
dissemination, copying, or the taking of any action based on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete
the original message.
1 � t
*VM
77Q1r®®�� City Council Supplemental Meeting Packet
-►�.�
4 L
CITY OF IOWA CITY November 4, 2024
Information submitted between distribution of the meeting packet on Thursday and 4:00 pm on
Friday.
Late Handout(s):
9.b. Zoning Code Amendment - Redemption Centers - See revised comment.
Comment: On September 18, 2024, the Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended approval of REZ24-0007 by a vote of 7-0. Approval will amend
Title 14, Zoning Code, to allow redemption centers in commercial and industrial
zones. Staff is requesting expedited action.
10.b. ratom Ban - See correspondence from Stephanie Taylor, American Kratom
Association
November 4, 2024 City of Iowa City
it�- ice, ,6
Kellie Grace Late Handouts Distributed
From: staylor@americankratom.org
Sent: Friday, November 1, 2024 12:10 PM 02 l
To: *City Council (Date)
Subject: Digital Packet regarding Kratom Science and Policy
Attachments: We sent you safe versions of your files; AKA Policy Brief on FDA Shift on Kratom and
CBD-2.pdf; AKA_ Policy Brief on kratom dose -finding study_022324_vfinal.pdf;
AKA -Policy Brief on FDA Admission on Kratom Dangers_022324_vfinal (1)-1.pdf;
American Kratom Association_Kratom Science Update Redesign_12.8.23_vfinal.pdf;
Bergman Letter.pdf; FDA Kratom Danger Not Determined.pdf,- Statement on the science
of kratom prod ucts_FINAL.pdf
RISE{
** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or
attachments. **
Mimecast Attachment Protection has deemed this file to be safe, but always exercise caution when opening files.
Good Afternoon Iowa City Council,
I am writing on behalf of the American Kratom Association regarding the third reading of the Ordinance to
Prohibit kratom sales to be discussed at the upcoming meeting on November 4th.
The American Kratom Association represents kratom consumers nationwide and advocates for the appropriate
regulation of kratom, not banning kratom.
I have attached the following documents:
-A Scientific Update on kratom
-Briefing paper on the new FDA regulatory approach to kratom - regulate not ban
-Briefing paper on the FDA Admission on Kratom Dangers with supporting documentation
-Briefing paper on the kratom dose -finding study
-Statement on the science of kratom products
-Letter from Congressman Jack Bergman (R-MI) concerning the impact state and local bans have on veterans
We hope you will take the time to review this information and let science guide your decision. Please feel free to reach out
with any questions you might have.
Best Regards,
Stephanie Taylor
Research and Project Assistant, The American Kratom Association
540-300-1605 1 stavlor(67a americankratom.org
13575 Heathcote Blvd #320 Gainesville VA 20155
4)
AMERICAN KRATOM ASSOCIATION
FDA Deputy Commissioner Signals Significant Shift in FDA Policy
on Kratom and CBD Regulation.
New regulatory approach exposes deep flaws in FDA's decades -long claims about
kratom being dangerous as new FDA study finds "kratom appears to be well
tolerated at all dose levels." (presented by FDA at scientific conference, February 2024)
M._
oo0o0o
ALLIANCE FOR
A STRONGER FDA
■ CBD and kratom are being marketed in almost every neighborhood you go into.
■ FDA has been thinking about what the regulatory framework for these products
should look like.
■ Based on what the FDA knows about CBD, in particular, the Agency does not think
that those products would be able to meet the safety standards currently in place for
foods and dietary supplements today.
• Given wide availability of both CBD and kratom, the FDA wants to make sure consumers
are educated on what they are taking and that adverse events are reported and
minimized — especially in children.
• The FDA wants to work with Congress on this effort, which includes how to ensure that
CBD and kratom products are clearly labeled with all ingredients, and that these
products are not making their way into the hands of children,
• All adverse events need to be quickly and accurately reported in such away that the
FDA can identify any trends.
• FDA wants to know who is making the products containing kratom and CBD, where
they are being made, and that they are manufactured or produced in away that is safe.
• This effort will take collaboration with the Hill and with stakeholders so the FDA can
determine what regulations are needed to ensure the safety of the products and the
level of oversight that will be required.
The FDA announced on January 16,
2024, it will accept proposalsto conduct
a Human Abuse Potential ("HAP") study
to assess the potential severity of a
kratom dependency or addiction liability
The HAP study is authorized only
because the dose finding study showed
kratom can be safely ingested.
An FDA scientist reported on some of the results of the
dose finding study at the Third Annual Kratom Symposium
on February 14-15, 2024. Researchers report that some of
the policy staff atthe FDA were "profoundly disappointed"
atthe lack of adverse events that occurred among human
participants in the dose finding study, where the ascending
doses gotto 12 grams of kratom material before just 2 of
the participants experienced some nausea. That level of
kratom consumption is extraordinarily high among current
kratom consumers.
It is reported thatthe scientists at FDA accepted
the safety data for its evidentiary value and are
now preparing to make a public presentation
on the results ofthe dose finding study at a
scientific conference in the fall of 2024.
That dose finding study data cleared the way
for the HAP studyto be advertised and that is
expected to be completed within 2 years. It is
important to note thatthe dose finding study
had to demonstrate kratom can be safely
consumed before the HAP study could
ethically be advertised.
Kratom researchers are excited that the next
level of studies on the safety and addiction
liability of kratom extract products, and safe
consumption levels can be identified, and the
limits on kratom plant constituents in a kratom
product before it is deemed to be adulterated.
Those needed dose finding and HAP studies for
kratom extract products will take several years
after the current HAP study is completed.
i. https://grants,gov/search -results-deta il/351644
ii. https://pharmacy.uf.edu/third-international-kratom-symposium/
hi, https://www,fda,gov/files/drugs/published/Botanical-Drug-Development-Guidance-for-Industry.pdf
9 The American Kratom Association 1 13575 Heathcote Boulevard, Suite 320 1 Gainesville, VA 20155 www.americankratom.org— www.kratomanswers.org
0 AMERICAN
KRATOM
ASSOCIATION
POLICY BRIEF
February 2024
The FDA has repeatedly made claims overthe past 12 yearsthat kratom is a dangerous substance that
should be classified as a Schedule I substance underthe federal Controlled Substances Act("CSA"). Yet,
when called by a Federal Judge to present witnesses and testimony under oath in a case in the Southern
District of California at a Hearing on February 8, 2024, on whether kratom is dangerous, the FDA refused to
attend the Hearing or even provide under oath any documents ortestimonyto the Court)
The explanation provided by the U.S. Attorney to the Court explaining the FDA's decision stated
the following:
They [FDA] have refused to provide us with witnesses or documents to support
our position ... The reason they gave was that they have not yet made a
determination regarding whether kratom is dangerous."
The FDA has repeatedly made claims on its website and in recommendations to the Drug Enforcement
Administration ("DEA")to schedule kratom's constituents as Schedule I substances. The first rejection was
issued by the DEA on October 13, 2016"with a finding thatthe evidence and data was insufficientto justify
scheduling.
Then, on August 16, 2018, the Assistant Secretary of Health at the US Department of Health and Human
Services issued a scathing withdrawal letteron the FDA'ssecond attemptto schedule kratom'sconstituents
underthe CSA."' When confronted by former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb on the decision. Dr. Giroir
called the FDA recommendation "embarrassingly poorevidence
and data"."'
Finally, the FDA took its crusade to ban kratom to the international stage where the standards of
scheduling are less rigorous than underthe federal CSA. On December 21-, 2021, the WHO's Expert
Committee on Drug Dependence unanimously concluded there was "insufficient evidence" to justify
international scheduling of kratom and refused to even authorize a critical review.
r- 3:,3-rt0179-TWR�IedPa0e ID 1032 Exhibit 6; United Stat. ofAmenca, Plaintiff,. Nine2Five-ILC Scbosti,,: GW11ery(2), Defendants
nttL/W4 rederalregeae:_yov,decumentJ201o'0/13/2G16-£a65`/waithorawa.-ofnot;�e-cfintent-to-ten;poiaiityp!a• mltragyn.ne-nr�d•7-hydic.tyindrugyninc•into
iutp�//sta+icl :quaiespacr- cr••n/s;and54d50ceee4b0579%634869c;/L',0145eah6df5° 7,?!a7cfrl/1a'1^47e9369S/dhillon8lr 2018•rs=n^^,e•lefret-froin•a;_h•�,uim
cgou pdf
.aps /mw,r com/DrGiroar/ctatus'13958741143726 102533
`FxpPrr. Conan on Gr.:q Depen dance Summary of Assessments, Finany •nd Re-_ommendations of the 4=4th ECDP 12021 ), iv,jw Nc =4
http /cdn why .it n.•dia/riots!defauh. ,oV r_e!convoll^d-s�•bstanrr •-'44eCdd_Jnsy_anr pdf
9 - Preface :1
' Jack Henningfteld, PhD Kratom science increased almost exponentially over the past
Vice President, Research, Health decade with more than 450 new scientific publications
Policy and Abuse Liability, Pinney
Associates, Adjunct Professor,
addressing kratom safety, benefits, and abuse potential since
Behavioral Biology, Dept of
Psychiatry and Behavioral Science,
early 2018, and more than 100 since the 2022 Kratom Science
The Johns Hopkins University
Update developed.
School of Medicine
was
z Marilyn Huestis, PhD
Science and Policy Advisor, Clinical
Pharmacology and Toxicology,
Cannabinoid and Other CNS-Active
Pharmacotherapies, Senior Fellow,
Institute on Emerging Health
Professions, Thomas Jefferson
University, Honorary Professor, Barts
and the London School of Medicine
and Dentistry, Queen Mary
University of London, President,
Huestis & Smith Toxicology, LLC
3Oliver Grundmann, PhD
Clinical Professor of Medicinal
Chemistry, University of Florida
College of Pharmacy, President -
Elect, American College of Clinical
Pharmacology
Albert Garcia-Romeu, PhD
Associate Professor, Psychiatry and
Behavioral Sciences, The Johns
Hopkins University School of
Medicine, Guest Researcher,
National Institute on Drug Abuse
Intramural Neuroimaqinq Research
The science provides evidence to guide consumer safety leading to kratom
regulations now passed into law in eleven states, with many more states
considering such laws. As discussed below, these new scientific findings also led
the United States Department of Health and Human Services (US DHHS) to
reverse its position on Controlled Substances Act (CSA) scheduling and, in August
2018, to rescind its earlier scheduling recommendation to the Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA).
