VII.1. First Reading Ordinance Amending the Hopkins City Code Modifying Cannabis Regulations; Krzos
1
City Council Report 2025-173
To: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
Mike Mornson, City Manager
From: Ryan Krzos, City Planner
Date: December 1, 2025
Subject: First Reading of a City Code Amendment for Cannabis Business
Registration Requirements, Procedures and Separation Requirements.
_____________________________________________________________________
REQUEST
City Staff has prepared an amendment to City Code for the registration procedures and
requirements for cannabis businesses. The amendment would make the following
changes:
• Increase allowed retail registrations.
• Permit amendments to applications.
• Clarify buffer rules.
• Set a deadline to complete registration steps.
• Miscellaneous clarifications.
Two readings of the ordinance by the City Council are required for approval. The
Planning & Zoning Commission also recommended that the City evaluate the existing
buffers and uses allowed downtown. If there is consensus, staff will bring these issues
back for discussion.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and The Planning and Zoning Commission recommend the City Council adopt
Resolution 2025-075 approving a first reading of the City Code Amendment for
cannabis business registration and separation requirements.
ANALYSIS
Background
The Minnesota Legislature legalized recreational cannabis in 2023 and established the
Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) to regulate licensing. In December 2024, the
City of Hopkins adopted Ordinance 2024-1216, which created a local registration
process for cannabis retailers in alignment with state law.
As part of that Ordinance, the City established a limit of three retail locations within
Hopkins and a first-come first-served basis for processing registration applications. This
Planning & Development
2
cap was determined based on considerations including community scale and expected
market capacity.
Since adoption, the City has received significant interest from retailers and eight
applications for registration to date. At their October 7, 2025 meeting, the City Council
discussed an increase in the number of available registrations. Additionally, staff sought
feedback on minor housekeeping updates to the Ordinance, specially regarding how
buffers are established and whether applicants may amend their applications. Staff has
prepared the proposed ordinance amendment in line with the consensus of that
discussion.
Because buffers are a land use matter, the Planning and Zoning Commission’s review
is required. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing and considered
the ordinance amendment at their November 25, 2025 meeting. Five members of the
public spoke during the public hearing. One person spoke in support of increasing the
number of retail dispensaries. Four people spoke in opposition to increasing the number
of dispensaries and expressed concern regarding the proximity of potential locations to
youth-oriented spaces, concern about perceptions of safety, and concern about loss of
activity in the downtown. Following discussion, the Planning & Zoning Commission
voted 4-0-1 recommending approval with additional recommendations that the City
discuss examining uses permitted in the MX-D Zone, adding daycares to the uses that
are buffered from, and increasing the buffer distances to the distance required for off-
sale liquor or the State maximum.
Proposed Ordinance
The proposed Ordinance amendment would make the following changes:
1. Increase the number of retail registrations from three (3) to five (5).
2. Allow registration applicants to amend their applications while maintaining the
order of which they are processed
3. Clarify that buffers are established from registered locations and establish that
when a requested location is amended during the processing of an application,
buffers are reestablished at that time.
4. Establish a 12-month period during which an applicant must complete the
required steps for registration.
5. Other miscellaneous changes for the sake of clarifying the requirements and
procedures reflective of state law and to codify the exiting waiting list process.
Discussion
Increase in Registrations
• State law does not require cities to impose a numerical limit on dispensaries but
allows them to do so, provided there is at least one registration for every 12,500
residents.
• Neighboring communities have taken varying approaches: some have set
maximums, while others rely on zoning standards alone (no maximum).
• For example, Minnetonka, Edina, Eden Prairie, and St Louis limit
dispensaries to the statutorily required minimum (1 per 12,500 residents),
• Golden Valley, Bloomington, Burnsville and Minneapolis have no
maximums.
2
• Retail businesses generally are associated with a greater number of service calls
as compared to other commercial uses.
o The Police Department noted that the city has three specific tobacco
stores that have generated 92 calls for police service in the last year.
