Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Anoka County adopts cannabis business ordinance, caps retail registrations at 30

2260128 · February 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a public hearing with no speakers, the Anoka County Board adopted an ordinance establishing county oversight of cannabis businesses, setting a limit of 30 retail registrations (one per 12,500 residents) and describing delegation, education and public‑health roles.

The Anoka County Board of Commissioners on Feb. 11 adopted an ordinance to govern cannabis businesses in the county and set a limit of 30 retail registrations, a cap based on a statutory ratio of one registration per 12,500 residents.

The board opened a public hearing at 10:02 a.m. and stated in the record that notice had been published on Jan. 24, 2025, in the Anoka County Union. County Attorney Johnson closed the public comment portion after no members of the public appeared to speak. Janelle Hubbard, Public Health and Environmental Service director, told the board that public health would play a role in developing and overseeing the ordinance, saying the department aims to “ensure the health and safety of our communities.”

The ordinance text adopted by the board says, in part, “Anoka County is authorized under Minnesota's law to limit the number of retail registrations within its boundary, 1 per 12,500. Therefore, Anoka County sets the limit of retail registrations for Anoka County boundaries to 30.” Commissioner Meissner moved the ordinance; Commissioner Jepsen seconded. The motion passed unanimously after a voice vote.

Board members discussed why the county needs an ordinance. Hubbard and multiple commissioners said counties are required to provide regulatory oversight that includes townships and to offer a consistent framework that cities may adopt or opt to delegate to the county. Commissioners emphasized that cities retain autonomy to write their own rules and that any city may later enter a delegation agreement with the county to have the county oversee cannabis licensing and registration in that city.

Commissioners also discussed public‑health and education components the ordinance would require of businesses, and the need to remain flexible while the state Office of Cannabis Management and local governments continue to establish procedures. Commissioner Meissner noted that the county could later amend the ordinance if implementation showed changes were needed; Jepsen and others said the 30‑registration figure reflects the statutory ratio and functions as an upper limit under the adopted language.

County staff recorded no written comments submitted before the meeting. County Attorney Johnson recommended a minor correction to the ordinance title to match the published public notice; the board approved that correction before the vote. The ordinance and related materials were attached to the board agenda for Feb. 11, 2025.

What happens next: the ordinance is now on the books as adopted by the county board. Cities in Anoka County may continue to adopt their own regulations or choose a delegation agreement with the county for oversight. County public health staff said they will continue working with cities and the Office of Cannabis Management as the state and local infrastructures are implemented.