More recently in 2021, the World Health Organization Expert Committee on Drug
Dependence (WHO ECDD), thoroughly reviewed all the evidence for international
scheduling including written and oral statements from scientists around the world.
The WHO ECDD concluded there was insufficient evidence to recommend
scheduling kratom, meaning the available data did not show public health risks of
kratom warranting international restrictions.
What is clearly needed Is balanced regulation to ensure that kratom
products purchased by consumers are pure and unadulterated,
meeting the same types of standards applied to other food products,
and even bottled water. Steps toward such standards were taken in
states that passed their own versions of kratom consumer protection act
laws. Ultimately, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) needs to
develop national performance standards for kratom as it does for other
products. Such standards will help ensure access to kratom products that
are appropriately marketed and are without contaminants and adulterants
that might pose safety risks.
This Is the first annual update of the October 2022 Kratom Science
Update. Many new studies related to kratom safety, the effects of its
naturally occurring constituents, and the benefits reported by kratom
consumers provide the basis for this 2023 update. The recent findings
may also support implementation of regulatory efforts that were passed
into law in many states. Updates are provided at the end of each
subsection.
Specific regulatory and policy approaches
supported by new evidence.
6
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) request to schedule kratom (specifically, mitragynine and 7-
hydroxymitragynine) In Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), was reversed by the lead
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) official charged with Controlled Substances Act
recommendations to the DEA, namely, the Assistant Secretary of Health, Dr. Brett Giroir. Dr. Giroir requested
a review of the evidence pertaining to kratom scheduling and safety, and concluded In August 2018, that the
evidence did not support Schedule I placement. See a summary of the findings of the review In Dr. Girolr's
formal 2018 scheduling rescission letter to the DEA at:
YJ 1% 0 httu:flslallcl_s quares ace.comistaticf54d50ceee4b05797b34869cfft/60145eab6df59e7e36a7cfcll16119476936
k9a WE
95Idhilton-8.16.2018-resggnse-letter-from ash- dm iroir_pff.
The conclusions of the Assistant Secretary of Health were
consistent with those of the National Institute on Drug Abuse
(NIDA), which states on its Kratom Facts webpage that "While
there are no uses for kratom approved by the FDA, people
report using kratom to manage drug withdrawal symptoms and
cravings (especially related to opioid use), pain, fatigue and
mental health problems.
NIDA supports and conducts research to evaluate potential
medicinal uses for kratom and related chemical compounds."
NIDA substantially expanded its kratom research support
since 2017 and this research portfolio is rapidly expanding the
evidence base for kratom regulation and possibly new kratom
derived medicines in the years to come.
Similarly, at the international level, the large evidence base was
reviewed in 2021 by the World Health Organization Expert
Committee on Drug Dependence (WHO ECDD) to determine if
kratom met criteria for being placed on a critical review pathway
for international scheduling. The WHO ECDD came to essentially
the same conclusions as the Assistant Secretary of Health and
NIDA. After conducting a thorough pre -review and a public
hearing with input from leading international experts, the ECDD
reported to the United Nations Office of Drug Control that there
was insufficient evidence to recommend kratom for critical review
but that it should be kept under surveillance. It also stated,
"(k)ratom is used for self -medication for a variety of disorders but
there is limited evidence of abuse liability in humans..."
IAddressing overdose risks, the ECDD noted:
"Although mitragynine has been
analytically confirmed in a number of
deaths, almost all involve use of other
substances, so the degree to which
kratom use has been a contributory
factor to fatalities is unclear."
Both the Assistant Secretary, and the WHO ECDD also acknowledge beneficial
uses to abstain from opioids. Without labeling this as 'therapeutic use', the
Assistant Secretary clearly acknowledges such use and the public health risks of
banning kratom. This nuanced recognition of benefits of use, along with risks of
banning access to use by Assistant Secretary Giroir, was absent in the 2017 and
early 2018 position of FDA, but was since recognized by the Secretary of Health
Becerra in a letter to Senator Mike Lee and Congressman Mark Pocan on March
16, 2022.1
1 https://assets. website-files. com/61 eO7df3l2afed l3238eb7fl /6261 ab3O3b46bb88f2l b6d 1 a_HHS % 2OKratom % 2OResponse. pdf
Regulatory update:
Uniform national regulation of kratom is vital because kratom product vendors vary widely in their product
stewardship, quality control, and packaging and marketing related information and claims. Product testing
revealed that some products were adulterated with dangerous substances and/or with high concentrations of
mitragynine and other kratom alkaloids. Since October 2022, 4 additional states (West Virginia, Virginia,
Florida, and Texas) enacted various laws to ensure continuation of legal kratom sales in their states, but with
regulatory oversight laws generally referred to as the Kratom Consumer Protection Act (KCPA). This brings
the total to 11 states that now have consumer protections in place. Several other states are considering
similar regulatory frameworks.
Although the KCPA provisions and standards vary somewhat
across states, most include the following requirements for all
products sold in the state: (a) registration of products and
vendors, (b) labeling that discloses that products contain
kratom as well as the name and contact information of the
distributing vendors, (c) products must be tested to show they
are not contaminated with heavy metals and toxins, that are
consistent with the standards for food products such as
oatmeal, tea leaves and coffee, or adulterated with drugs or
boosted levels of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine
(70HMG); (d) health claims are not permitted; and (e) the
minimum age of purchase is either 18 or 21 years, depending
on the choice of the state.
Several more states are in various stages of consideration
and action on similar proposed KCPA laws. Federal KCPA
regulatory oversight has bipartisan support in the U.S.
Congress with the filing of S. 3039, sponsored by Senator
Mike Lee (R-UT) and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), and H.R.
What is the current state of kratom
science and evidence?
Kratom was studied for decades, primarily in Southeast
Asia (SEA), where kratom trees grow in abundance, but
research escalated substantially in the US and globally
with support by NIDA, SEA countries, and philanthropies.
New science over the past 5-10 years includes investigations
on kratom/mitragynine chemistry and medicinal development,
neuropharmacology, brain imaging, preclinical and clinical
studies, and surveys in the US and SEA. The rate of
published kratom research continues to increase, along with
presentations and symposia at a wide spectrum of national
and international scientific meetings, such as the Society for
Neuroscience, College on Problems of Drug Dependence,
The International Conference on the Science of Botanicals,
the International Association of Forensic Toxicologists and the
Society of Forensic Toxicologists.
5905 sponsored by Congressman Mark Pocan (D-WI) and
Congressman Jack Bergman (R-MI). The Federal Kratom
Consumer Protection Act will provide a regulatory framework for
kratom much like the Congress did in 1994 when they passed the
Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA).
Specifically, among other provisions requiring the FDA to publish
standards for the manufacturing and marketing of kratom
products, the Federal KCPA will (1) require full transparency of all
taxpayer -funded scientific research conducted on kratom; (2)
require the FDA to add peer -reviewed published kratom research
articles to their kratom website; and (3) require transcripts of
public hearings where independent scientific testimony on kratom
is provided. These requirements will allow the public to see a
balanced perspective on current research on kratom related to its
safety, benefits, and addiction liability profile.
0 Kratom research effort update
The pace of kratom research and publication of peer -reviewed
research remains rapid and continues to accelerate with
expanded funding from govemment agencies in the US and
internationally, as well as private sector efforts to support dietary
supplement notifications and potential new drug applications
derived from kratom. Since, October 2022, more than 450 new
studies were published through October 2023, most supported by
the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and others from
Southeast Asia. These studies provide the basis for the "Science
Updates" noted at the end of each of the subsections in the
November 2023 Kratom Science Update.
The following summary and conclusions are based on peer -
reviewed scientific publications, many conducted by international
leaders in kratom research and supported by NIDA. A
bibliography with links to key articles is provided.
What is kratom?
It K
NA
Kratom is a tree in the coffee family. Not surprisingly, its diverse effects include coffee -like alerting,
stimulating, and mood enhancing effects, which are quite distinct from the effects of morphine -type oploids.
It also has some opioid-like effects that Include pain relief, possible opioid withdrawal symptoms after
chronic frequent use and unpleasant side effects like constipation, but without the potentially lethal
respiratory depressing or highly addictive brain rewarding effects that are driving the opioid epidemic.
Is kratom an opioid?
While some naturally occurring substances in kratom act on
opioid receptors, kratom is not a prototypical opiold based
on its chemical structure, botanical origins, or law —
nationally or internationally. Like many natural products it has
diverse effects and mechanisms of action that contribute to
these effects and the reasons people use kratom. Some
kratom constituents bind to opioid receptors and relieve pain
whereas others do not. Unlike opioids which sedate and can
impair mental functioning, kratom is used by many people in
place of coffee for its alerting, mental focusing, and
occupational performance enhancing effects.
Who uses kratom and why?
Animal and human studies, as well as neuropharmacology
mechanisms of action studies, show that kratom does not carry
the substantial opioid-like risks of deadly respiratory depression
or powerfully addictive euphoria. A misunderstanding of one of
kratom's self -reported beneficial uses, recognized by researchers
and NIDA, providing relief of opioid withdrawal, is sometimes
interpreted as evidence that it must be an opioid. In fact, the
nonopioid adrenergic blocking drugs developed for treating high
blood pressure, clonidine and lofexidine, were prescribed for
decades to treat opioid withdrawal. FDA approved lofexidine
(Lucemyra) for treating opioid withdrawal in 2018. Mitragynine,
currently considered kratom's primary active compound, and
other kratom constituents also produce adrenergic and other
effects that might contribute to relief of withdrawal symptoms in
people dependent on opioids, alcohol and stimulants.
