My name is Susan Cave. I am also the mother of William Cave, who died at just 32 years old from consuming raw leaf not 70h. William was a healthy young man who worked hard. He had no history of addiction or drug use or abuse. He was a loving father of one daughter and a devoted husband… On April 20 2024, my son did not come home. His toxicology confirmed mitragynine was his killer. My William died from a toxic mixture of his prescribed antidepressants and RawLeafKratrom (RLK) In the beginning, Will and I were told that RLK was safe, natural, and a benign supplement to help with anxiety/ depression. After consuming RLK for less than one year, Will realized he had become dependent when he tried to stop and could not because the withdrawals and cravings were so overpowering. Will took raw leaf for 4 years before it took his life and the last 3 yrs was spend trying to withdraw and stop kratom…each time failing. Parents like me are left to bury our children while the AKA and the kratom industry continue to deny responsibility., deny deaths, call medical examiners incompetent, and call grieving parents liars. If RLK bans had existed earlier, my son might still be here today. After his death I joined a national non-profit organization called Kratom Danger Awareness founded by Wendy Chamberlain. Now I advocate not only for my son but for 1000s of other families who have been devastated by RLK. In 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration formally accepted our citizen petition requesting the scheduling of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine. That acceptance means is enough scientific and medical concern to warrant a full review under the Controlled Substances Act. The FDA has been clear that products containing kratom are adulterated and unlawfully marketed under food and drug law. They are not approved drugs, not lawful dietary supplements, and not compliant consumer products. Yet HB 308 establishes inspection, seizure, and enforcement authority for nicotine and hemp while leaving these adulterated, opioid-active products entirely outside the framework. That gap is now known. Parents have asked that it be addressed. The enforcement structure already exists on these very pages. I respectfully urge the Committee to amend HB 308 to include kratom, so that products the FDA has already identified as adulterated are subject to the same permitting, inspection, and seizure authority as every other high-risk retail product regulated by this bill. Please listen to the families. Please support Bills that ban or schedule RLK.

HB 308 is premised on the idea that products marketed as legal, natural, or reduced-harm still require oversight when they present public-health risks. That principle is sound — but the bill fails its own logic by excluding kratom. Kratom is a psychoactive substance sold in gas stations, vape shops, and tobacco retailers; it is available in high-potency extracts and concentrates; and it is associated with documented dependence, withdrawal syndromes, poison-center calls, and fatalities. Leaving kratom unregulated while regulating nicotine pouches and tobacco alternatives creates a regulatory contradiction and a clear loophole that undermines the purpose of HB 308. Kratom should be explicitly included under the same regulatory framework, or addressed through immediate companion legislation. Anything less is a failure of responsible governance.

HB 308 regulates tobacco and nicotine products in the name of public safety — yet completely ignores kratom, a psychoactive substance sold in the same gas stations and vape shops, marketed as “safe,” and available in high-potency extracts. This omission is not theoretical to me. On December 6, 2023, my son Austin died alone in his room. His toxicology was negative for fentanyl, heroin, and other illicit street opioids. The cause of death was ruled intoxication by mitragynine, the primary alkaloid in kratom. I was the one who found him, and that is a trauma I will live with forever. If Virginia believes public safety justifies regulating nicotine pouches and tobacco alternatives, there is no defensible reason to leave kratom completely unregulated. Treating kratom more leniently than tobacco is illogical and dangerous. A bill that claims to protect public health while ignoring a substance that has already killed Virginians is not reform — it is willful neglect.

My daughter Kielee died March 1st 2025 of mitragynine overdose. She was only 23 years old. Because she was so young they did an investigation. After an autopsy and a toxicology screen was preformed mitragynine overdose was determined to be the factor of death. Kielee trusted the word natural. She used natural kratom off. She believed it was safe to use for pain because that's how it is marketed. If HB 308 is about public safety and enforcement, then leaving kratom out guts the bill. Kratom is a gas-station opioid sold in convenience stores and smoke shops, taken for opioid-like effects, and concentrated into shots and extracts with no permit, no inspection, and no seizure authority. This bill proves the General Assembly knows how to regulate dangerous retail products. The structure is here. The enforcement power is here. The precedent is written line by line. And yet kratom alone is spared. That choice guarantees circumvention. When tobacco and nicotine are regulated, retailers will pivot to the one opioid-active product the law does not touch. Enforcement will tighten everywhere except where the risk is greatest. I urge the Committee not to advance a bill that closes every door while leaving the opioid on the counter untouched.