Many of the calls are trespassing calls, which originate from store thefts
and other disturbances. Other calls to these locations over the last few
years include: burglaries, assaults, fraud, robberies, property damage,
disorderly conduct, alarms, etc.
o From the police department service level, staff would anticipate that these
cannabis shops will generate at least as many calls for police service. The
Police Department recommends no more than three in our community.
o Cannabis retailers conduct principally cash transactions; however, State
Administrative Rules establish safety protocols for the physical space of
the retailer relating to access, storage, video surveillance, alarm systems,
and lighting.
• Retail cannabis operations generally provide new local business activity and
employment.
• In 2024 Hopkins had a healthy retail vacancy rate between 3.1-3.3%. An
oversaturation of retail locations could tie up retail space with businesses that
may end up closing due to the oversaturation, leading to unhealthy vacancy rates
in the meantime.
• Cities were previously incentivized to host more cannabis retailers through
shared Cannabis Tax revenue, but this aid was repealed in the 2025 state
budget.
Application Amendments
• State Statute is silent on whether applicants may amend submitted registration
applications. Staff currently interpret that amendments are permitted and the City
Council expressed support for codifying.
• An applicant may want to amend their application as circumstances may change
with regard to their ability to acquire, lease, or improve space after they have
applied.
Buffer Provisions
• Since amending information in an application would be allowed, a corresponding
change is necessary to clarify how the separation between retail locations is
administered.
• This modification would state that buffers are established from registered
locations and when a location is amended during the processing of an
application, buffers are reestablished at that time.
• This is meant to establish that if a location is changed, the existing locations are
not negatively impacted. In other words, it would be clear that someone looking
to amend their location would have to account for the registrations that were
processed after them.
• As noted, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the City
examine the uses that buffers are from as well as the distance required. If
directed by the Council, staff would bring the issue back for an amendment
provided there is consensus from policymakers.
3
o When the initial ordinance was developed the City decided to impose the
distance required for off-sale liquor. For reference, buffers from tobacco
and liquor sales are as follows:
Tobacco Sales and Vaping Establishments - prohibited within 500
feet of a public park, public or private school, church, daycare or
the Hopkins Center for the Arts
Off-sale Liquor sales - prohibited within 350 feet of any elementary
or secondary school, daycare center or religious institution, existing
exclusive off-sale liquor store, pawnshop, currency exchange, or
any business licensed by the city as an adult oriented business
o State Statute allows the City to prohibit a cannabis business within 1,000
feet of a school or 500 feet of a day care, residential treatment facility, or
an attraction within a public park that is regularly used by minors, including
playgrounds and athletic fields.
o Office of Cannabis Management staff has indicated that a city could also
impose a buffer between retail locations, but it is not mentioned in statute.
Registration Completion Period
• State law allows businesses with preliminary license approval to seek local
registration before final licensure. Preliminary license approval expires after 18
months.
• The Council expressed interest in requiring a shorter timeframe, of 12 months,
after applying for registration that applicants have to complete the steps
necessary for final approval.
• This provision is meant to prevent applicants from “sitting on” registrations, and
advantages those applicants that are further along in establishing their
operations.
Modifications to Zoning
• As noted, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the City
examine uses that are allowed downtown. The consensus of the commission
was that this examination should be beyond just cannabis and include other uses
that add or detract from the environment envisioned for downtown Hopkins.
Should the City Council concur, this issue will be brought back for further
discussion.
Review Criteria
City Code Amendments are considered legislative action. The City has a wide degree of
discretion in creating legislation, but it must be reasonable and promote public health,
safety, and/or general welfare. Staff finds that the proposed ordinance amendment is
reasonable in that it provides for an orderly process for the registration of cannabis
businesses.
Community Input and Engagement:
Engagement Actions:
o The Planning and Zoning Commission’s public hearing on November 25,
2025 – see summary above.
o Published notice of this public hearing in the City’s official paper.
4
• Three written comments on this proposed code amendment were submitted and
included as an attachment to this report.
• Staff will provide an update to the City Council on any additional public
comments received.