According to surveys in the US, most consumers are White adults, aged 35-55, with jobs and health care insurance, who report
that their consumption is primarily for health and well-being. This includes consumption as an alternative to caffainated products for
alertness and increased focus, for the self -management of pain, and to improve mood. Many consumers state that kratom worked
better for them, had fewer side -effects than the FDA -approved medicines they had taken, and/or that they preferred natural
products. A smaller but important fraction of consumers are people who consider kratom as a "lifeline" or a path away from opioids.
They use kratom to manage opioid withdrawal and reduce or eliminate opioid use.
Update. Continuing surveillance and studies monitoring
individual kratom consumers confirm the 2022 Update
findings summarized above. However, new research
provides additional insights into the reasons for use and
effects of use that are important to consider in regulatory
efforts. In brief, users primarily report use for a broad
range of perceived benefits including energy and
productivity, as well as to self -manage withdrawal and
addiction to stimulants, alcohol and other substances in
addition to opioids that have been the primary focus of
earlier studies. Studies from NIDA by Dr. Kirsten Smith
and colleagues found that whereas the motivations of
many kratom consumers to initiate use were to address
specific health concerns, many continue to use for
additional reasons such as increasing energy and
Update: Kratom addiction related research findings.
The percentage of people who reported becoming "addicted to
kratom" is small based on early studies and new research;
however, there is currently no objective basis for estimating this
percentage in the US. Estimates of the fraction of kratom
consumers who report addiction are confounded by many factors
including the following:
Many people equate 'withdrawal symptoms" with addiction or a
substance use disorder and apparently are not aware that the
American Psychiatric Association, FDA, NIDA, and the World
Health Organization acknowledge that withdrawal can occur with
many substances that are not ordinarily considered addicting, and
that withdrawal alone is not the basis for a substance use disorder
or "addiction" diagnosis, as discussed in reports from these
productivity, relaxation, and mood. organizations in the bibliography,
C, Some people with prior addictions to opioids, stimulants, and
alcohol used kratom to achieve abstinence from those
substances and continue to use kratom, reporting addiction
and difficulty discontinuing, in some cases in fear of returning
to the far more deadly addictions that kratom helped them
escape. Such use might be more appropriately considered
"harm reduction" or therapeutic use, much as is maintenance
of use of medicines such as antidepressants and approved
addiction treatment medicines, such as buprenorphine and
naltrexone, maintained long term to reduce the risk of relapse
to the more deadly substances;
Distinguishing between the mood enhancing effects of kratom
reported as therapeutic or beneficial in surveys from
recreational users, and reasons that are not necessarily to
address a specific disorder are not always clear. This is also
the case with respect to reported kratom use to "improve
sexual health" and as part of exercise regimens;
Finally, the factors that contribute to a diagnosis of a
"substance use disorder" include personally and socially
destructive aspects, and indicators of regular and compulsive
use that are not necessarily a risk to personal health, violent
crime, society, or the US drug overdose epidemic.
Surveys and clinical studies confirm that kratom withdrawal
can occur in some kratom consumers but is generally milder
as compared to opioid and other drug withdrawal syndromes
and generally self -manageable. Most kratom consumers do
not experience withdrawal and although it is more likely
in frequent multiple -times per day consumers, many such people
do not report experiencing withdrawal upon discontinuation of
kratom.
People with chronic opioid use histories report that kratom
provides relief of opioid withdrawal. As was discussed, alleviation
of opioid withdrawal may be due to some of kratom's effects that
are not mediated by opioid receptors but also by effects that are
similar to those of medicines used to treat high blood pressure
including one that is FDA approved for treating opioid withdrawal
— lofexidine. These results are consistent with human reports that
kratom may be therapeutically useful for managing opioid
withdrawal though FDA has not approved kratom for this or any
other medical use. Clearly more research is needed to guide
consumer use and potentially support applications to FDA for
acceptance and approval for such use.
What led to increased kratom use in the United
States?
Although kratom was taken as a natural traditional medicine in
SEA for centuries, its use in the US was largely limited to Asian
immigrants from the early 1970s through the 1990s. In the early
2000s, with a rising general interest in natural products as
alternatives to conventional medicines and growing public access
to information via the Internet, kratom use began to increase.
Reasons for use appear generally similar from the US to SEA, as
an alternative to coffee and tea for its alerting and mild stimulant
effects, to improve mood and relieve pain, and to manage
withdrawal and help people to reduce or discontinue use of
opioids, alcohol and other addictive substances. Many survey
respondents report that kratom was either more effective, carried
fewer side effects of concern such as the sedating effects of
opioid pain relievers, and/or that they prefer natural products over
conventional medicine. Estimates of the present market vary
widely. By 2014, there were an estimated 3-5 million kratom
consumers, and marketing and SEA export estimates suggest
that the present market is 15 million or more in the US. One
federal survey estimated between 2-3 million kratom consumers,
which might reflect its panel of respondents. The federal survey is
designed to track substance abuse and might underrepresent
middle aged and older people with lower rates of recreational
substance use who might use kratom for other reasons.
Does kratom contain dangerous substances?
Like its botanical cousin coffee, kratom contains many
substances referred to as alkaloids, which tend to be somewhat
alkaline and bitter in flavor. More than 40 alkaloids are identified
in kratom to date, with most having little or no known
pharmacological effect, or occurring at such low levels as to be of
little cause for harm or benefit. However, as is the case with other
natural products, the naturally occurring mixture of substances
likely contributes to the overall effects and natural variations in
alkaloid composition may lead to varying pharmacological effects.
The main ingredient currently thought to account for most
of the effects reported by kratom consumers is
mitragynine, which does not have strong rewarding and
addictive effects, nor respiratory depressant effects like
opioids and conventional stimulants.
The second most widely recognized substance is 7OHMG
that has stronger opioid effects but occurs at levels that
are often nondetectable in fresh kratom leaves. However,
7OHMG is also a product of mitragynine metabolism and
its gradual elevation in the blood following oral
consumption may contribute to some of the effects of
kratom that are desired by consumers.
Respiratory effects of kratom.
In the absence of kratom regulation, some kratom makers
boosted 7OHMG content far higher than that found in the native
plant material, and this is a potential safety concern. States
passing kratom consumer protection act laws ensure that legally
marketed kratom does not contain boosted mitragynine or
7OHMG levels, contaminants, or other adulterants, thereby
reducing public health risks. Additionally, dangerous substances
like fentanyl and O-desmethyltramadol were found in adulterated
kratom products. Regulation is needed from FDA to ensure that
all US consumers are protected from risky exposure to
contaminated or adulterated products.
It is well understood that kratom's respiratory effects are not like those of morphine -like opioids; however,
research since 2018 support the conclusion that kratom Is not simply weaker than opioids with respect to
respiratory depression. Specifically, mitragynine and other alkaloids in kratom act as partial agonists at
oploid receptors, meaning that their maximal effects reach a ceiling beyond which higher doses produce
little additional effect". This was demonstrated in several animal species (including cats, dogs, mice, and
rats) with mitragynine doses increased to levels far beyond what is or can be consumed by even high intake
chronic kratom consumers. The most recent study employed a sophisticated rodent model developed by
FDA to compare a broad range of mitragynine doses to therapeutic and toxic oxycodone doses across blood
gases and other parameters. Whereas oxycodone produced the signature dose -related plummeting blood
oxygen levels and deaths, mitragynine produced no evidence of respiratory depression at any dose, and no
life -threatening effects.
Can you overdose on kratom?
Kratom acts as a partial p-opioid agonist that does not
activate the p-arrestin 2 pathway involved in respiratory
depression. Thus, kratom is much less likely to contribute to
overdose deaths than heroin, fentanyl, oxycodone or other
potent opioids. When mitragynine, the primary alkaloid in
kratom, is identified in overdose cases, it is almost always
found along with active central nervous system drugs with
known lethal potential. Nevertheless, kratom consumers
should not assume that kratom is without risk, especially
when combined with other drugs.
The American Kratom Association recently published
guidelines on factors to consider prior to naming kratom or
mitragynine as cause of death. This was necessary because
of the confusion following the FDA's announcement on
February 6, 2018, that kratom was seriously harmful, with an
opioid-like death risk. The FDA listed 44 deaths occurring in
kratom consumers, but only 1 did not include other
respiratory depressing substances or other conditions that
likely contributed to the deaths. For example, further
investigation determined that the one kratom only case was
a motor vehicle fatality.
One of the most important guidelines to consider before naming
kratom or mitragynine as cause of death is to ensure that
comprehensive toxicology testing is performed. In many cases
in which kratom is found at the scene or in the decedent's
home, and in some cases with mitragynine detected in a blood
sample, investigators concluded it must have been involved in
the death. However, routine toxicology does not identify other
drugs that are increasingly known to cause overdose death,
such as novel fentanyl related and other psychoactive
substances. Most laboratories do not include kratom or
mitragynine in their routine testing because of the lack of
reports of kratom overdoses and deaths, necessitating
expensive analysis of autopsy specimens at reference
laboratories. Thus, only kratom testing is ordered and the
possible presence of other novel psychoactive substances is
not identified due to the additional cost that cannot be borne by
poorly resourced local and state forensic laboratories.
Centers for Disease Control scientists (2019) analyzed data
from the State Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System
(SUDORS) from 27 states over 18 months finding 152 or 0.56%
of 27, 338 overdose deaths mentioning kratom in their
postmortem toxicology reports.
However, kratom was listed as cause of death in 91 or 59.9%
of these cases, despite only 7 or 4.6% having kratom only
identified by toxicology. The authors stress that the presence
of other drugs cannot be ruled out as contributing to cause of
death. Eighty percent of decedents had a history of substance
misuse. In cases when kratom was identified, 65.1% of
fatalities also included fentanyl, 32.9% heroin,
benzodiazepines 29.4%, prescription opioids 19.7% and
cocaine 18.4%.
