Leading the agenda was an innovative car sharing proposal for multi-unit properties, designed to streamline garbage collection and reduce visible waste. A public works representative, Ms. Haas, conveyed enthusiasm for the ordinance, a long-desired initiative. The proposal targets properties with two to four units, allowing shared use of a single garbage cart instead of separate carts for each unit. This change could benefit property owners with multiple adjacent buildings, offering a more practical and less cluttered waste management solution. The ordinance also permits these property owners to opt for dumpster service when feasible, provided contracted haulers can supply this option. Otherwise, owners may seek private contracts to meet their needs.

The operational structure was outlined, emphasizing that overfilled carts would trigger notifications to the city, prompting additional cart provisions if necessary. Consistent overfilling could lead to the withdrawal of cart sharing privileges. The council expressed general support, with particular interest in the initiative’s impact on parking and property aesthetics. While some council members inquired about potential expansion to single-family homes, Ms. Haas noted that current interest in this sector leans more towards opting out of organized trash programs rather than embracing cart sharing. This aspect would require further exploration to address billing and service complexities.

Transitioning to another pressing matter, the meeting delved into the intricacies of cannabis regulation and zoning, following amendments to state statute 342. The statute outlines 16 license types for cannabis businesses, with city registration mandatory for retail operations only. The city’s role emphasizes zoning compliance, while the state oversees broader operational aspects such as security and advertising. Although St. Paul has passed zoning regulations allowing cannabis retail in mixed-use, commercial, and neighborhood nodes, application approval timelines remain a challenge, often exceeding the 30-day target due to procedural delays.

The council discussed prohibiting cannabis sales within 300 feet of schools and requiring conditional use permits for businesses exceeding 15,000 square feet outside industrial districts. In a move to foster an open market, the city opted against limiting cannabis operation numbers, promoting economic opportunities. Retailers must meet criteria including approval from the Office of Cannabis Management, fee payment, and compliance with city codes. Proposed operating hours for retailers are 8 AM to 10 PM, Monday through Saturday, and 10 AM to 9 PM on Sundays, with exceptions for liquor license holders.

Temporary cannabis events also came under scrutiny, with regulations prohibiting sales near sensitive locations like schools. Events must comply with strict security and age restrictions, similar to temporary liquor licenses. This regulatory flexibility allows events up to four days, promoting economic activity while maintaining community safety.

The meeting further explored public funding challenges, highlighting the need for collaboration among sectors like education and healthcare to expand resources. A presenter emphasized the U.S.’s low tax status compared to other developed nations, noting that Minnesota’s spending as a share of the economy has declined since the 1990s. Despite this, a potential funding increase looms, potentially adding billions to the state’s budget for public goods.

The discussion touched on the cyclical nature of public trust and funding, with strategies like “starve the beast” contributing to service dissatisfaction. Comparisons between St. Paul and Minneapolis revealed disparities in intergovernmental revenue, influenced by income levels and demographic differences. Property taxes emerged as a contentious yet vital revenue source, with debates over their stability versus equity. Suggestions for a land value tax aimed at encouraging development and reducing speculation were proposed, alongside discussions on infrastructure and urban density.