A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to a variance request from the Northern Improvement Company, which sought to reduce the setback for mining operations near County State Aid Highway 26 in Spring Prairie Township. The company proposed reducing the standard 200-foot setback to 100 feet, arguing that valuable materials within this zone could aid local infrastructure projects. This request stirred concerns among township representatives, who feared inadequate reclamation efforts could transform the landscape into a “lunar” one. Leon Schloffman, a township official, voiced these concerns, emphasizing historical issues with reclamation and weed management, despite acknowledging the company’s competence.

The board deliberated over whether the variance aligned with the Klay County Land Development Code’s intent and purposes. It was ultimately agreed that the variance would not alter the locality’s character and addressed practical difficulties faced by the applicant. Conditions were set, including a stipulation that mining could occur no closer than 43 feet from the road right-of-way, with no stockpiling within the 200-foot setback. The variance was approved with these conditions.

Equally contentious was the proposal for a text amendment to the ordinance, aimed at permitting cannabis businesses in the Agricultural Service Center zoning district. The amendment would expand business opportunities beyond the limited commercial areas currently designated for such uses. However, it faced opposition due to potential conflicts with the comprehensive plan and the rural character of the area. Concerns were raised about the possible surge in variance requests if the amendment proceeded, which could overwhelm the Board of Adjustments.

The amendment discussion highlighted the need for economic development while preserving historical and cultural sites. Proponents argued for the adaptive reuse of old agricultural buildings, positing that revitalizing these structures could prevent their loss. Despite these arguments, the board recommended denying the amendment, citing inconsistencies with the county’s comprehensive plan and the nascent status of cannabis regulations in the region. This recommendation will be forwarded to the county board for further consideration.

In addition to these major topics, the board addressed several other issues. A conditional use permit for a solar garden was discussed, with concerns about its impact on prime farmland and the agricultural landscape. The solar project, planned to occupy approximately 10 acres, would interconnect with Excel Energy’s grid. While some board members viewed the solar garden as beneficial for diversifying revenue streams for farmers, others were wary of its aesthetic and agricultural implications.

The board also considered a conditional use permit for a cannabis micro business in Holly, Minnesota. The applicant outlined plans to cultivate cannabis and operate a retail space, emphasizing security measures and adherence to state regulations. The board determined that the business would not conflict with local land uses and would support the county’s commercial development goals.