Gershman (2019) recently investigated 15 kratom-related
deaths over 18 years and found 11 were multidrug deaths
including opioids, and four were kratom only deaths and
attributed by the coroners to kratom toxicity. Blood was
available for comprehensive toxicology testing in 3 cases and
additional toxic drugs were identified in all of these cases. The
last case had no blood available for additional testing.
Mitragynine concentrations ranged from 16 to 4800 ng/mL.
Some of the kratom associated death cases did not test for
kratom but based the decision on crime scene investigation
only, others had only a positive qualitative result confirming
A recent study compared the respiratory effects of up to 400
mg/kg oral mitragynine to up to 150 mg/kg oral oxycodone in
rats according to the study design published by FDA.
Oxycodone significantly depressed oxygen saturation and
sedated the animals with two deaths at the higher doses.
Mitragynine did not significantly depress respiration or
produce life -threatening effects, even at these exceedingly
high doses. Thus, the LD50 was not able to be established
for kratom.
mitragynine exposures which varied widely from very low to very
high levels.
Recently, Papsun (2023) reviewed more than 5400 blood
mitragynine postmortem kratom cases tested at NMS Labs over
the last five years. Kratom identification in postmortem cases was
1.67-1.88% over the last 5 years. Mean and median blood
mitragynine concentrations were 360 and 120 ng/mL,
respectively, with a range of 5.4-11,000 ng/mL Most cases
identified the presence of other drugs including fentanyl in 62%,
methamphetamine 19%, cocaine 10% and others in 2022 cases.
The authors concluded that "blood mitragynine concentrations of
>1000 ng/mL are more often associated with severe adverse
events, up to and including death." However, there was no
conclusion as to what dose of kratom or mitragynine alone might
be considered "lethal" or to carry a high risk of mortality. Although
kratom related deaths are low when compared to its widespread
use, consumers should be aware of the potential dangers of
combining multiple prescribed and recreational drugs with
kratom. '
Although the lethal dose in humans remains unknown,
consumers should not take excessive kratom doses, should not
consume kratom with other CNS-active drugs and should
consider their personal medical conditions.
Regulation with balanced evidence -based warnings is in the
interest of personal and public health to minimize the risks of
kratom without falsely equating it with "narcotics" or "opioids" and
thereby discouraging its contribution to harm reduction.
IIs kratom fueling the opioid overdose epidemic?
The US has the world's most
sophisticated and multi -pronged
substance abuse and product safety
monitoring network including the
National Survey on Drug Use and
Health (NSDUH), Monitoring the Future
(MTF), Treatment Episodes Data Set,
and the DEA's National Forensic
Laboratory Information System (NFLIS).
It also includes the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN), which reported
a variety of potential signals of emerging substance threats while kratom
use was rapidly increasing from the 1990s through pre-2012 reports, as
well as the "new" DAWN system that reported on 2021 data in its 2022
report. None of these systems, nor more than 20,000 comments to the
DEA, suggested that kratom contributed to the opioid epidemic.
Kratom was also never listed in DEA's annual National Drug Threat
Assessment, though DEA routinely monitors kratom as a "chemical of
concern." Despite over 10 years of monitoring, DEA has not listed kratom or
mitragynine or 7OHMG as a national drug threat.
Key scientific findings in the past five years:
Multiple state of the art animal studies found that kratom
has low abuse potential. For example, mitragynine
produces weak rewarding effects as compared to
morphine and heroin. The authors of this fact sheet urge
that as a precaution, consumers should monitor their
kratom consumption to reduce the risk of dependence
development.
Surreys indicate that some people can become
dependent upon kratom; however, many of these people
were using kratom to abstain from opioids and/or other
substances. Disentangling prior substance use disorders
from kratom use is not always clear. Most people who
report kratom dependence or withdrawal state that it is
more readily self -manageable than dependence and
withdrawal from opioids and other drugs of abuse.
Mitragynine treatment results in reduced opioid (e.g.,
morphine and heroin) drug seeking and self -
administration in animal models assessing the potential
effectiveness of drug use disorder reduction and
cessation. These findings are consistent with human
reports that kratom consumption reduces their opioid
cravings and served as a path away from opioids.
In animals made physically dependent on morphine,
kratom pretreatment reduced morphine withdrawal
symptoms in several models for evaluating efficacy in
the treatment of withdrawal.
2023 UPDATES:
How kratom works, that is, its mechanisms of action, is
amongst the most active areas of research in the US and
globally with new studies published in journals or
presented at scientific meetings seemingly every month.
Much of this progress is summarized in original research
and review articles listed in the bibliography. A few key
findings are included below.
0 Whereas 7OHMG is often discussed as a potentially
dangerous kratom constituent, studies indicate that it is
present at very low and often not detectable levels in
fresh kratom leaf material. Thus, it is better thought of as
a mitragynine metabolite that gradually emerges in the
bloodstream, likely contributing to some of the effects of
kratom. Products that contain artificially high levels of
7OHMG (e.g., higher than 2% of the total alkaloid
content) have likely been "spiked" with added 7OHMG.
Regulatory oversight should prohibit such products.
This is consistent with human reports that kratom
consumption helps to manage opioid withdrawal and
reduce opioid craving.
Similarly, an intracranial brain self -stimulation study
suggested low rewarding effects of kratom alkaloids as
compared to drugs of abuse.
Several national internet surveys found that kratom use was
helpful in managing opioid withdrawal, reducing opioid
cravings, and achieving abstinence from opioids.
None of the national surveys relied upon by the FDA,
Centers for Disease Control (CDC), NIDA, and DEA to
determine if a substance poses an abuse -related threat to
public health suggested that kratom poses a known or
imminent risk to public health. Consistent with this, the DEA
never listed kratom as a threat to public health in its annual
National Drug Threat Assessment reports.14
Safety studies in several animal species demonstrated that
even at extraordinarily high doses, mitragynine and kratom
produced little evidence of respiratory depression or life -
threatening effects in contrast to opioids such as morphine
and oxycodone which produced substantial dose related
decreases in respiration.
Whereas 2% is the performance standard used presently in
some states, it would seem ideal for FDA to develop an
evidence -based standard that might be somewhat higher or
lower, and with guidance for accepted testing methods.
0 Whereas mitragynine is the primary or sole alkaloid present
in many marketed kratom products, it increasingly appears
likely that a variety of other naturally occurring alkaloids
contribute to the effects ascribed to kratom.
0 Although kratom use persists in the US with several million
consumers estimated, clear signals of substantial public
health risk remain lacking, while the preponderance of
evidence suggests that use of naturally derived kratom
products is more typically associated with perceived health
benefits.
GENERAL CONCLUSION: �
The rapid progress in understanding the risks and benefits
of kratom and its potential for therapeutic use and public
health benefits over the past decade is a tribute to visionary
funding from NIH and other organizations in the US and
globally, as well as the dedication and care of hundreds of
researchers worldwide.
There clearly seems to be adequate scientific evidence to not only justify why regulation is
warranted but also to guide regulatory efforts. For any regulation of food, dietary ingredients and
pharmaceuticals, regulations need to be considered as an evolutionary process guided by
emerging scientific evidence including laboratory and clinical studies, as well as real world
surveillance to understand trends, patterns and emerging risks and benefits to health and well-
being. Thus, the conclusion that more research is warranted should not be used as an excuse
to delay regulatory implementation but rather a vital part of relevant and effective regulatory
implementation and evolution.
Through Pinney Associates, Drs. Henningfield and Huestis provide scientific and regulatory
advising on new medicines, dietary supplements, cannabinoids, and tobacco/nicotine products
for FDA regulation. This paid work includes leading the development and drafting of this kratom
science facts summary for the American Kratom Association. Dr. Grundmann is a member of
the advisory board of the Kratom Vendors Association and received an honorarium from the
American Kratom Foundation for participation: in a scientific discussion forum about kratom
dependence. Dr. Garcia -Romeo is a paid scientific advisor to ETHA Natural Botanicals and
received a speaking honorarium from the American Kratom Foundation.
Expert evaluations of kratom policy and regulation and
Note:
risks & public health United Nations Commission on
Narcotic Drugs, WHO Expert Committee on Drug
Cudingthattheee on Drug
Dependence (2021).
Dependence pre -review of kratom concluding that the
DepenesummaryoftheWHatomco
evidence does not support initiation ofa fun review of
Implementation of the international drug control treaties: changes in the scope of
kratom for international drug scheduling considering its
effects, safety, abuse related- risks and public health
control of substances Summary of assessments, findings and recommendations of the
factors
44th World Health Organization's (WHO) Expert Committee on Drug Dependence
(ECDD), 11-15 October 2021: Kratom, mitragynine, 7-hydroxymitragynine.
'\ htips.'Il w ,unodc.oVdocumenfs/wmmissions/CND/CND Sessions/CND_64ReconvenediECN72021_C
�C
RP12 V2108992 pdf.
Assistant Secretary of Health Dr. Brett P. Giroir, Admiral
This formal DHHSschedulingrescission letter
(August 16, 2018).
summarizes review ofthe evidence for FDA's 2017
recommendation to schedule kratom and concluded that
Letter from the Assistant Secretary of Health to the Administrator of the Drug
FDA did not provide sufAcient evidence to support
Enforcement Administration to rescind previous support to permanently place
scheduling, and also failed to consider the adverse public
health consequences of Scheduling and thereby banning
mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine in Schedule I of the Controlled
legal consumer access to kratom
Substances Act 2018
- \ Available from: https://rmages go02.informamarkels comlWebrink-02PI,7b548e6d56-2ea44da4-9404-
R
0348b56e9a88%7a dhilbn-8.16.2018-response-latter-6omashtadm-gffdr.pol
Gershman K, Timm K, Frank M, Lampi L, Melamed J,
An important investigation of autopsy reports listing kratom
Gerona R, Monte AA.
only as cause of death and the importance of
comprehensive toxicology to identify the presence of other
Deaths in Colorado Attributed to Kratom.
toxic drugs contributing to the death The range of
N Engf J Med. 2019 Jan 3:380(1):97-98.
mdfagynine concentrations in kratom-related deaths
includes low levels far below those reported in controlled
kratom administration studies.