NEXT STEPS
If approved for a first reading, the required second reading of the Ordinance will be
scheduled for the December 16, 2025 regular City Council meeting. Publication of the
ordinance in the City’s official paper is required to make the change effective.
If so directed, staff would prepare modifications to the buffer requirements and/or uses
in the downtown, which would be subsequently reviewed per the Ordinance amendment
procedures, include an additional public hearing by the Planning & Zoning Commission
with a final decision by the City Council.
DOCSOPEN\HP145\9\1032915.v1-6/12/25
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-1230
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HOPKINS CITY CODE MODIFYING CERTAIN
REGULATIONS RELATED TO REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS, PROCEDURES
AND SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS OF CANNABIS BUSINESSES
SECTION 1. Amending Chapter 10, Article XVIII, Section 10-652 of the Hopkins City
Code by adding the following underlined text and deleting striken material, as follows:
Sec. 10-652. - Pre-License Zoning Certification of Cannabis Businesses
(a) The City Manager, or designee, is authorized to certify whether a proposed
cannabis business complies with the city’s zoning ordinances, this article, and if
applicable, with state fire code and building code pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
section 342.13.
(b) Potential licensees are responsible for obtaining all necessary zoning, building
and fire code approvals prior to the city receiving the request for certification from
the OCM. If a potential licensee fails to obtain necessary zoning approvals prior
to the city receiving a request for certification, the city will inform the OCM that the
potential licensee does not meet zoning and land use laws, or does not meet
building and fire code requirements. If, at the time the city receives a request
for zoning certification, there are no further intended alterations to the
building where the business is to be conducted, the city will also certify
compliance with building and fire code regulations, provided that the
potential licensee has obtained inspections prior the city’s receipt of a
request for certification from the OCM. Building and fire code inspections will
be valid for 1 year from completion.
SECTION 2. Amending Chapter 10, Article XVIII, Section 10-653 of the Hopkins City
Code by adding the following underlined text and deleting striken material, as follows:
Sec. 10-653 Distance Requirements
(a) The city prohibits the establishment and operation of a cannabis retailer within the
following buffer zones:
• 350 from a school
• 350 feet from an attraction with a park feature
• 500 feet from another cannabis retailer
(b) The buffers in this section will be measured from the potential
licensee’sapplicant’s proposed business location based on the location of
schools, park features, and cannabis retailers on the earlier of the date the city
receives the request from the OCM for certification pursuant to section 10-652 that
is ultimately successful or the date the city receives a complete application for a
2
retail registration pursuant to section 10-654. Buffer distances will be measured
from the property line of the proposed cannabis retailer to the property line of a
school or cannabis retailer, and the border line of a park feature. A buffer from a
cannabis retailer will be established from other cannabis retailers with City-
issued registrations and from other applicants that have submitted complete
applications but have not received a registration from the City as of the date
the applicant’s buffer is established. If an applicant amends the proposed
business location after submitting a complete application, buffers will be
reestablished on the date the application is amended.
(c) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a cannabis retailer from continuing to operate
at the same location if a school or park feature establishes within the buffer zone.
SECTION 3. Amending Chapter 10, Article XVIII, Section 10-654 of the Hopkins City
Code by adding the following underlined text and deleting striken material, as follows:
Sec. 10-654. - Retailer Registration
(a) Retail Registration Required. Before making retail sales to customers or patients,
a retailer must register with the city. Making retail sales to customers or patients
without an active registration is prohibited. Subject to Minn. Stat. 342.22, subd.
5(e) the city may impose a civil penalty, as specified in the city’s fee schedule, for
making a sale to a customer or patient without a valid registration from the city and
a valid license from the OCM.
(b) Cannabis Retail Registration Limits.
(1) The city will issue three (3)five (5) registrations to cannabis retailers.
(2) Registrations issued to businesses with a cannabis retailer license, preliminary
license approval, or other applicable written approval from the OCM will count
toward the city’s registration limit.
(c) Processing Registrations.
