The meeting began with a public hearing on ordinance 2026-338, which proposed to regulate cannabis businesses while repealing a previous ordinance related to cannabinoid products. The changes were necessary to align with the Office of Cannabis Management’s new role in regulating lower potency hemp edibles. The new ordinance ensures that businesses selling these products must register with the city. The hearing revealed no public objections, and the council emphasized the importance of updating local regulations to comply with state laws.

Another item was ordinance 2026-339, which proposed amendments to city code 153.078 concerning off-street parking, loading, and access. The Planning Commission had been working on these changes, which included stipulations for driveway widths and updates to residential garage standards. The proposed amendments aimed to improve parking regulations, particularly concerning emergency vehicle access, and to address ongoing parking issues in specific areas such as Oldtown. The council discussed ensuring that no off-street parking would be permitted within 15 feet of a state highway to maintain visibility and safety, reflecting concerns about current no-parking zones along state highways.

The council then examined the zoning regulations, particularly focusing on cannabis-related businesses. The proposed changes included definitions for cannabis microbusinesses, cultivators, manufacturers, retailers, wholesalers, and delivery services. There was detailed dialogue about zoning categories and permitted uses, particularly in districts B1 and B2. The council considered permitting commercial storage and raising the maximum structure height to 45 feet. They also deliberated on whether to classify daycare facilities for 12 or more persons as conditional use and whether financial institutions without drive-in facilities should become permitted uses.

The meeting also involved discussions on lighting ordinances, specifically the requirement for downward-facing fixtures. This sparked debates about light pollution and whether the regulations should be more flexible as long as fixtures do not affect neighboring properties. It was suggested that the current requirements might be redundant, and a consensus emerged to simplify the ordinance by removing specific downward-facing stipulations.

Signage regulations were another point of interest, particularly concerning the placement of signs in parking areas. The council discussed how current rules might affect businesses, using Dollar General as an example, where the sign is placed in the green space rather than the parking lot. The regulations require that signs not be located within parking areas, prompting discussions about whether variances should be allowed for businesses that wish to deviate from these stipulations.

Other topics included snow removal, parking surface regulations, and the potential impact on residents if strict enforcement were pursued. The council considered allowing recreational vehicles to be parked on gravel instead of requiring hard surfaces, as mandated by city code. There was debate about whether existing ordinances include a grandfather clause for older properties, allowing them to maintain gravel parking.

The council also addressed the design and construction materials for buildings, proposing changes to include brick and other exterior wall products of similar quality. Suggestions were made to lower the minimum building size for metal buildings and adjust exterior wall requirements to attract businesses while maintaining aesthetic standards.