Henningfield JE, Rodricks JV, Magnuson AM, Huestis MA.
An exceedingly high dose of400mg7kgoral mitragynine
did not significantly depress respiration or produce fife -
Respiratory effects of oral mitragynine and oxycodone in a rodent model.
threatening effects in rats. The LD50 was not established
for kratom However, 60 and 150 mg/kg oral oxycodone
Psychopha—amlogy 2022 D-:239(12) 3793-3804
significantly depressed oxygen saturation and sedated the
animals resulting in two deaths
Olsen EO, O'Donnell J, Mattson CL, SchierJG, Wilson N.
Center far Disease scientists analyzed data from the State
Unintentional Drug Overdose Reporting System finding
Notes from the Field: Unintentional Drug Overdose Deaths with Kratom Detected -
that although kratom identifications In postmortem autopsy
27 States, July 2016-December 2017.
cases only represented 0.56%of overdoses, d was
reported as cause of death (kratom-involved) in 59.9% of
MMWR Morb Modal Wkly Rep 2019 Apr 12;68(14):326-327
cases Potent opioids were also identified in these kratom
cases, 65.1 % fentanyl, 32.9% heroin and 19.7%
prescription opiolds
Papsun D, Schroeder W, Brower J, Logan B.
Afterrm iewing rrvfragynine mncentrahwis 61 more then 5400 blood
posfmx),farnkrswmcam over &aMWNveyean,,m„ragyninawas
Forensic Implications of Kratom: Kratom Toxicity, Correlation with Mitragynine
identified m 1.67-1.88% canes. with a wide range of concentrerions
(5.4-11,000ngrmi.) Most cases idermoed the presence ofoffw drugs
Concentrations, and Polypharmacy.
mcludep kr4enyl in 62%. mefhemphafamfne 1904. cocaine 10%and
others The authors mnrJudad that 'good mihagymne cawenfrations
Curd Addict Rep 10, 272-281 (2023).
of>1000 ng7mL are more often assoatafed with severe adverse evenfs.
up to and including death -Although kratom related deaths are low
when compared to its widespread use, cod m rs should be aware of
the potential dangers or combining muttic a prescribed and recreational
drugs with kratom
Prozialeck, W., Avery, B., Boyer, E., Grundmann, O., Note:
Henningfield, J., Krueger A., McMahon, L., McCurdy, C., Leading krafomresearchers discuss policy implications of
Swogger, M., Veltri, C., and Singh, D. (2019). state-of-the-art knowledge related tokratom'seffects,
Kratom Policy: The challenge of balancing therapeutic potential with public safety. uses, risks, and real-wodd public health benefits and risks
MInternational Journal of Drug Policy. 70:70-77.
0
Grundmann O, Garcia-Romeu A, McCurdy CR, Sharma A,
This article addresses the fact that some manufactured
Smith KE, Swogger MT, Weiss ST (2023).
extracts have high concentrations of mftragynine and
other substances and do not include labeling that
Not all kratom is equal: The important distinction between native leaf and
describes the concentrations, total content, or
extract products,
recommended serving sizes and the need for national
regulation of such
Addiction. 2023 Oct 9. doi: 10 1111/add. 16366. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 3781"05
0
Swogger MT, Smith KE, Garcia-Romeu A, Grundmann O,
Although there are no FDA approved uses for kratom,
Veltri CA, Henningfield J, Busch LY (2022)
which is the case for most dietary supplements, this expert
information
opinion article provides practical for
Understanding kratom use: a guide for healthcare providers.
consideration by health care professionals whose patients
are consuming kratom
Front Pharmacol 13 801855.
Henningfield JE, Grundmann O, Babin JK, Fant RV, Wang
This article compared estimates from FDA of deaths
DW, Cone EJ (2019)
associated with kratom consumption in comparison with
deaths associated with nonmedical opioid use concluding
Risk of death associated with kratom use compared to opioids.
that the risk of death associated with kratom use is at least
1, 000 times less than for opioids.
Prev Med. 120:105851
Henningfield JE, Wang DW, Huestis MA (2022)
This article is a published version of an assessment of
kratom abuse potential according to the 8-factor analysis
Kratom abuse potential 2021: an updated eight factor analysis.
required for permanent scheduling by the Controlled
FronlPharmacnl 12.775073.
Substances Act It concludes that on the basis of all
factors, including decades of surveillance in the US, and
decades more globally, kratom does not warrant
scheduling and, s1 fad, that scheduling kratom would
carry adverse public health consequences This is
consistent with the position of the WHO Expert Committee
on Drug Dependence and the DHHS review led by
Assistant Secretary Gimir.
Whereas there are several surveys that provide estimates of how many people use kratom with estimates ranging
from about 2 to more than 15 million, those surveys provide no information about why people use kratom, or the
consequence of their kratom use (See Henningfield JE, Grundm n O, Garcia-Romeu A, Swogger MT. We Need
Better Estimates of Kratom Use Prevalence. Am J Prev Med. 201;62(1):132-133).
The following surveys are focused Specifically, these surveys show that although there is some
on why people use kratom and recreational use of kratom, most people use for reasons
provide insights as to the risks and related to health and well-being including as approaches to
benefits of kratonsumption. self -manage opioid and other drug withdrawal and to reduce
7and discontinue opioid and other addictive drug use.
Coe MA, Pillitteri JL, Sembower MA,
Gerlach KK, Henningfield JE.
Kratom as a substitute for opioids: Results from an online survey.
M Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019;202:24-32.
Grundmann O.
Patterns of Kratom use and health impact in the US -Results from
an online survey.
M Drug Alcohol Depend 2017;176:63-70.
Smith KE, Rogers JM, Schriefer D,
Grundmann O.
Therapeutic benefit with caveats?: Analyzing social media data to
understand the complexities of kratom use.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2021;226:108879
0 Exploring the self -reported motivations of
kratom ( Mitragyna speciosa Korth.) use: a
cross -sectional investigation
O Grundmann et al. 2022
0 (PMID:35389321)
0 (Feldman et al., 2023; Smith et al., 2023
0 Garcia-Romeu A, Cox DJ, Smith KE, Dunn
KE, Griffiths RR.
Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa): User demographics, use patterns,
and implications for the opioid epidemic.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2020;208:107849.
0 Smith KE, Rogers JM, Dunn KE, et al.
Searching for a Signal: Self -Reported Kratom Dose -Effect
Relationships Among a Sample of US Adults With Regular Kratom
Use Histories.
fm FrontPharmaco1.2022;13;765917.
0 Swogger MT, Walsh Z.
Kratom use and mental health: A systematic review.
M Drug Alcohol Depend.2018;183:134-40.
0 Oliver Grundmann 1 2, Charles A Veltri 2,
Diana Morcos 2, David Knightes 3rd 2, Kirsten
E Smith 3, Darshan Singh 4, Ornella Corazza 5,
Eduardo Cinosi 5 6, Giovanni Martinotti 5 7,
Zach Walsh 8, Marc T Swogger 9Smith et al.,
2023; and a few in 2022
0 Behnood-Rod A, Chellian R,
Wilson R, Hiranita T, Sharma
A, Leon F, et al.
Evaluation of the rewarding effects of
mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine
in an intracranial self -stimulation
procedure in male and female rats.
Drug Alcohol Depend.2020;215:108235.
0 Hassan R, Pike See C,
Sreenivasan S, Mansor SM,
Muller CP, Hassan Z.
Mitragynine attenuates morphine
withdrawal effects in rats -a comparison
with methadone and buprenorphine.
Mn FrontPsychialry.2020;11:411
Hemby SE, McIntosh S, Leon F, Cutler SJ,
McCurdy CR.
Abuse liability and therapeutic potential of the Mitragyna speciosa
(kratom) alkaloids mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine.
Yue K, Kopajtic TA, Katz JL.
Abuse liability of mitragynine assessed with a self -administration
procedure in rats.
Addict Biol. 2019; 24(5):874-85 Psychopharmacology (Bert). 2018; 235(10):2823-9
Wilson LL, Harris HM, Eans SO, Brice -Tuff AC, Cirino TJ, Stacy HM, et al
Lyophillzed kratom tea as a therapeutic option for opioid dependence.
M Drug Alcohol Depend. 2020;216:108310.
Note: The following studies are representative of several dozen other studies published since 2018 that help
understand the effects, and potential benefits and risks of kratom's constituents including mitragynine.
At kratom doses far higher than those consumed by humans, respiratory depressant effects are substantially lower than opioids. This does not mean
that kratom does not carry risks but rather that its overall risks appear much lower than those associated with opioids. Balanced regulation could help
consumers minimize the risks of kratom use by banning medical claims, providing accurate labeling and warning labels, as is being implemented in
states that passed kratom consumer protection act laws.
Avery BA, Boddu SP, Sharma A, Furr EB,
Leon F, Cutler SJ, et al.
Comparative pharmacokinetics of mitragynine after oral
administration of Mitragyna speciosa (kratom) leaf extracts in rats.
M Plante Med. 2019;85(4):340-6.
10 Hill R, Kruegel AC, Javitch JA, Lane JR,
Canals M.
(2022) The respiratory depressant effects of mitragynine are
limited by its conversion to 7-01-1 mitragynine.
Sr J Pharmacol 179(14):3875-3885
Chakraborty S, D[Berto JF, Faouzi A,
Bernhard SM, Gutridge AM, Ramsey S, et al.
A novel mitragynine analog with low -efficacy mu opioid receptor
agonism displays antinociception with attenuated adverse effects.
J Med Chem 2021;64(18):13873-92
Kruegel AC, Grundmann O.
The medicinal chemistry and neuropharmacology of kratom: A
preliminary discussion of a promising medicinal plant and analysis
of its potential for abuse.
