Rice County took its first steps toward another ordinance regarding the newly legalized cannabis industry, this time deciding where different types of the businesses can be built.
The county has several types of zoning districts, like industrial, residential, agricultural, etc. Tuesday morning’s Rice County Board of Commissioners work session was mostly dedicated to getting guidance on which districts should allow which types of businesses.
As Rice County Environmental Services Director Julie Runkel explained to the board, Minnesota offers several licenses for cannabis businesses, but they would focus on the main two: microbusiness and mezzobusiness licenses.
A microbusiness can have up to 5,000 square feet of indoor growing space and a half acre of outdoor growing space. The microbusiness can manufacture products for consumption, but only as much as it can produce with the plants grown in 5,000 square feet.
The microbusiness can also have a retail area, in which customers are permitted to sample edible cannabis products on site.
“I view it in my mind similar to like a winery or distillery where they’re making the product there and then they’re selling some to the customers on site, and they can actually consume it there,” Runkel said.
Commissioner Steve Underdahl said he believes that could go against the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, but said he might be “getting too deep into the weeds right now, no pun intended.”
Rice County Environmental Planner Jeremy Edwards said to keep in mind there are other forms of consumption, not just smoking. A press release from “Canna Advisors,” a consulting firm helping build the cannabis industry in the country, only mentioned edible cannabis being allowed for on-site consumption.
The mezzobusiness is similarly mixed-use, but doesn’t allow for on-site consumption. A mezzobusiness can have up to three retail locations, whether one is attached or all three are separate from the cultivation and manufacturing spaces.
Counties and cities can place a cap on the number of licenses allowed within their area. Cities and townships may choose to register retail cannabis stores themselves or delegate registration to the county, which could impact any county-level caps.
State regulations will provide some guidance, but local governments are stuck navigating how to regulate community impacts through zoning.
The board discussed taking a cautious initial approach to regulations while learning more about the approaches of cities within the county. Most of the board agreed with Commissioner Gerry Hoisington’s assessment of the best route to take.
“Wow, there’s so many unanswered questions,” he said. “And so it’s just start from scratch, and we’re just trying to develop something. My thought would be to start out with this thing on the conservative side of things. Just not open up any type of Pandora’s box. I don’t know how this is all going to develop. But time will tell I guess how this thing plays out.”
For the most part, no real guidance was given for now, in terms of the regulation itself. But the board did direct staff to check in with the cities to see the approach preferred by their respective governments, so the board can determine the best locations for the businesses.
Staff is also anticipating “an overhaul” of the county’s large-gathering ordinance, which Runkel said might come with regulating a license type called a “cannabis event license.”
Commissioner Jim Purfeerst inquired about the setbacks surrounding the new kinds of businesses.
“So once we approve a facility, if a daycare center wants to move in and they’re within that distance, whatever is set there, they won’t be able to open a daycare center then if this business is there first?” he asked.
Edwards clarified that will be up to the board as they continue to draft its ordinance.
As the board continues its discussion in the coming months, it is expected to pass a moratorium at next Tuesday’s meeting, which would not allow new cannabis businesses to open until next year.
Most Popular
Comments / 0