Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pine County adopts interim-use ordinance regulating adult‑use cannabis businesses
Summary
The Pine County Board adopted Ordinance 2024‑58 to regulate siting and operation of adult‑use cannabis businesses, making manufacturers an interim‑use only and establishing routine zoning inspections; the move follows a lengthy public hearing with dozens of commenters about setbacks and siting.
Pine County commissioners voted to adopt Ordinance 2024‑58, a countywide overlay ordinance to regulate adult‑use cannabis businesses, after a public hearing that drew residents, business proponents and detailed staff explanation of the proposed performance standards. County Auditor‑Treasurer Kelly Schroeder summarized the changes since the December 3 draft and said the ordinance treats larger indoor cultivators and smaller operations differently, requires annual administrative permits for smaller operators, and allows routine zoning inspections for businesses regulated under the ordinance.
“We're treating retail differently than meso and micro businesses…if it's happening on the same property, we don't want two different sections of the ordinance to apply,” Schroeder said when explaining definitions and the decision to allow certain licenses to be stacked on a single parcel under some conditions. Schroeder also noted the board had moved some uses from conditional to interim to allow the county to learn how businesses operate before settling on permanent rules.
Public comment ran more than an hour. Tenants, township residents and local business advocates weighed in: some, like tenant Joe Zappa, said the draft struck a reasonable balance by discouraging stacked cultivation or multiple manufacturers on a single parcel while allowing a cultivator and manufacturer to co‑locate. “Having a cultivator and a manufacturer…is efficient security wise, transportation wise,” Zappa said in support. Other residents urged stricter siting, larger setbacks from homes, and alignment with state Office of Cannabis Management recommendations that businesses be located in industrial or commercial areas rather than near residences.
After debate about setbacks and performance standards, a motion to adopt the ordinance with one technical change — making manufacturers subject to an interim‑use permit rather than an interim or conditional use — passed and the board recorded the motion as carried. The board and staff noted the ordinance is an overlay intended to operate countywide where traditional zoning districts do not exist in most townships; townships may adopt stricter local rules if they choose. Next steps include publishing the adopted ordinance and implementing the administrative permit processes and inspection program.