Q Neuropharmacology. 2018;134(Pt A):108-20.
Macko E, Weisbach JA, Douglas B 0 Maxwell EA, King TI, Kamble SH, Raju KSR,
Berthold EC, Leon F, et al.
(1972) Some observations on the pharma logy of mitragynine [in Pharmacokinetics and safety of mitragynine in beagle dogs.
cats, dogs and monkeys).
T 0 Arch WPhwrmP C *" Then 198(f):145. _ Plante Med. 2020;86(17):1278-85.
1
NIDA.
2022, March 25. Kratom. Retrieved from
Mhttps://nida.nih.gov/research-topics/kraiom on December 5, 2023
Obeng S, Wilkerson JL, Leon F, Reeves ME,
Restrepo LF, Gamez-Jimenez LR, et al.
Pharmacological comparison of mitragynine and 7-
hydroxymitragynine: In vitro affinity and efficacy for mu-opioid
receptor and opioid-like behavioral effects in rats.
J Pharmacol Exp The,. 2021:376(3):410-27.
L7
Obeng S, Kamble SH, Reeves ME, Restrepo
LF, Patel A, Behnke M, Chear NJ,
Ramanathan S, Sharma A, Leon F, Hiranita
T, Avery BA, McMahon LR, McCurdy CR.
Investigation of the Adrenergic and Opioid Binding Affinities,
Metabolic Stability, Plasma Protein Binding Properties, and
Functional Effects of Selected Indole-Based Kratom Alkaloids.
t* J Mod Chem. 2020 Jan 9:63(1):433439.
Sharma A, McCurdy CR.
Assessing the therapeutic potential and toxicity of Mitragyna
speciosa in opioid use disorder.
Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2021;17(3):255-7.
Vicknasingam B, Chooi WT, Rahim AA, Chakraborty S, DiBerto JF, Faouzi A,
Ramachandram D, Singh D, Ramanathan S, et al. Bernhard, SM, Guttridge, AM,
Kratom and pain tolerance: A randomized, placebo -controlled, Ramsey, S et al.
double-blind study. .(2021). A Novel Mitragynine Analog with Low -Efficacy Mu
Yale J Biol Mod 2020; 93(2):229-38. Opioid Receptor Agonism Displays Antinociception with
Attenuated Adverse Effects.
J Med Chem. 2021;64(18):13873-13892.
', McCurdy C, Grundmann O, McLaughlin
J (2020) Kratom Resources. Department of Pharmacodynamics, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida.
* https //pd.ph...,;y.u8.edu/research/kratom/ Accessed 8 March 2022.
Note:
this is a Irving and evolving repository of factual scientific information that may be useful to policy makers, regulators, consumers, and
other researchers. It is an example of what would ideally be provided by NIH and FDA.
Neither the US Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, nor the US CSA or the international drug control
treaties define "therapeutic use" as being approved as drugs by FDA or the equivalent regulatory
agencies in other countries. However that has become the de facto standard of the FDA, which
therefore ignores self -reported beneficial use by dietary supplement consumers and states that they
have no recognized therapeutic use, and thus, widespread use of kratom to stay off opioids was
ignored as a benefit. The authors of this science update and the American Kratom Association
agree that specific health claims should not be made by kratom marketers without supporting
evidence, but neither should policy makers simply dismiss the benefits of kratom and the risks of
removing licit kratom by millions of kratom consumers.
Contributing to the misunderstanding that kratom carries opioid-like risks of overdose and addiction
is a misunderstanding of potency and strength. Strength refers to the maximum effect that a
substance can produce, whereas potency refers to how much of the substance it takes to produce
a given effect. Thus, alcohol is strong and actually results in approximately 2,000 overdose deaths
annually in the US, however, it is relatively low in potency among central nervous system active
substances and requires the equivalent rapid consumption of a quart or more of high percentage
(proof) alcohol to produce death, though for young people it may take much less as suggested by
fraternity hazing related deaths every year in the US. At the other extreme is fentanyl which can
produce extremely strong euphoriant effects in humans, reinforcing effects in animals, and lethal
respiratory depressant effects at very low doses of just a few mg. Kratom's primary active alkaloid,
mitragynine is both relatively weak and low in potency with respect to respiration as compared to
morphine. In fact, it is a partial agonist with respect to respiratory depression, meaning that its
maximal effects at all tested doses do not produce lethal respiratory depression. The mitragynine
metabolite 7-hydroxymitragynine is more potent than morphine on the guinea pig ileum muscle
twitching test but that test is not necessarily relevant to lethality, and 7-hydroxymitragynine, also
appears to be a partial agonist with respect to its respiratory effects.
DEA has included kratom on its list of "drugs and chemicals of concern", for the past decade, first
listing it following reports of overdose deaths in Sweden among consumers of a kratom product that
was later concluded to have been adulterated with lethal doses of O-desmethyltramadol. However,
as mentioned in this science update, DEA never listed kratom as a threat to public health in its
annual National Drug Threat Assessment reports. In fact, it has not listed kratom in its annual
National Forensic Laboratory Reports since 2016, apparently, because the reports have remained
low and not at the "threshold for reporting." Whether and when DEA will remove kratom or kratom
alkaloids from its drugs and chemicals of concern list is not clear since researchers agree that
kratom use and epidemiology should continue to be monitored, but unfortunately, this listing implies
a higher level of concern than has been expressed by any other DEA action since it withdrew its
scheduling proposal in 2016.
JACK BERGMAN
1ST DISTRICT, M;CHIGAN
congrog; of the aniteb 6tateo
10owe of Repressentatibeg
Magbington, W 20515-2201
March 12, 2024
Congressman Matt Salmon (Ret.)
Chairman, American Kratom Association
13575 Heathcote Boulevard, Suite 320
Gainesville, VA 20155
Dear Matt:
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
My purpose is writing today is to provide my perspective on the reports from state and local
jurisdictions who are proposing bans on kratom, many of which are based on well-intentioned
but misplaced concerns by law enforcement and public health officials. Simply put, these
proposed bans will create far more harm than any potential benefit kratom critics believe will
result from a ban.
My specific concern is for the health and welfare of many of our nation's servicemembers and
Veterans that I served with and others who returned from their service with injuries and chronic
pain. Many of those Veterans have received treatments with dangerous opioids that lead to
severe addictions and expose them to the unacceptable risk they will end up as another of the
more than 80,000 opioid overdose deaths per year in the United States.
One of the tools and resources many Veterans have used to quit their opioid dependence, manage
pain, improve mood and focus, and get their lives back on track has been through controlled use
of a pure, unmodified kratom product. For many, it has been a miracle solution keeping them
from a downward spiral of addiction and destruction.
I am certain you have seen during your time in Congress what I see clearly today. The common
opponent in our effort to facilitate the recovery of millions of Veterans is the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (FDA). Three times in the last decade, the FDA has attempted to force
kratom into Schedule 1 of the Controlled Substances Act, a drastic action that would essentially
criminalize the use of the supplement nationwide and harm countless Americans who have
benefited from kratom for decades. The FDA, which has a long-standing bias against any
supplement that is not a pharmaceutical that can profit Big Pharma and their own budget, has
pushed for kratom to be labelled a Controlled Substance by misstating the science, ignoring
kratom's long history of safe use, and falsely claiming kratom has the same effects as classic
opioids.
In their campaign to get kratom reclassified as a dangerous drug, the FDA has relied on three
false and thoroughly debunked objections to its widespread use: that kratom is unsafe, that it is
highly addictive, and that it has no approved medical use. Even former HHS Assistant Secretary
for Health Brett Giroir felt compelled to call out the FDA for relying on "disappointingly poor
evidence and data and a failure to consider the overall public health" in coming to such a
baseless conclusion. It is rare for a top-ranking HHS official to criticize the FDA for biased,
shoddy work, but in this case the unsupported conclusions were so egregious that Giroir felt it
W✓UMHeiICIi. GFF:(Y rRAVFRSE CITY OFWT 4% 0ININN OFFICE MANISTIOUL OFF'I:f
16 13%DOUG:AS DR, STE 226 W 125 G AYf., STE 8-119 7870%f Co Ro 442, STE E1
WASHINrror,, DC 2C-515 TnAVFReE C,rY, MI 49696 Gw'NN, MI 49841 MAMIS➢OUE, MI 49854
12021225-4735 (231)944-7633 (9061273-2227 1906)286-4191
necessary to publicly criticize them. Likewise, current HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra
acknowledged substantial "knowledge gaps" regarding kratom and that "kratom-involved
overdose deaths have occurred after use of adulterated kratom products or taking kratom with
other substances."
While the FDA continues to spread its propaganda about kratom, the Agency itself just
concluded a human safety study on kratom that showed that kratom "appears to be well tolerated
at all dose levels" (presented by the FDA at the 3rd Annual International Kratom Symposium in
Orlando, Florida, February 2024). The study showed that two of the 40 participants experienced
nausea after ingesting 12 grams of kratom in 24 capsules in a five minute period. No significant
adverse events occurred. That study has now cleared the way for a Human Abuse Potential study
to assess what level of dependence or addiction that kratom may cause, if any. That research will
take another two years or more to complete.
Equally significant is the FDA's refusal to comply with an order by a federal judge in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of California to provide witnesses and documents
on the FDA's position that kratom is dangerous. The judge called the hearing in a case the FDA
itself initiated against a kratom importer. The U.S. Attorney stunningly informed the Court that
the FDA "refused to provide us with witnesses or documents ... [and] the reason they gave was
that they have not yet made a determination regarding whether kratom is dangerous."
Yet, the FDA continues to mislead state and local officials on the safety profile of kratom,
including with false statements that remain on the FDA's website today. Any state or locality
that proposes to criminalize the sale and consumption of kratom needs to look at the science on
kratom, not the gaslighting the FDA continues to engage in.
