This transcript appears to be from a **White Bear Lake City Council** meeting (likely June 2023, based on the dates mentioned). Based on the context provided, here is the formatted transcript with speaker identifications: *** **[00:00] Unknown:** You'd have heard a bell ringing every intersection, it's been constant. Yeah. [Music] Out. Oh, I gotta get my report ready, remember. Oh, Lieutenant. Yes. **[00:15] Mayor:** I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. All right, let's jump into items. Item 2A: Minutes of the regular city council meeting from June 13th, 2023. Unless there are corrections, I'd entertain a motion to approve the minutes. **[00:40] Councilmember:** Move to approve. **[00:41] Councilmember:** Second. **[00:42] Mayor:** I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say "aye." **[00:45] Councilmembers:** Aye. **[00:46] Mayor:** Any opposed? Motion carries, the minutes are approved. Item 2B: Minutes of the city council work session on June 13th, 2023. I’d entertain a motion to approve those minutes. **[00:55] Councilmember:** Move to approve. **[00:56] Mayor:** I have a motion. **[00:57] Councilmember:** Second. **[00:58] Mayor:** And a second. All those in favor say "aye." **[01:00] Councilmember:** Mr. Mayor, yes, I would just like to thank the person that actually [prepared these]. Thank you, very good. **[01:05] Mayor:** I would agree, echo that. And we'll thank our City Attorney, Troy, again for that presentation during that work session. All the good information, we do appreciate that. All those in favor say "aye." **[01:15] Councilmembers:** Aye. **[01:16] Mayor:** Any opposed? Motion carries, the minutes are approved. Item 3: Adoption of the agenda. We only have a couple items. Are there any changes or corrections to the agenda? Seeing none, I'd entertain a motion to approve the agenda. **[01:30] Councilmember:** So moved. **[01:31] Mayor:** Do I have a second? **[01:32] Councilmember:** Second. **[01:33] Mayor:** The motion and a second. All those in favor say "aye." **[01:36] Councilmembers:** Aye. **[01:37] Mayor:** Any opposed? Motion carries. We have an agenda. Item 4: Consent agenda. I’d entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. **[01:45] Councilmember:** So moved. **[01:46] Councilmember:** Second. **[01:47] Mayor:** I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say "aye." **[01:50] Councilmembers:** Aye. **[01:51] Mayor:** Any opposed? Motion carries. The consent agenda is approved. Item 5: Visitors and presentations. We have nothing scheduled. Item 6: Public hearings. Nothing scheduled. Item 7: Unfinished business. Second reading of an ordinance amending the City Charter. We had a first reading last week, so we're on to the second reading. I think Mr. Oni is here. Would you like to just—we heard from you last week, but maybe just give us a quick recap and then we'll kick it back to the Council for consideration. Thank you. **[02:20] Mr. Oni (Staff):** Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, just a refresher. The charter amendment we’re proposing would clear up some language related to annual elections, which we no longer have. So it specifies municipal elections or general elections and removes the word "annual" in a number of places. It removes gender-specific terms such as "foreman," and it removes references to specific state statutes that are prone to be possibly amended someday, which would create other issues for our charter. So it refers to general state statutes rather than specific ones. And then the other part of the amendment we're proposing is to allow City Council to appoint a City Attorney for terms up to five years, where currently it's limited to one-year terms. **[03:05] Mayor:** Very good. Thank you. Council, do we have any questions for Mr. Oni? **[03:10] Councilmember Edberg:** Thank you. Councilmember Edberg here. Yeah, so looking at the minutes of the various resolutions, the recommendation is clear. There's a majority. Can you characterize any of the minority opinions—those that voted "nay"—and kind of the strength and the nature of those opposing views? **[03:30] Mr. Oni:** Sure. I would say the opposing views generally were not convinced of maybe the need to change; they thought that one year was sufficient. Or they weren't quite certain on the five years. They weren't certain maybe of any specific number but didn't want to leave it ambiguous to multiple terms, as was one thing that we discussed for a while. So those are generally the opposing viewpoints. **[04:00] Councilmember Edberg:** And was there general consensus that the decision should be that the individuals serve at the pleasure of the Council? In other words, we can have an agreement, but those agreements are subject to the pleasure of the Council? **[04:15] Mr. Oni:** Absolutely. I think that was everybody's understanding. **[04:18] Councilmember Edberg:** Okay. Thank you. **[04:20] Mayor:** Any other questions? All right. Thank you, and just for Councilmember Edberg's edification, as I mentioned last week, this was a logistical thing for staff and for myself. Quite frankly, the attorneys that we retain will often offer us a better deal if we can extend it for multi-years versus one year. So it was a logistical upshot for us as well as a monetary upshot. And as I said, Wendy and I—Miss Crawford and I—requested three years. The Charter Commission decided to push it further