(1) Applications will be processed on a first-come, first-served basis based on the
city receiving a complete application. Applications will be considered complete
when all materials in Section 10-654 (d) are received by the city and include all
required information and the required registration or renewal fee is
received.
(2) The date a certification under Section 10-652 is issued will have no impact on
the applicant’s registration processing.
(d) Application. The applicant must submit a registration application or renewal form
provided by the city. The form may be amended from time to time by the City Clerk,
but must include or be accompanied by:
3
(1) Name of the property owner.
(2) Name of the applicant.
(3) Address and parcel ID for the property for which the registration is sought.
(4) Certification that the applicant complies with the requirements of this article.
(5) Fee Required. At the time of initial application, and prior to the city’s
consideration of any renewal application, each Retailer must pay fees or
initial registration and renewal as established in the city’s fee schedule.
Initial registration fees and renewal registration fees are nonrefundable.
(6)(5) Proof of taxes, assessments, utility charges or other financial claims of the
city or the state are current for both the applicant and the proposed location.
(7)(6) A copy of a valid state license, preliminary license approval, or other
applicable written approval from the OCM.
(e) Amending an Application. An applicant may amend information on the
application once it has been submitted.
(f) Immediate Denial. An applicant that does not comply with the distance
requirements of Section 10-653 will be immediately denied.
(g) Processing Application. Once the City receives a complete application, and
the maximum number of registrations defined in Section 10-654(b)(1) have
not been issued, the applicant will receive written confirmation confirming
that the applicant has submitted a complete application and informing the
applicant of the steps that must be completed before the City will issue the
registration:
a. Fee Required. At the time of initial application, and prior to the city’s
consideration of any renewal application, each Retailer must pay fees or
initial registration and renewal as established in the city’s fee schedule.
Initial registration fees and renewal registration fees are nonrefundable.
b. Preliminary Compliance Check. Prior to issuing any retail registration,
the city shall conduct a preliminary compliance check to ensure
compliance with this article and any other regulations established
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 342.13.
c. At the time of the preliminary compliance check, the applicant must also
submit a form recertifying that the applicant complies with the
requirements of this article and proof of taxes, assessments, utility
charges or other financial claims of the city or the state are current for
both the applicant and the proposed location.
4
d. Applicants will have twelve (12) months between date the initial complete
application is submitted to complete the required steps to receive the
registration. Once the twelve (12) month period has passed, the
application shall be denied. Applicants that have submitted applications
prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall have twelve (12) months
from the effective date of this ordinance to complete the required steps
to receive the registration.
e. During the time when applications for open registration slots are being
processed, applicants that submitted complete applications will be placed
on a waitlist based on the order in which they were received and
processed should applicants ahead of them be denied.
(e) Preliminary Compliance Check. Prior to issuing any retail registration, the
city shall conduct a preliminary compliance check to ensure compliance with
this article and any other regulations established pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, section 342.13.
(h)(f) Reasons for Denial. The city shall not issue a registration or renewal if any of
the following conditions are true:
(1) The applicant has not submitted a complete application.
(2) The applicant does not comply with the requirements of this article.
(3) The applicant does not comply with applicable zoning and land use
regulations.
(4) The applicant is found to not comply with the requirements of the Act or this
article at the preliminary compliance check.
(5) The applicant is not current on all property taxes and assessments at the
location where the retailer is located at any time this information must be
submitted.
(6) The maximum number of registrations, pursuant to Section 10-654 (b), have
been issued by the city.
(7) The applicant does not have a valid license, preliminary license approval, or
other applicable written approval from the OCM.
(8) An applicant obtains a registration, or the maximum number of
registrations, making them ineligible under state law to obtain an
additional cannabis retail registration.
(i)(g) Issuing the Registration or Renewal. The city shall issue the registration or
renewal if the Retailer meets the requirements of this article, including that none
of the reasons for denial in Section 10-654 (f) are true.
5
(j)(h) Nontransferable. A registration is not transferable to another person, entity, or
location. This prohibition does not apply to a transfer of property ownership at
the location where a retailer is located.
(f) Registration Enforcement.
