Cannabis Discussion Exposes Shorewood Government Dysfunction

Staff left the Council unprepared for one of the most important decisions the Council will face

You might ask, why is KSB writing about a cannabis dispensary?  Our focus is natural resources and the environment.  But those require good government, and the cannabis dispensary highlights the issues we face on the environment. Shorewood's government is dysfunctional and ineffective.

The cannabis dispensary is just south of the high school, next to Starbucks.  The Council scheduled a vote on the dispensary on Monday. Under state law, the city can’t prohibit the dispensary in this location. 

But the city can put conditions – restrictions and requirements - on the business to ensure it’s safe and not a nuisance.  The city can’t require just any conditions – state law prevents some.  But the city has wide permission to require reasonable restrictions if it chooses.

This dispensary is on the road that leads to the high school. Half or more students travel past it at least twice a day.  Many kids walk by it to Starbucks where they study or pass time until school activities.  Many students walk near it to get home.  Many kids are there after dark in the winter.

This location is the poster child for requiring as many restrictions as possible to ensure safe and legal operations.  If you can require extra safety conditions anywhere, this is it. 

So what conditions or restrictions might be good? 

We don’t know much about dispensaries, so we asked ChatGPT for a list of conditions.  Chat gave 32 ideas that might be good. 

How many of those 32 did the Council consider?  Two.  Plus two that aren’t on ChatGPT’s list.  Two out of 32 – that’s 6%.   For the location where you’d expect the most conditions possible. 30 good ideas never came up.

What are examples of conditions?  Require a third-party security assessment, an enhanced ID-verification system, a guard outside during peak periods, documented employee training, security staffing tied to actual school schedules, professional exterior lighting plan, employee training on fake IDs and more.

We don’t know if those are good ideas, but it seems like they should be considered.

How would your boss feel if you answered 2 out of 32? 

We’re disappointed the Council didn’t do better, but the problem isn’t the Council – it’s City staff.  The Council is part-time, they work many hours for little pay. They’re not experts and don’t have time to research every issue.

That’s why they have staff. Staff’s job is to prepare Council for important policy decisions like this. And to provide the information they need to do a thorough review.

If only the Council let residents speak during the hearing.

How many items were on staff’s list for the Council to consider?  Well, staff didn’t prepare a list.  So zero.  Out of 32.  Staff asked the Council to require a few things that are already required by state or city law.  But those apply regardless of what the Council did.  They’re the bare minimum.  Nothing else.  The least regulation possible.  For the poster child of sensitive locations, where our kids walk and congregate.  Staff suggested the minimum, nothing more.

On one of the most important issues they’ll consider, the City Council was absent.  Because staff didn’t prepare them or give them the information to do their job.

That isn’t Council’s fault.  Imagine working all day, going through 2 hours of Council meetings and then being forced, with no preparation and no help, to come up with ideas on how to make a dispensary safe?  Council spent an hour spitballing ideas and making things up on the fly. 

It’s no wonder they considered 2 of 32 ideas. 

In some cases, staff moved the Council away from options.  Planning Director Griffiths responded to a question about fake IDs by stating that he believed state law requires electronic ID scanning, which is not true.  We’re sure the Planning Director didn’t know (but shouldn’t he if he’s leading this discussion?), but it ended discussion about tools to prevent fake IDs for a location that’s walking distance from a high school.  

The unfortunate thing is that Council didn’t have to approve the application now – they had until January.  They wanted to delay, which would allow residents to submit conditions or staff to do the work they should have.  But the City Attorney convinced the Council to approve it Monday – because it was more convenient for the dispensary owner.  No time to consider conditions because your kids’ safety would inconvenience the dispensary owner.

What should have happened?  Staff should have spent 15 minutes like we did on ChatGPT to prepare a list of conditions, their benefits and drawbacks and what other cities have done for Council to walk through, 1 to 32.  And Council could have used that list to come up with more ideas.

But staff didn’t do any of that.  They left the Council with no guidance, to figure it out on their own. 

That’s what City staff does.  We’ve seen complicated issues with the Council and never once has staff provided Council with guidance they need to consider the issues properly.  And every time the meetings are chaotic, random and ineffective.  This trainwreck was easy to predict.

The Council deserves better.  But they’re the boss.  If they want more, they can require more.  And they haven’t.  Until they do, they’ll continue to fail us on the most important matters facing the city.

It’s your kids walking by that dispensary every day, don’t you think someone should at least ask the questions?

Want to try it yourself?  Here’s our ChatGPT query:

Prepare a list of best practice conditions the city of shorewood mn can require from a canabis dispensary that is on a direct road to the large high school, where a majority of kids travel twice a day..  The dispensary is in the same parking lot as a Starbucks where many kids walk and study.  The Starbucks has an outdoor seating area and cars back up in the drivethrough for Starbucks.  There is quite a bit of foot traffic by kids past the dispensary.  Sunset in this area is before 5:00 pm for several months.  The dispensary hours are proposed to be 10am to 9pm.  School gets out at around 3 and after school activities continue into the evening.  The dispensary is outside the restricted area from the high school or other facilities and the city does not have a dispensary yet so the council cannot be block the dispensary but can require conditions that are not preempted by state law.  The city did a traffic study and decided this use will result in less traffic than the restaurant use that the building was used for earlier.  Because of backup to get to the high school, cars often back up in the morning and afternoon and are stopped in traffic for extended periods on the street adjacent to the dispensary.  The area behind the dispensary was a drivethrough lane before (won't be used for the dispensary) but is fairly out of sight and used to have dumpsters there.  Assume you are a high level security consultant with expertise in cannabis dispensaries in sensitive locations.  Set out best practices and conditions/restrictions for the council to consider, including things related to compliance, security and age verification.  Prepare a table of possible conditions/restrictions that the council can consider, for each, set out benefits, problem to be addressed, drawbacks and if already required under state or city law.  Don't suggest things that the city can't require under state law, but if it's not clear if something is allowed, set it out and list possible preemption as a drawback.