There is no doubt that kratom needs to be regulated to protect consumers from improperly
manufactured or deliberately adulterated kratom products, and that is why there are eleven states
who have taken that step, with many more currently considering state Kratom Consumer
Protection Acts in their states. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and I are conservatives, and we have
joined with our progressive colleagues, Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Congressman Mark
Pocan (D-WI), to lead a bipartisan effort to protect Veterans and the public with a federal
Kratom Consumer Protection Act.
Please let me know how I can provide additional assistance to you in your efforts as the Chair of
the American Kratom Association in the effort to protect all consumers with responsible
regulations on kratom.
If you have any questions, please notify my staff, Amelia Burns at
amelia.bums@mail.house.gov. Thank you for your prompt attention.
Kind regards,
Jack Bergman
Member of Congress
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
LY
NINE2FIVE, LLC (1),
SEBASTIAN GUT RY (2),
Subject:
Defendants.
FW: Guthery
Case No. 3:23-cr-00I 79-TWR
MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF
SUBPOENA DIRECTING THE FDA
TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS FOR
INSPECTION IN ADVANCE OF THE
EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON
JANUARY 11, 2024
EXH I BIT B
From: Pierson, Melanie (USACAS) <Melanie_Pierson@usdom.gov>
Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 9:40 AM
To: Young, Andrew <Andrew.Ycune@btlaw.com>
Cc: Orabona, Joseph (USACAS) <Jose h.Orabona usdo . ov>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Guthery
Caution: This email originated from outside the Firm.
We have been in contact with representatives of the FDA regarding the upcoming sentencing hearing regarding the
dangers of kratom. They have refused to provide us with witnesses or documents to support our position, as well as
witnesses and documents that might be inconsistent with our position. The reason they gave was that they have not yet
made a determination regarding whether kratom is dangerous. We are prepared to withdraw our sentencing
memorandum and refile, using supporting materials from independent experts and not the FDA, as we do not believe
that the FDA is a part of the prosecution team in this case. If you disagree, please let us know immediately so we can file
a motion with the court to resolve this issue in advance of the sentencing hearing.
Respectfully,
AUSA Melanie Pierson
Filed December 6, 2023
Statement on the science of kratom products and their US regulation
Kratom (Min-agyna speciosa Korth.), refers to a tree with a long use history in its native Malaysia,
Thailand, Indonesia, and other parts of Southeast Asia.[1] Kratom has received increased attention in the
United States since US consumers first began using kratom in the early 2000s for the self -treatment of a
variety of health conditions, including pain and some psychiatric symptoms. Since this time, kratom
products have proliferated and are used not only to address pain or as a substitute for licit and illicit
substances with high -risk profiles, but also to improve general well-being, increase energy, mood, and
productivity, as well as for recreation.[2] In its native Southeast Asia, kratom has been used by chewing
freshly picked leaves or brewing tea immediately after leaf harvest. The first written reports of kratom use
in scientific literature appeared over 150 years ago stating the traditional medicine use to alleviate pain,
decrease fatigue/increase stamina, and self -treat other ailments.[3] To this day, fresh kratom leaf is widely
used. More recently in Southeast Asia, the fresh leaf has been used to ameliorate withdrawal symptoms
from a substance use disorder, most commonly related to opioid, alcohol, or stimulants.[4] In the US,
primarily dried leaf material (not freshly harvested) is used in a number of preparations and products.
The known science of kratom is centered on the presence of alkaloids (chemicals) which act on a variety
of neurotransmitter systems to elicit a complex pharmacological profile. Mitragynine is the major alkaloid
in kratom and because of this, it has been the subject of most scientific reports. There is a much smaller
body of science around whole leaf kratom preparations and other individual alkaloids. Mitragynine acts
on opioid, adrenergic, and serotonergic receptors, which is different than classical opioids, like morphine,
that only act on opioid receptors.[5] As such, mitragynine is not a classical opioid, like morphine, but
rather is unique in that it has partial agonist activity and relatively low abuse liability. To date,
mitragynine and lyophilized kratom tea have not been shown to cause respiratory depression in animal
models, which is a major concern of licit and illicit opioids consumed in the US.[6,7] The potential for
mitragynine and kratom to serve as a medical blueprint for the treatment of substance use disorders has
PAGE 1
been recognized by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.[2,8] Other kratom alkaloids exert diverse
actions that may further explain the complex effects that kratom consumers report.
The native kratom leaf contains varying amounts of alkaloids that usually are present in amounts of 24%
by weight. The primary alkaloid in many leaf materials is mitragynine, which is present on a percent
weight basis ranging from <1.0% but usually not exceeding 2.5%.[9,10] The other alkaloids are present in
major and minor amounts with paynantheine, speciogynine, speciociliatine, and mitraciliatine, all of
which do present with pharmacological activity, accounting for most of the remaining alkaloids.
Mitragynine is metabolized in the human body to some degree into the active metabolite, 7-
hydroxymitragynine.[l1] This 7-hydroxymitragynine metabolite has been shown to be associated with
relatively greater abuse liability than its parent mitragynine, as it is more potent than mitragynine and 3-
22 times more potent than morphine at opioid receptors.[12-14] The pharmacology of 7-
hydroxymitragynine appears to differ from mitragynine in that is only acts on opioid receptors, rather than
multiple systems in the human body. It has been proposed that the amount of 7-hydroxymitragynine
should be limited in products as it is found in very low levels in the native kratom leaf material and,
indeed, many US products do not contain 7-hydroxymitragynine in detectable amounts. From a safety
perspective, limiting the amount of both mitragynine, 7-hydroxymitragynine, and other alkaloids as has
been done in most kratom-related state legislation, ensures that consumers are unlikely to experience
adverse effects at commonly reported amounts of kratom ingestion.
With a diverse kratom product marketplace in the US, it is important to distinguish between products
comprised predominantly of native kratom leaf material, which contains at a maximum 2.5% mitragynine
as part of a total of 4% of alkaloids by weight, and kratom extract products with enriched alkaloids.
Extracts products that contain multiple times the amount of mitragynine and other kratom alkaloids than
are present in the native leaf material may produce a higher risk profile of adverse effects than whole -leaf
products although there is currently limited clinical evidence supporting this claim. Likewise, kratom
products that are pre -mixed with other substances would confer a higher risk profile than kratom leaf
PAGE 2
alone. Further, any semi -synthetic, isolated kratom alkaloid, and selective alkaloid rich fraction would, we
believe, pose considerable risk in an unregulated product, and would no longer be considered as "kratom"
in any meaningful sense of the term. Because native kratom leaf has a long use history in Southeast Asia,
there are very few instances of major adverse effects reported, which is the basis for the differentiation
between native leaf and kratom extract materials. In the years that kratom whole leaf and extract products
have been sold in the US, there have been, to date, few clinical case reports of adverse effects. These
include reports related to kratom-related morbidities, toxicities, mortalities, and those related to kratom
physical dependence or substance use disorder. This is noteworthy given that US kratom consumers now
number in the millions.[15-17] Of the cases that do exist, many are confounded by a variety of factors,
including other health conditions and polysubstance exposure.
Surveys, case reports, ecological momentary assessment, and other forms of self -report indicate that the
primary use of kratom products among US consumers is for relieving pain, anxiety, or mood -related
symptoms (and improving mood generally), increasing focus and energy, and for a sizable subset of
consumers as a short- and long-term replacement for substances which they believed caused them
problems, primarily opioids and alcohol, and to a lesser extent stimulants.[18-21]
Like many psychoactive products (e.g., caffeine), kratom products can be habit-forming as indicated by
users who consume large quantities of kratom with greater frequency over an extended period of time.
The severity of physical dependence is mild to moderate, and substance use disorder for kratom has been
assessed as mild -moderate for those who meet criteria according to the Diagnostic and statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria.[22] Note that a majority of kratom users do not develop a use
disorder; those that use kratom regularly and develop physical dependence can manage this and their
kratom consumption despite a lack of proper dosing instructions on most kratom product labels. Indeed,
we have not seen clinically concerning hallmarks of addiction in the samples of consumers we and others
have assessed.[23]
PAGE 3
Because of the various kratom products on the market without Federal regulation or appropriate oversight
of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), it is important to ensure consumers have access to
kratom products that are adequately labeled to inform their consumption. As such, legislatures should
require adequate labeling of kratom products according to the FDA and the US Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) guidances for dietary supplements. Such labeling should include at a minimum:
address and name of manufacturer or distributor, a list of all ingredients, the total amount of kratom
material per serving, how many servings per container, an expiration or best before date, a statement
about how products may be habit-forming with frequent or heavy use, a statement that consumers should
consult a healthcare professional prior to kratom consumption, a statement that kratom use is not advised
during pregnancy and lactation or by a person who is taking prescription medications. Sales of kratom
products should be limited to consumers 18 years and older. The amount of mitragynine, 7-
hydroxymitragynine, and total alkaloids per serving should be included on the label as well as a statement
that the product contains no semi -synthetic kratom-derived alkaloids. Lastly, the FDA has established
guidance documents on proper labeling and good manufacturing practices for dietary supplements that
can be adapted for kratom products. Good manufacturing practices (GMP) encompasses adequate
documentation of sourcing of materials, adherence to established analytical principles, and organization
of facilities and personnel to adhere to regulatory requirements. All kratom products should adhere to
GMP.
To conclude, we write this with the recognition that considerably more investment in scientific research is
needed to better understand kratom, both as the naturally growing botanical and kratom-derived product
formulations. Likewise, more research is needed on kratom's effects on humans. Our statement is based
only on data to date. However, based on the currently available scientific and public health knowledge
about kratom, we believe that US adults should have access to kratom products that are regulated, ideally
along the lines we have noted above, and that investments are made by state legislatures not only in
PAGE 4
passing kratom regulations, but enforcing them. Finally, this statement does not necessarily reflect the
views of any institution that we work for.