(1) Generally. The city council may impose a fine or suspend a registration
under this article on a finding that the registered business has failed to
comply with the requirements of this article or any applicable statute or
regulation.
(2) Notice and Right to Hearing. Prior to imposing a fine or suspending any
registration under this article, the city shall provide the registered
business with written notice of the alleged violations and inform the
registered business of his or her right to a hearing on the alleged violation.
a. Notice shall be delivered in person or by regular mail to the address
of the registered business and shall inform the registered business of
its right to a hearing. The notice will indicate that a response must be
submitted within ten (10) business days of receipt of the notice, or the
right to a hearing will be waived.
b. The registered business will be given an opportunity for a hearing
before the city’s hearing officer before final action to fine or suspend
a registration. Provided, the registered business has submitted a
written application for appeal within ten (10) business days after the
notice was served. The hearing officer shall give due regard to the
frequency and seriousness of the violations, the ease with which such
violations could have been cured or avoided and good faith efforts to
comply and shall issue a decision to fine or suspend the registration
only upon written findings. Within ten (10) business days of the
hearing officers order, the decision may be appealed to the city
council.
c. If no request for a hearing is received within ten (10) business days
following the service of the notice, the matter shall be submitted to
the city council for imposition of the fine or suspension of the
registration.
(3) Emergency. If, in the discretion of the City Manager, a registered
business poses an imminent threat to the health or safety of the public,
the City Manager may immediately suspend the registration and provide
notice of the right to hold a subsequent hearing as prescribed in part (2)
of this section.
(4) Reinstatement. The city may reinstate a registration if it determines that
the violations have been resolved. The city shall reinstate a registration
6
if the OCM determines the violations have been resolved.
SECTION 4. In accordance with Section 3.03 of the City Charter and Minn. Stat. §
412.191, subd. 4, due to the significant length of this Ordinance, City staff shall have the
following summary printed in the official City newspaper in lieu of the complete
ordinance:
On December 16, 2025, the Hopkins City Council adopted Ordinance 2025-1230 that
amends Chapter 10, Article XVIII of the Hopkins City Code. The purpose of amending
the City Code is to modify Cannabis Business Registration Requirements, Procedures
and Separation Requirements. The Ordinance increases the number of allowed retail
registrations, permits amendments to applications, clarifies buffer rules, sets a deadline
to complete registration steps, and makes miscellaneous modifications for readability
and clarity.
A printed copy of the ordinance is available for inspection during regular business hours
at Hopkins City Hall and is available online at the City’s web site located at
www.hopkinsmn.com.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this ordinance shall be the date of
publication.
First Reading: December 1, 2025
Second Reading: December 16, 2025
Date of Publication: December 25, 2025
Date Ordinance Takes Effect: December 26, 2025
By:
____________________________
Patrick Hanlon, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
CITY OF HOPKINS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-075
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE 2025-1230
AMENDING THE HOPKINS CITY CODE MODIFYING CERTAIN REGULATIONS
RELATED TO REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS, PROCEDURES AND SEPARATION
REQUIREMENTS OF CANNABIS BUSINESSES
WHEREAS, City staff has prepared an Ordinance Amendment to the Hopkins City
Code to modify requirements for cannabis businesses regarding the registration procedures
and requirements; and
WHEREAS, the Code Amendment would make the following changes:
• Increase allowed retail registrations from three to five.
• Permit applicants to amend applications without losing their processing order.
• Clarify buffer rules, including reestablishing buffers when locations are
amended.
• Set a 12-month deadline for applicants to complete registration steps.
• Make miscellaneous clarifications reflective of state law and codify the existing
waiting list process.
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the City Code Text Amendment is as follows:
1. That the above stated City Code Text Amendment was initiated by the City; and,
2. That the Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission, pursuant to published notice,
held a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on
November 25, 2025 and all persons present were given an opportunity to be
heard; and,
3. That written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and,
4. The Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed the application materials, Planning
& Zoning Report 2025-13 dated November 25, 2025, and all supporting
documentation, and adopted a resolution recommending that City Code
Amendment be approved with additional recommendation to further evaluate and
discuss buffers and uses downtown; and
WHEREAS, staff recommended approval of the above stated City Code
Amendment based on the findings outlined in City Council Report 2025-173 dated
December 1, 2025; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hopkins
approves a first reading of Ordinance 2025-1230 amending the Hopkins City Code modifying
regulations related to registration requirements, procedures and separation requirements of
cannabis businesses.
