My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10.1 SR 09-062022
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2021 - 2030
>
2022
>
09-06-2022
>
10.1 SR 09-062022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/7/2022 10:14:48 AM
Creation date
9/1/2022 3:55:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
9/6/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
products, the products and the authority to regulate them are quite different. If a city chooses <br />to license edible cannabinoid sellers, it would be best to do so separately from tobacco <br />regulations or be sure to carefully draft new language in an existing ordinance that follows the <br />unique requirements of the new law. <br />Q16. If our city licenses edible cannabinoid products, <br />how much can we charge as a license fee? <br />A16. When setting fees, cities should consider a number of things. First, cities should not view <br />municipal licensing as a significant source of revenue. License fees must approximate the <br />direct and indirect costs associated with issuing the license and policing the licensed activities. <br />License fees that significantly exceed these costs are considered unauthorized taxes. <br />This means a license fee may not be so high as to be prohibitive or produce any substantial <br />revenue beyond the actual cost to issue the license and to supervise, inspect, and regulate the <br />licensed business. <br />Return to top—QLp-age, <br />Zoning <br />Q17.What authority do cities have regarding zoning <br />for where the products could be sold? <br />A17. Nothing in the new law limits a city's zoning authority related to CBD and THC products. <br />No Minnesota court has interpreted the limits on zoning authority in this context, but at least <br />one court in another state has ruled that a state law related to cannabis did "not nullify a <br />municipality's inherent authority to regulate land use under [state] law so long as the <br />municipality does not prohibit or penalize all medical marijuana cultivation ... and so long as <br />the municipality does not impose regulations that are unreasonable and inconsistent with <br />regulations established by state law" DeRuiter v. Township of Byron, 505 Mich.130, 949 N.W.2d 91 <br />(2020). It is unknown if a Minnesota court would come to the same conclusion. <br />Cities should be thoughtful and intentional about how zoning regulations related to <br />cannabinoid products affect their communities and work with their city attorney to determine <br />what, if any, zoning restrictions should be adopted. Cities will need to consider not only zoning <br />regulations related to retail sales of CBD and THC products but also the manufacturing and <br />production of the products within the city. Unless specifically differentiated in a zoning <br />ordinance, a city's general manufacturing and production zoning provisions will likely apply to <br />CBD and THC production as well. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.