My name is Wendy Chamberlain. I am a mother, and I am here because my son, Joseph, is dead. Joseph did not struggle with illegal drugs. He did not overdose on fentanyl or heroin. He used kratom—Whole leaf natural powder , specifically its primary alkaloids, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine—products that are sold openly, marketed as safe, and completely unregulated. My son died from mitragynine toxicity. A product he used for energy. He was my only child , business owner and a dad to 3 amazing boys.. He simply sat down one evening to watch tv and fell asleep and never to wake up again. This changed our lives forever.. He was so full of life and love.. And taken away at 38 yrs old on 8/30/2020. After his death, I did what grieving parents do when the system fails them—I started asking questions. I learned that kratom products vary wildly in potency, that newer extracts are far stronger than what users believe they’re taking, and that there is no federal oversight, no dosing standards, and no warning labels that reflect real risk. I now serve as the founder and chair of Kratom Danger Awareness, nonprofit and I represent thousands of families across this country—parents who have buried children, spouses who have lost partners, and families living through addiction that began with a product sold as “natural” and “safe.” This is not speculation. This is not anecdote. In 2025, the Drug Enforcement Administration formally accepted our citizen petition requesting the scheduling of mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine. That acceptance means the federal government determined there is enough scientific and medical concern to warrant a full review under the Controlled Substances Act. That matters. Because it confirms what families like mine have been saying for years: these substances are not harmless supplements. They are psychoactive compounds with real risks—risks that communities like yours are now being forced to manage on the ground. Local action matters when federal action lags. Virginia has the opportunity to put public health first, to protect families, and to prevent more parents from standing where I stand today. I am not here because I want to be. I am here because my son cannot be. If HB 308 is intended to promote public safety and retail accountability through enforceable standards, then excluding kratom undermines the very framework the bill so carefully builds. The General Assembly has already done the difficult work. The definitions are written. The enforcement mechanisms are in place. The authority is clearly asserted—within this bill itself. What remains unexplained is why kratom alone is left outside that system. I urge the Committee not to advance a bill that strengthens oversight for every high-risk retail product while leaving the most obvious enforcement gap intact. Please act—before more families join ours. Thank you. Wendy Chamberlain

If HB 308 is intended to protect public safety and ensure meaningful retail accountability, then excluding kratom defeats the bill’s purpose. Kratom is a gas-station opioid sold next to nicotine and hemp, marketed as harmless, and consumed for opioid-like effects, yet it remains entirely outside the enforcement framework this bill creates. The General Assembly has already done the hard work. The permitting structure exists. Inspection and seizure authority exist. The precedent is written clearly in this legislation. What remains unexplained is why this one product—opioid-active, unregulated, and routinely sold in the same high-risk retail environments—is left exempt. I urge the Committee not to advance a bill that modernizes enforcement everywhere except where the danger is most obvious and the incentive to evade regulation is greatest.

Members of the Committee, HB 308 is one of the most expansive retail-control bills this body has considered in years. It creates a permitting regime. It authorizes inspections. It allows seizure of contraband. It establishes nuisance standards. It revokes licenses. It imposes escalating penalties. In short, HB 308 demonstrates that the General Assembly knows exactly how to regulate dangerous retail products when it chooses to do so. That is why the bill’s most important feature is not what it contains but what it leaves out. Kratom is not mentioned anywhere in HB 308. Not by name. Not by alkaloid. Not by botanical classification. Not by functional effect. This omission has a very real consequence: Under HB 308, a retailer can lose its tobacco permit for repeated violations and still lawfully sell kratom powders, capsules, concentrated extracts, and liquid shots the next morning, from the same counter, to the same customers. ABC agents may inspect, seize, and shut down nicotine and hemp products. They may not inspect, seize, or shut down kratom. That is not a hypothetical loophole. That is an enforcement gap created by this bill. HB 308’s precision makes this gap impossible to dismiss as oversight. The bill carefully defines products, delineates authority, and assigns penalties across more than twenty pages. The exclusion of kratom is therefore a policy decision—intentional or not—with predictable consequences. Those consequences will not be theoretical. They will be operational. Retailers will adapt immediately. Products subject to permits and seizures will be replaced with products that are not. Enforcement will migrate away from regulated items and toward the one psychoactive product left untouched. If the purpose of HB 308 is public safety, retail accountability, and meaningful enforcement, then leaving kratom outside this framework defeats the bill’s core intent. The General Assembly has already done the hard work. The structure exists. The enforcement authority exists. The precedent exists—on these very pages. What remains unanswered is why kratom alone is exempt. I respectfully urge the Committee not to advance a bill that modernizes enforcement for every high-risk retail product except the one most likely to exploit the gap.