Adopted this 1st day of December, 2025.
________________________
ATTEST: Patrick Hanlon, Mayor
__________________________
Amy Domeier, City Clerk
This Message Is From an Untrusted Sender
You have not previously corresponded with this sender.
From:Jessie Whitaker
To:Amy Domeier; Ryan Krzos
Subject:Hopkins P&Z Dispensary License Comment
Date:Tuesday, November 25, 2025 3:12:13 PM
Hi Amy and Ryan,
I won't be able to make it to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting tonight but I would
like to pass along my thoughts. Can you please send this to the right person/people?
Hello Planning and Zoning,
When it comes to creating a license cap for dispensaries in Hopkins, I think we should let the
market dictate how many Hopkins can sustain. I think it's reasonable to at least have as many
available as there are liquor licenses for liquor stores. It's not the job of the city to legislate a
subjective morality. I think this is a case where the market will find a natural balance.
Thanks,
Jessica Whitaker
145 19th Ave N
Hopkins, MN
This Message Is From an External Sender
From:Sandy Boren-Barrett
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Fw: 1017 Mainstreet Cannabis Dispensary !!!
Date:Friday, November 7, 2025 12:35:06 PM
Dear Ryan,
Council Member Hunke suggested I forward my letter of concern to you and ask that it be
forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to their meeting and public hearing on
11/25/25. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Sandy Boren-Barrett
Artistic Director/CEO
Stages Theatre Co.
1111 Mainstreet
Hopkins, MN 55343
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Sandy Boren-Barrett <sbb@stagestheatre.org>
Sent: Monday, November 3, 2025 12:33 PM
To: Patrick Hanlon <mayor@hanlonforhopkins.com>; hgarrido@hopkinsmn.com
<hgarrido@hopkinsmn.com>; bhunke@hopkinsmn.com <bhunke@hopkinsmn.com>;
akuznia@hopkinsmn.com <akuznia@hopkinsmn.com>; bgoodland@hopkinsmn.com
<bgoodland@hopkinsmn.com>
Cc: Susan Swenson <sswenson@stagestheatre.org>; Mike Mornson
(mmornson@HOPKINSmn.com) <mmornson@HOPKINSmn.com>; Lynn Anderson
(landerson@HOPKINSmn.com) <landerson@HOPKINSmn.com>
Subject: 1017 Mainstreet Cannabis Dispensary !!!
Dear Mayor Hanlon and Hopkins City Council,
It has come to my attention that the City and Council are considering allowing a Cannabis Dispensary
to open at 1017 Mainstreet, right next to the Kiddywampus store, and blocks from the HCA and
Stages Theatre Company? This is VERY concerning , for a number of reasons.
1. When the HCA was imagined and opened – Hopkins Mainstreet, as you know was known as a
place of “cars and bars”. There was a gun shop, a porn store, a trailer park. The buildings
existence was intended to revitalize and CHANGE a real and perceived negative stigma about
the Hopkins community. You can say all you want about the potential “increased foot traffic”
and “economic” boom this business will bring, but I believe it will have a real effect on the
community, safety, nuisance-related issues and retail rentals on Mainstreet.
2. Stages Theatre Company, like a school, or park or the library ½ a block away, serves primarily
children – over 150.000 people come to Stages annually. We hear OVER and OVER again,
that one of the main reasons parent, grandparents, school groups have chosen to come here,
outside of affordability, is they feel safer here than heading to Children’s Theatre. The
community that Stages has built here, is loyal, but this WILL impact how they feel about
coming to Hopkins, safety is imperative, real and percieved. How they feel about spending
time at the restaurants and walking from 819 or Pink Ivy, or thirty Bales to Stages with their
kids/grandparents to see a show matters.
