North St. Paul City Council — Transcript
Saturday, March 15, 2025
Adult Use Cannabis Ordinance Adoption
Votes (1)
Public Hearing and Discussion on North St Paul Adult Use Cannabis Ordinance
Dissent: None on the final motion. Initial discussion included differing opinions on allowing MU1 zoning and requiring a CUP, but consensus was reached for the final recommendation. A condition was added to readdress the topic in a year.
Moved by Commissioner Wise [0:28:13] · Seconded by Commissioner Alvarez [0:28:22]
The Planning Commission held a public hearing (with no public present) and discussed staff and City Council recommendations for the local adult-use cannabis ordinance. Key points included restricting operations to MU2 and MU3 zones, not allowing them in the historic MU1 downtown area, establishing buffer zones (750 ft from schools, 500 ft from daycares/parks), setting operating hours (Mon-Sat 10 am-10 pm, Sun 10 am-9 pm), and capping registrations at two. A major point of debate was the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), with staff suggesting it might not be legally defensible due to state restrictions, but providing benefits like public notice. Commissioners also raised concerns about potential traffic impacts from such businesses, the lack of defined 'park attractions' in state law, and the possibility of drive-thru services. Comparison to liquor store regulations and experiences in other legal states (Michigan, Alaska) were made. Ultimately, the Commission favored not requiring a CUP and maintaining the MU2/MU3 zoning restriction, while acknowledging limited control due to state mandates. A request was made to readdress the ordinance after one year of operations to assess real-life impacts.
Notable Quotes (4)
we cannot prohibit outright prohibit the sale and and possession and transportation of cannabis and hemp products per state statute we are only allowed um to enact uh reasonable and I use air quotes there reasonable restrictions meaning you cannot uh through local zoning control outright ban or prohibit um uh the operation of cannabis uh sales and other uh types uh through those local zoning controls
the city is really really tightly restricted on what restrictions you can place on a on a business and uh the City attorney um comment was you know the city is not really allowed to be more restrictive in a lot of these cases and therefore maybe a conditional need permit is not even shouldn't even be required
If I look at any of our locations here we are not going to be able to handle that kind of traffic if that's the kind of activity that we're talking about generating so I guess I would ask what does that mean as we start thinking about two locations in a town that cannot handle that kind of volume
I think I would agree with um commissioner Gad booy about a lot of what she said with with you know this is no different from a liquor store um I mean I understand the state statute is going to control it slightly differently but from our point of view it shouldn't really be any different
Ordinances & Resolutions (4)
Minnesota state law legalizing adult use cannabis consumption and dictating parameters for local regulation.
Overview of potential local control options authorized by the Cannabis Act, included in the meeting packet.
Outlines what can and cannot be done regarding a Conditional Use Permit for cannabis operations.
The local ordinance under consideration by the Planning Commission.