Fergus Falls, MN – During Monday’s (June 17th) Fergus Falls City Council Meeting, the second reading of the Ordinance 58 occurred, and the City Council failed to pass it into law.
What Ordinance 58 is and why it is so controversial.
Ordinance 58 is a law that would alter zoning laws and determine what areas within the city a business can sell or manufacture marijuana.
According to the ordinance as written, cannabis businesses would not be allowed to sell marijuana in the downtown area.
The retailers that are currently selling hemp downtown, namely Sugar High and Elevate, would still be able to sell their current products, but when the State government gives out marijuana licenses, they would not be able to sell full marijuana at their current locations.
The owners of these businesses and their supporters worry that their businesses would not be able to survive the ordinance, as either they are forced to move which the owners don’t believe they can afford, or they can’t sell marijuana and lose business to someone who can afford to move into the other zones and sell the plant.
The public voices their concerns and the Chief of Public Safety responds.
Following the previous Council meeting, where multiple constituents voiced opposition of the ordinance, Chief of Public Safety Kile Bergren presented an amended version of the ordinance that would include those areas with certain restriction at a Committee of the Whole meeting.
He also addressed some of the questions that were asked at the meeting, though not all of them, like why it appears that the Cannabis Committee did not consult with any cannabis experts.
The public rebuttals as discussions get more heated.
As the Council opened up the floor for the public to speak on the matter, it was apparent that emotions were running high for some of the more passionate constituents.
Emily McCune, the owner of Sugar High, was the first to the lectern, “I’m just tired, and I’m confused, and I’m frustrated.”
She went on to talk about how many of the “arguments” Chief Bergren and some of the Council members have stated have no relevance to the details of the ordinance, and are instead opinion based on the stigma against cannabis, which is not what is being decided.
She said, “If we’re talking about opinions, it’s as ridiculous as me to get up here and say, ‘Well my opinion is that having alcohol downtown and the City of Fergus Falls profiting off of alcoholism and addiction shouldn’t be allowed.’ You don’t get to pigeonhole cannabis and set it aside from tobacco and alcohol. If you do, you are using your opinion on that substance.”
After McCune’s passionate rebuttal and questioning of the Council, a couple of concerned constituents also voiced their feelings towards the ordinance.
Jacob Buettner, “If we’re aiming towards economic growth in downtown Fergus Falls we absolutely need to be prioritizing free operation of businesses downtown regardless of whether or not you agree or disagree with the products they’re selling, they are legal.”
Mike Donoho, “Your concern about not allowing two established cannabis businesses, very nicely situated in downtown Fergus Falls, but then having the cannabis businesses front and center as tourists and other people drive into Fergus Falls. It makes absolutely no sense, why you wouldn’t allow the conditional use permits or interim use permits for established businesses.”
The last member of the public to speak was Kris Stach, the owner of Elevate.
He spoke about how he felt the way Elevate and Sugar High were being treated unfairly, and he shared many of McCune’s frustrations.
He also questioned the statements that have been made about public safety concerns and followed with statistics found in research studies, “Others have spoke about public safety concerns with zero facts or statistics to go along with this.”
In conclusion, Stach said, “I would love to see us stay downtown. Me or Emily might not get a license to sell cannabis, however if we do, we’d like to stay in this community and watch it grow. Moving us out to the outskirts of town or in the industrial parks isn’t going to help the rest of the small town businesses in downtown, unfortunately. And being a lifelong resident, I would love to keep raising my children here.”
After Stach spoke, Mayor Ben Schierer closed the public discussion and allowed the members of the Council to speak.
Council member Scott Kvamme started his comments with, “First of all, I think it’s not appropriate to say that we would be closing or moving anybody. This isn’t about closing or moving anybody. This is about what would be coming, which is the legalization of recreational marijuana. It wouldn’t effect what’s currently happening in the businesses that currently exist can currently exist and continue doing what they’re doing.”
He continued to explain the importance of having a zoning ordinance on the books before the legalization occurs and licenses are given out, and what he believes is the future of Fergus Falls, “I think the future of Fergus Falls is young families and children. My view is that this is not a family friendly business, not a family friendly product, it doesn’t serve to develop a family friendly culture.”
In a shocking statement to those gathered, Kvamme also said, “Going with B6 and industrial zoning doesn’t deny anybody access to anything. They can find it, and if they’re too stoned to find it, well they’ve got bigger problems.”
After that statement was made, members of the public quickly voiced discern for his “inappropriate” comment, and the strong emotions filled the room.
After Kvamme said his piece, Mayor Schierer spoke against the idea that the ordinance wouldn’t be moving businesses, “I don’t think there’s any reasonable person that knows the market as it’s changing, expects the THC market to continue. THC businesses will no longer be in business, so to say that we’re allowing these two businesses to stay in existence, I don’t think that’s a fair statement. If it’s technically true, it’s not actually what’s going to happen with the market.”
He also spoke personally of his time as an owner of a business downtown, “When my wife and I started a business in this community, it was a business that manufactured a controlled substance. We made beer. It was controlled at the federal level, state level, there was local licensing. We would not have been able to start that business under the [type of] ordinance the City is considering right now.”
He finished by saying, “The state has allowed it, these are legal businesses. As a community, are we going to support the businesses that currently exist? Are we going to support the businesses that want to invest their money and their time in our community. I think the message that we send is so important to the future of this community.“
The vote failed. What next?
After discussions were closed, the Council took a vote on the initial draft of the ordinance that would exclude downtown from cannabis retailing.
Council members Kvamme, Job, Rachels, and Kreimeier voted in favor, while members Rufer, Fish, and Hicks voted against.
Per the City Council Charter, the ordinance needed 5 votes in favor to pass, and it failed to do so.
The issue now goes back to the Cannabis Committee to try to find a new compromise that would be able to pass the Council, and hopefully help alleviate the concerns of the public.