3. Now, the direct economic impact to the City – an IMPORTANT ONE. Not only could this
effect Stages Theatre Company’s ticket revenues – it would then, in turn EFFECT the % of
revenue that is coming directly TO the City of Hopkins FROM our ticket sales as a result of our
lease agreement. The City of Hopkins (if all goes according to the STC budget) stands to gain
between $35,000-$45,000 in “ticket subsidies” from our ticket sales. That is not a small
amount to put in jeopardy. Is this really worth it? To change the culture and climate of THIS
side of Mainstreet? Does it HAVE to be on Mainstreet???
4. I want to go on record as saying, I am not opposed to a Cannabis Dispensary in theory – but
when I drop of my drycleaning this morning on Hopkins Crossroads and Hwy 7 and see the
NEW NEON sign with a leaf and STAY HIGH in the darkened windows…I am very concerned. It
is not a good look for this community, and I am fearful you will lose other businesses (like
Kiddywampus) that have invested and worked hard FOR Hopkins, by doing this. There needs
to be locational considerations, and specific limitations on what they are able to put as
forward facing to Mainstreet. Seriously, drive by the Hopkins Dispensary and check it out, the
new signage is not a good look for families walking by, and darkened windows don’t help that a
lot.
This decision will have lasting impact on all of us, truly… People are generally not just driving out to
Hopkins just to have dinner, they are driving out to FIRST see a show at Stages or a concert at the
HCA, and then to have dinner before or after a show. If you ask ANY restaurant in the area, they
KNOW when Stages Theatre Company has a show – they staff MORE employees with our
performance calendar in mind…THIS too will impact them a great deal.
I am asking you to reconsider the IMPACT, and act accordingly. Thank you for taking the time to read
this, I appreciate all you do, and ask that you do the same for those small businesses in the area that
rely on good and positive word of mouth.
If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out.
Sincerely,
Sandy Boren-Barrett
Artistic Director/CEO
Stages Theatre Company
This Message Is From an External Sender
From:Susan Gauthier
To:Ryan Krzos
Subject:Cannabis stores in Hopkins
Date:Sunday, November 2, 2025 4:06:13 PM
Hello Ryan,
I have been communicating with the Hopkins City Council and Mayor Hanlon on this issue.
The Mayor suggested I email you also before the meeting on November 25, where I
understand this subject will be discussed.
I watched the City Council meeting on October 7 and I was surprised at the casual way this
was discussed. It's an important issue for the future of Hopkins.
I did some research and 18 of the 24 states that have legalized cannabis retailers
allow cities to opt out. Even in progressive California, nearly two-thirds (60%) of the
state’s cities and counties don’t allow retail sales. I don't understand why the
Minnesota legislature didn't allow an opt-out provision. All those cities must have a
good reason.
So we are left with a minimum required number, three for Hopkins. Why would you
consider having more than three? What advantage could there be? There's no tax
revenue. Edina, Minnetonka, St. Louis Park and Eden Prairie are staying with their required
minimums. They are being cautious.
The most important reason for not allowing more than three is to follow the recommendation
of the Hopkins police. Apparently pot stores do attract crime.
Why do I oppose cannabis retail on Main Street? In addition to crime, I believe it will hurt the
reputation of Hopkins. As you walk down Main Street and see the assortment of businesses,
there are many that I like to visit. There are some that I don't care about. But none of the
current ones elicit a negative reaction. Not true for many people when it comes to cannabis
stores. Hopkins was just written up as the next Eat Street. Do we want to be known as the pot
capital of the southwest suburbs?
I live at Marketplace and Main. If there had been a cannabis store at 500 Main, and another at
900 Main Street when I was looking for apartments, I wouldn't have rented my current place.
Please be cautious, listen to your neighboring cities and your police, and slow down. Three is
plenty! License three stores if you have to, but then wait a year or two to see how it goes.
Thank you for considering my comments.
Susan Gauthier
612-203-9289