Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cannabis microbusiness registration at North Star Building moved for legal review after buffer-zone concerns
Summary
Councilors postponed decision on Finnegan Farms LLC’s microbusiness registration at the former North Star Drug building, directing the city attorney to issue a formal opinion on whether nearby autism-program activities create a prohibited buffer-zone under ordinances 6.11 and 6.33.
The Virginia City Committee of the Whole on Feb. 17 deferred action on a cannabis microbusiness registration after councilors raised legal questions about zoning and proximity to programs for young adults.
The petition by Patrick and Kelly Finnegan to register Finnegan Farms LLC for a retail microbusiness at the old North Star Drug building (603 North 9th Street) prompted detailed questions about whether the location falls within a prohibited distance of a “youth-oriented facility.” Councilors noted an email from the Minnesota Autism Center and correspondence citing the Bridge to Independence program operating at a nearby leased space. Councilor Paulson read an attorney letter claiming the issuance of a permit near the autism center would be improper and could be subject to an injunction.
City Attorney Brian Lindsey told the council he had reviewed ordinance section 6.11 and found its denial authority is limited to items regulated in chapter 6, and he said he needed to assimilate recent correspondence and the city’s tobacco/cannabinoid language in section 6.33 before issuing a formal opinion. "I'll go back, and I'll do, I'll research it one more time, put together a formal opinion that I'll deliver to the council by memo," Lindsey said.
Councilors debated whether the autism-related programming is a licensed daycare or a separate program; Community Development staff said they had not found a daycare license for the program and described it as programming from the Minnesota Autism Center. Several councilors asked that the city confirm whether state statute or agency definitions treat such programs as daycare for the purpose of buffer zones.
After discussion, Councilor Bachstader moved, and Councilor Scalco supported, to move the matter to the next full council meeting for further legal and factual review. The motion passed on a recorded voice/roll-call count of four in favor and two opposed, with one absence noted. The council directed the city attorney and staff to provide a memo and any relevant correspondence in advance of the next meeting.