to five. I'm kind of indifferent; I think five seems like a long time, but the language of the charter would give us the flexibility to hit that three-year goal, which I think is what we set out to ultimately accomplish. **[05:05] Councilmember Edberg:** Please. So that all makes sense to me. I don't—I get it. Councilmember Walsh and I served on such a committee, how long ago was that? Five, four, five years ago? **[05:15] Councilmember Walsh:** Five, yeah. **[05:16] Councilmember Edberg:** So yes, I'm familiar with that. And I do not in any way disagree with your assertion. My sense is that the ability for the Council to express its "pleasure" is required—that's like, if we do not have that confidence, that becomes a dealbreaker at some point, and there should be, as we do, ways of ending the agreement. My sense is that I'm not sure that I would encourage our staff to take this as a mandate for a five-year agreement. Three strikes me as more reasonable. Obviously, there's going to be some horse trading with whoever we appoint to do that work on our behalf. I'm not quite sure I'm ready for five, but more than one clearly makes sense, and then let's figure it out from there. So those would be my kind of reflections based on both the reading as well as your comments. **[06:05] Mayor:** Sure. Any other thoughts on this? If not, I would entertain a motion to approve the ordinance we have before us. **[06:12] Councilmember:** Move to approve. **[06:13] Councilmember:** Second. **[06:14] Mayor:** I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say "aye." **[06:20] Councilmembers:** Aye. **[06:21] Mayor:** Any opposed? Motion carries, the ordinance passes. Was there an accompanying resolution with this, or is it just the ordinance? **[06:28] Staff:** No. **[06:29] Mayor:** Okay, so we're all set. All right, motion carries, the ordinance is approved. Thank you again. Item 8: New business. On-sale intoxicating liquor license application for The Minnesotan Production Company. Mr. Longendyke, I believe you're going to present on this, please. **[06:45] Kelly Longendyke (Staff):** Yes, good evening Mayor and Councilmembers. I'm here to present a new liquor license application for a to-be-new liquor establishment. The applicant is Corey Roberts; he is the owner of The Minnesotan Production Company, and we are "Doing Business As" (DBA) The Minnesotan for this liquor license application. The applicant is applying for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license and a Sunday liquor license. So, The Minnesotan—we know it as a downtown business, currently a clothing store. The beginning of this story involves the applicant reaching out to staff inquiring about a liquor license with the general idea that someone can enjoy a beverage while shopping. State liquor laws would be very specific on to who gets a liquor license; a clothing store is not eligible for a liquor license. So City staff discussed with the applicant some opportunities for pursuing a liquor license, and the outcome of that discussion was that The Minnesotan was interested in becoming a bar. So, the applicant took the steps to pursue a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) which you may recall was approved February 14, 2023, which allowed the business to transform itself into a liquor lounge with the primary use being the liquor lounge and accessory use allowed. This applicant would choose to have the accessory use be a retail store. Primary use again: the liquor lounge, at least 70% of the floor plan. Accessory use: the retail clothing store, no more than 30% of the floor plan. You already heard these details back in February with the conditional use permit. So why are we talking about it again? It's because the liquor lounge area is the only area that is eligible for the liquor license. So we do have to make note that only part of the floor plan of this building would have the liquor license. The Minnesota rules that's referenced on the screen reads: "No license shall be granted for any premises with inside access to another business establishment unless the combination is permitted under Minnesota statutes." And anytime we're talking about liquor laws, it's predominantly Chapter 340A. A clothing store is not outlined as an allowable combination. So we do have to treat it as a separate business. Separation is required. That would be physical delineation showing that only alcohol can be consumed in part of the building with signage saying "No alcohol beyond this point." You may have seen this type of signage in different businesses. And then separate transactions, because you cannot purchase liquor in a retail clothing area. So again: physical delineation, signage, separate transactions. We communicated this with the applicant, and he worked with us in transforming his floor plan to align with these requirements. He talked about the signage that he plans to put up and where it would be located. He has two separate checkout counters, and we can look at the floor plan here next. So just to orient ourselves before I get into the details: you'll see on the far right-hand side, that is the frontage of the store facing 4th Street, which is also the north part of the building. You'll see the entrance there in the lower right-hand corner. So a customer would come in and they would be in the retail clothing space, which is the green shaded area. If they wanted to access