Comments Document

I STRONGLY OPPOSE Patrick HOPE why do you have to always attack the vape industry. Did you get hurt by it? Does your children disobey your parental skills and do what they want? Why don't you go after the alcohol industry? DID you know that vaping nicotine doesn't create problems for the State Police or Local Police in paperwork for DWI and DUIs? Think about that. Your law is saying its ok to have prefilled pods but not nicotine in a traditional format that has less nicotine then the pre-filled pods? DID you know that the prefilled pods have the HIGHEST nicotine level on the market? DO you go after the alcohol industry and control their alcohol proof? DO you tell them you can't add fruity, desert or bakery flavors to their product? DO you tax them on the ingredients in their products like you tax the ingredients in vape e-liquid? DO you tax the beauty, food, and drug industry for their use of Propylene Glycol and Vegetable Glycerine? Let adults that are 21+ make the choice to do what THEY want with their BODY and MINDS. If you are serious about keeping this out of the "kids" hands, then make every single SMOKE SHACK, TOBACCO HUT and the gas stations owned by NON-CITIZENS use a software like "INTELLICHECK" to scan and verify REAL IDs. Underage individuals are NOT trying to purchase traditional juice (lowest nicotine); they are buying the PRE_FILLED pods which has the HIGHEST nicotine levels. Even when the undersage individuals get the products they are getting it from those who are of age and most likely IRRESPONIBLE parents are NOT PARENTING. If you are so serious about banning and SUPPORTING THE MONOPOLY OF BIG TOBACCO, then take away the following food products from the shelf: -Potatoes -Bell Peppers -Eggplants -Chili Peppers -Tea -Cauliflower -Chocolate -Toothpaste ALSO take away all the products in the health industry like patches, OTC nicotine gum and lozenges. Those products are most likely lining your pockets with donations by the lobbyists. Find a better way to keep these products out of the hands of underage individuals; 21+ adults don't want to use BIG TOBACCOs nasty ass products!!!

Hello, "No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine." should be removed from "§ 4.1-359. Persons to whom retail tobacco products may not be sold; proof of legal age; civil penalty." or just the whole bill entirely. What good does it do ban those products from vending machines that are placed in 21+ venues? Virginia is the only state in this area of the United States that has completely banned those products from vending machines, even when the machines have ID verification and facial recognition software. I believe it should be removed from the bill entirely and allow those in Virginia to have the same opportunities as those in the surrounding states have.

In HB308, "§ 4.1-359. Persons to whom retail tobacco products may not be sold; proof of legal age; civil penalty. A. No person shall sell to any person younger than 21 years of age, knowing or having reason to believe that such person is younger than 21 years of age, any retail tobacco products. No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine." "No person shall sell retail tobacco products from a vending machine" should be removed completely unless the definition of "retail tobacco products" is changed, or should be changed to exclude "aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine" or changed to only include aerosolized or vaporized when the product contains nicotine. Including vaporized or aerosolized products that do not contain nicotine, or hemp does not make sense when applied in the term "retail tobacco products" The definition makes it so that vending machine operators cannot offer products like HealthVape, Ripple+, MONQ, and VitaStik which are aromatherapy diffusers and vitamin vaporizers, which would be far better alternatives to nicotine vapes. Removing "aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine" from the definition of "Retail tobacco products" would allow people to have the opportunity to purchase healthier alternatives to nicotine vapes from vending machines, instead of purchasing nicotine vapes from convenience stores and gas stations, provided the vending machines have ID verification and facial recognition. I still believe that those products should not be sold to those who are under the age of 21, using ID verification as well as facial recognition on vending machines would make it so those who are under the age of 21 could not purchase any aerosolized or vaporized products. My hope is that the definition of "retail tobacco products" is changed to remove those products that do not contain nicotine or hemp. I understand why the state would not want to allow people to purchase nicotine or hemp products from vending machines, but why include the products that do not contain nicotine? Thank you