Respectfully,
Oliver Grundmann, PhD, FCP
Assistant Dean of Lifelong Learning
Director & Clinical Professor
Online Graduate Programs in Pharmaceutical Chemistry & Clinical Toxicology
Department of Medicinal Chemistry, College of Pharmacy
Department of Biobehavioral Nursing Science, College of Nursing
University of Florida
Phone:+1-352-273-7714
Email: grundmanAufl.edu
Christopher R. McCurdy, PhD, FAAPS
Associate Dean for Faculty Development
Professor of Medicinal Chemistry
The Frank A. Duckworth Eminent Scholar Chair
Director, OF Translational Drug Development Core
Department of Medicinal Chemistry
College of Pharmacy
University of Florida
Office: (352) 294-8691
Email: cmccurdy@cop.uEl.edu
Abhisheak Sharma, PhD
Assistant Professor of Pharmaceutics
Co -Director, OF Translational Drug Development Core
Department of Pharmaceutics
University of Florida
Phone: +1-662-715-1151, +1-352-294-8690
Email: asharmal@cop.ufl.edu
Kirsten Smith, PhD
Assistant Professor
Behavioral Pharmacology Research Unit
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
School of Medicine
Johns Hopkins University
Cell:865-418-8177 Office:410-550-0035
Email: ksmit398 rc'h.edu
PAGE 5
References
1. Brown PN, Lund JA, Murch SJ. A botanical, phytochemical and ethnomedicinal review of the
genus Mitragyna korth: Implications for products sold as kratom. J Ethnopharmacol [Internet].
2017/03/24. 2017;202:302-25. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.03.020
2. Smith KE, Sharma A, Grundmann O, McCurdy CR. Kratom alkaloids: A blueprint? ACS Chem
Neurosci. 2023;14(2):195-7.
3. Veltri C, Grundmann O. Current perspectives on the impact of Kratom use. Subst Abuse Rehabil
[Internet]. 2019; 10:23-3 1. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31308789
4. Singh D, Narayanan S, Vicknasingam B, Prozialeck WC, Smith KE, Corazza O, et al. The Use of
Kratoin (Mitragyna speciosa Korth.) Among People Who Co -use Heroin and Methamphetamine in
Malaysia. J Addict Med [Internet]. 2022 Mar 1 [cited 2022 Oct 1];16(2):223-8. Available from:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34001777/
5. Karunakaran T, Zhuo NK, Zailan AA, Mian VJY, Bakar MHA. The Chemical and
Pharmacological Properties of Mitragynine and Its Diastereomers: An Insight Review. Front
Pharmacol. 2022;
6. Wilson LL, Harris HM, Eans SO, Brice-Tutt AC, Cirino TJ, Stacy HM, et al. Lyophilized Kratom
Tea as a Therapeutic Option for Opioid Dependence. Drug Alcohol Depend [Internet]. 2020;216.
Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33017752
7. Henningfield JE, Rodricks J V., Magnuson AM, Huestis MA. Respiratory effects of oral
mitragynine and oxycodone in a rodent model. Psychopharmacology (Berl) [Internet]. 2022 Dec 1
[cited 2023 Feb 17];239(12):3793-804. Available from:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/36308562/
8. NIDA. Kratom Research Topics National Institute on Drug Abyse. 2022.
9. Leksungnoen N, Andriyas T, Ngernsaengsaruay C, Uthairatsamee S, Racharak P, Sonjaroon W, et
al. Variations in mitragynine content in the naturally growing kratom (Mitragyna speciosa)
population of Thailand. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:1028547.
10. Sengnon N, Vonghirundecha P, Chaichan W, Juengwatanatrakul T, Onthong J, Kitprasong P, et al.
Seasonal and geographic variation in alkaloid content of kratom (Mitragyna speciosa (Korth.)
Havil.) from Thailand. Plants. 2023; 12(4):949.
11, Kamble SH, Sharma A, King TI, Leon F, McCurdy CR, Avery BA. Metabolite Profiling and
Identification of Enzymes Responsible for the Metabolism of Mitragynine, the Major Alkaloid of
Mitragyna speciosa (Kratom). Xenobiotica [Internet]. 2019;49(11). Available from:
bttps://www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov/pubmed/30547698
12. Obeng S, Wilkerson JL, Leon F, Reeves ME, Restrepo LF, Gamez-Jimenez LR, et al.
Pharmacological Comparison of Mitragynine and 7-Hydroxymitragynine: In Vitro Affinity and
Efficacy for µ-Opioid Receptor and Opioid-Like Behavioral Effects in Rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther
[Internet]. 202 1;376(3). Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33384303
13. Matsumoto K, Hatori Y, Murayama T, Tashima K, Wongseripipatana S, Misawa K, et al.
Involvement of µ-opioid receptors in antinociception and inhibition of gastrointestinal transit
PAGE 6
induced by 7-hydroxymitragynine, isolated from Thai herbal medicine Mitragyna speciosa. Eur J
Pharmacol. 2006;549(1-3):63-70.
14. Hiranita T, Sharma A, Oyola FL, Obeng S, Reeves ME, Restrepo LF, et al. Potential contribution
of 7-hydroxymitragynine, a metabolite of the primary kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) alkaloid
mitragynine, to the µ-opioid activity of mitragynine in rats. The FASEB journal. 2020;34(S 1):1.
15. Palamar JJ. Kratom use is underestimated, but prevalence still appears to be low. Am J Prev Med.
2022;62(1):133-4.
16. Covvey JR, Vogel SM, Peckham AM, Evoy KE. Prevalence and characteristics of self -reported
kratom use in a representative US general population sample. J Addict Dis [Internet]. 2020;38(4).
Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32657217
17. Henningfield JE, Grundmann O, Garcia-Romeu A, Swogger MT. We need better estimates of
kratom use prevalence. Am J Prev Med. 2022;62(1):132-3.
18. Smith KE, Panlilio L V, Feldman JD, Grundmann O, Dunn KE, McCurdy CR, et al. Ecological
Momentary Assessment of Self -Reported Kratom Use, Effects, and Motivations Among US
Adults. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(1):e2353401-c2353401.
19. Grundmann O. Patterns of Kratom use and health impact in the US —Results from an online
survey. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2017;176.
20. Coe MA, Pillitteri JL, Sembower MA, Gerlach KK, Henningfield JE. Kratom as a Substitute for
Opioids: Results From an Online Survey. Drug Alcohol Depend [Internet]. 2019;202:24-32.
Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31284119
21. Bath R, Bucholz T, Buros AF, Singh D, Smith KE, Veltri CA, et al. Self -reported Health Diagnoses
and Demographic Correlates With Kratom Use: Results From an Online Survey. J Addict Med
[Internet]. 2019; Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31567595
22, Smith KE, Dunn KE, Rogers JM, Garcia-Romeu A, Strickland JC, Epstein DH. Assessment of
Kratom Use Disorder and Withdrawal Among an Online Convenience Sample of US Adults. J
Addict Med. 2022;
23. Hill K, Grundmann O, Smith KE, Stanciu CN. Prevalence of Kratom Use Disorder among Kratom
Consumers. J Addict Med. 2023;10-1097.
PAGE 7
� r
1, k3z-ft-j;rrM®+�� �' City Council Supplemental Meeting Packet
CITY OF IOWA CITY November 4, 2024
Information submitted between distribution of the Supplemental Meeting Packet 1 on Friday
and 3:00 pm on Monday.
Late Handout(s)
10.b. ratom Ban -See correspondence form Laura Crossett.
November 4, 2024 City of Iowa City
Item Number: 10.b.
a
CITY OF IOWA CITY
"QR T-4 COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
November 4, 2024
Kratom Ban - See correspondence form Laura Crossett.
Attachments: Correspondence form Laura Crossett
Ashley Platz
From: Laura Crossett <newrambler@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, November 4, 2024 2:50 PM Late Handouts Distributed
To: *City Council
Subject: Kratom ban
2q
A (Date)
RI5A
** This email originated outside of the City of Iowa City email system. Please take extra care opening any links or
attachments. ** Dear Council Members:
I would come to speak to you in person this evening in favor of a kratom ban in Iowa City, which I understand you're
voting on tonight, but I have been quite ill and don't want to spread my germs more than necessary.
I am in favor of a ban on the sale of kratom in Iowa City because I believe it is a way to take a symbolic stand on a public
health issue both by indicating the potential harms of the drug and by making it slightly harder to get.
I know some of you are reluctant to legislate about a substance the FDA has made no move to regulate (though
notably the DEA was on the verge of regulating it cLuite severely in 2016), and I am sympathetic to that reluctance,
particularly given that the policing of drugs has disproportionately negatively affected people of color for decades. Many
of you have also noted that a ban on sales in Iowa City will hardly make the substance hard to get —for instance, instead
of going to the gas station a mile from my house, I could go to the liquor store in Coralville near where I take a weekly
viola lesson.
I also know, however, that legislation that make cigarettes harder to get and made more and more places off limits for
smoking is correlated pretty strongly with a decrease in smoking, and so in that way even a small step starts to make a
difference.
But I also know that cities and states legislate about all sorts of things that the federal government does not. This
country has no federal anti -discrimination law for LGBTQ people, but some states do. Iowa City manufactures and hands
out Prides signs, which isn't even a form of legislation and has, one could argue, no practical effect at all —but certainly I
notice a difference in communities that don't do such things.
I am not a medical expert and I can't speak to precisely how kratom should be regulated or used. I do know, however,
that it acts on opioid receptors and that you can buy it in multiple locations in my neighborhood, and that, as the FDA
currently does not regulate it, there is no real guarantee of just what might be in any given kratom product you buy.
I also knew Liz Wisnosky, a local woman who died due to circumstances related to her kratom use, and I knew her
children, who now do not have a mother. I believe that banning the sale of kratom in Iowa City would be a symbolic and
maybe even practical step in reducing harm, and perhaps even in preventing more such awful deaths.
Thank you for your work and your consideration.
Sincerely,
Laura Crossett
1420 Yewell St.
Iowa City, IA 52240
319-389-0449
Laura Crossett [she/her]
newrambler.net since 1999
lauracrossett.com