the liquor lounge, they would just pass through into the blue shaded area. I'll describe what we're seeing here. The red lines between the green and blue shaded areas are the proposed physical delineation, with the top red line being a full wall and the two bottom red lines being countertop space, which we have accepted to act as physical separation between the two spaces. You'll see that bottom red line—that's part of the retail counter, the checkout area—and right next to it in the blue area is a checkout counter for the liquor lounge. That is where a customer would go, show their ID, get—for the self-pour beverage dispensing system—it would be like a wristband or a card where you get credit and you can dispense the alcohol yourself. And that's where the age verification would occur. They would pick up their glass, and on the left-hand side, you'll see the dark blue shaded area—that is where the self-serve beverage dispensing area would happen. For the liquor license, this is just a very unique concept, and we're excited to have worked with the applicant who was cooperative in some of these conditions. We walked through them and explained some of them. So I'll just briefly describe the conditions before asking for your approval. The applicant will maintain the criteria of the conditional use permit; so that includes the 70/30 delineation, keeping seating in the liquor lounge, and having branded items in the retail clothing store branded to The Minnesotan. That separation—the physical separation and transactional separation that we talked about—the final floor plan... if there were to be any changes, it would go through staff for review. Seating and alcohol consumption would remain in the liquor lounge. That is language in the conditional use permit, but it's actually also relevant to the liquor license itself: that the licensed premises is only the liquor lounge. So you would not be able to leave a bar or restaurant with a beverage in your hand; we would treat it the same. The applicant and the employees and the business in general will follow all of the liquor laws, and I did make a note about monitoring the self-pour beverage dispensing system. It is a first in the city, and you may be familiar with them in other cities, but someone goes up—I'll just briefly describe—so you would go in, you would show age verification, and you would purchase basically credits. That could be through a scannable card or a wristband. And you go up to—there's a picture here—a self-dispensing system and you can... it just depends on what type of system you have, you can either do a full glass or you can just do a taste tester, but it deducts the credits from your wristband or card. Ultimately, people are serving themselves liquor, so there is major responsibility for employees to verify the age of who's purchasing these credits and then also to monitor to make sure that the people who are actually dispensing the alcohol are those who got their age verification and they're 21 years or older. The Sunday liquor license—you do have to have food to be consistent with other establishments in the city. We would require that they would at least serve heated-up frozen pizza and they would have to offer that pizza during all hours of business operation to maintain that Sunday liquor license. And something that is a requirement for all liquor license applicants: every single year they have to show a certificate of liquor liability showing that they have insurance. For this particular business, the liquor liability would only cover the liquor lounge area, which is where the liquor license is. And just to inform you, "liquor lounge"—that term is unique to our city, and the definition in our liquor ordinance is an establishment other than a restaurant, hotel, or club that has an intoxicating liquor license. I'd say we have a few of those in our city, and again, it is unique to our city, but they do have to still follow the liquor laws outlined in the state statutes and Minnesota rules. Staff recommends approval of the on-sale intoxicating liquor license and Sunday liquor license for The Minnesotan Productions company doing business as The Minnesotan with the conditions outlined in the resolution, and I'll stand for any questions. **[13:30] Mayor:** Thank you, Ms. Longendyke. I have one quick question off the top of my head. So, does staff have any concerns about enforcing this? Because this is a kind of a unique animal in the city; it's not just clearly a liquor lounge or bar, and not just clearly retail. Have you discussed that? What are their concerns, if any? **[13:50] Kelly Longendyke:** You know, the applicant is—we're trusting that they're going through this process and they're running a business and they have to follow liquor laws. So it's not just a city ordinance, but we are dealing with the Department of Public Safety, the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division. So we would trust that the applicant would follow the guidelines and the laws, and we would not... we would do our compliance checks as we do with other establishments. I don't have any concerns above any other establishment that we would have. We would certainly follow up on any reports if there was any wrongdoing with the license, but we would enforce it just as any other business. They are unique that they do have premises within their building that you cannot consume liquor, so it