Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Public Comments Cannabis topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents ask Pine County to limit cannabis operations near homes, cite lights, alarms and odors

6497247 · October 8, 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

Two residents used the public forum to urge stricter local siting rules and protections around cannabis facilities, citing bright lights visible for miles, audible alarms and odor concerns and invoking moral objections and existing county ordinance work.

Denise Weiss of Royalton Township and Les Arvis of Relson Township urged the Pine County Board of Commissioners during public comment to adopt stronger protections for residences near cannabis businesses, saying existing rules do not adequately shield neighbors from lights, noise and odor.

Denise Weiss told the board she has repeatedly asked for protections and described operational impacts from a nearby cannabis business: "Recently, lights have come on. We can see them 4 or 5 miles away," she said in the public forum. She also reported alarm noises the previous night that she said could be heard a quarter to a half mile away and likened the sound to multiple emergency vehicles.

Weiss said she believes cannabis operations should be located in industrial or commercially zoned areas and that local rules should better protect residents where facilities are permitted. She also framed part of her objection in religious terms, citing a passage from Mark 15 and arguing against drug use on moral grounds.

Les Arvis told the board he helped draft the county ordinance implementing state cannabis law and said the county followed the state's delegation of regulatory responsibility. Arvis said longtime operations such as Martin's Greenhouse operated for decades without complaint and argued the county ordinance gives businesses a fair chance to operate under state authorization.

The board did not take action on the comments during the meeting. The remarks were recorded as public forum statements; staff or commissioners did not present a response in the transcript excerpt.