would be the responsibility of the applicant to train the employees to make sure that no one is exiting the licensed premises. **[14:40] Mayor:** Thank you. Council, any other questions? Councilmember Jones, I think, yes. **[14:45] Councilmember Jones:** So, I mean, this is similar to, I mean, a hotel—that, okay, I can't leave the bar and go into the main entrance, right, the hotel entrance? So this is not really new as far as that's concerned, as far as combining two establishments. Okay. My biggest question—maybe it's more for the owner—over-serving. Exactly. That's my biggest concern, and I'm assuming x amount is going to be placed on a card or a wrist[band] or however it is done. And that's where the monitoring would [happen], because obviously a normal dispensary would have somebody looking at that person and interacting with them to see what the level of their intoxication is. And I don't know if you can answer that or not. **[15:30] Kelly Longendyke:** Yeah, we had mentioned that in the staff report too, that that is something that we were thinking about—that it'd be monitoring of how much they're consuming, that they are 21 years and older, and that they're not being over-served. I did some research as to the self-pour tap system, and it's not like you can put a hundred dollars in and take as many drinks as [you want]. My understanding is that you have to go up—I think your max is two drinks before you have to reload that card. And the applicant is here with us tonight if he wants to elaborate on the type of self-pour system, but as far as I know, the system is not meant to allow someone unlimited access to alcohol. They would have to reload their credits, at which point an employee could make a determination if they're being over-served. **[16:15] Councilmember Jones:** And not to be... and not to be too critical before—I mean, I get it. I mean, someone can buy a drink for someone else and pass it off. So, I mean, it's not that any type of monitoring system is bulletproof. So I respect that that would be it. And my last question is: do I have to tip the self-pour beverage dispensing system? Or, you know... just kidding, sorry, you don't have to answer that. **[16:45] Mayor:** Mr. Roberts, why don't you hop up to the microphone. Why don't you shed a little light? First, state your name and address for the record and maybe share a little bit about how this business model works logistically, how it's going to operate, please. **[17:00] Corey Roberts:** Corey Roberts, 2186 4th Street, White Bear Lake. Appreciate the opportunity to present this here tonight. We're excited to get finally started in downtown White Bear Lake. I think the concept is exciting and fresh and therefore hopefully relevant here in downtown White Bear Lake. So, I guess to start, I did have a question, Kelly, on this floor plan. Now, that wall—where the checkout is, where that red line is—I don't recall the conversation about that being a full wall. **[17:40] Kelly Longendyke:** No, it's not a full wall. So you and I had discussed that a checkout counter works as a physical barrier. So that's not a full wall. The only full wall that you had indicated was on the top of this image, but we would accept that the counter space below works as physical delineation. **[18:00] Corey Roberts:** Yeah. Good, thank you. So as far as the concept itself: the company that we purchased these from, they started on the West Coast. I think they have a thousand systems in the marketplace right now, so they've got a proven track record in terms of training, the limit of number of drinks—all those things are certainly in place. I think it's four drinks before you have to go in and reload and have a conversation with somebody. I can deliver more information to staff and Council as well if desired. So other than that, like I said, we're really excited to really push this forward in terms of relaunching our store. We're probably going to shut down for a period of time, or have a significant presence down at the State Fair this year. So on August 24th, we might shut down and relaunch and reopen sometime in early October—this is the timeframe. So, any specific questions? **[19:00] Councilmember:** Yeah, so the reloading system—is that automated or do you physically have to go to a person, give them money, and then have it reloaded? **[19:08] Corey Roberts:** You have to physically go to a person. Correct. **[19:10] Councilmember:** So there is a quasi-bartender, if you will, monitoring it from that standpoint? **[19:15] Corey Roberts:** Yep. Absolutely. **[19:16] Mayor:** Any other questions for...? **[19:18] Councilmember Edberg:** I don't know if this might be for the clerk or for Mr. Roberts, but any vision for licensed gambling? **[19:25] Corey Roberts:** Yes, I mean, we are interested at some point in pull-tabs, but we don't know what that looks like. Probably our biggest challenge is space right now. So but that is of interest to us at some point. **[19:40] Councilmember Edberg:** I'm just wanting to know it's on the agenda. Great, we'll talk about it when you're ready. Thank you. **[19:45] Mayor:** Yeah, I guess I just—I want to make sure you fully understand, because I've talked to staff many times about this. Let me say at the outset: run your business however you want, that's up to you within the bones of the law. But you are pivoting pretty significantly from what seems to be a very successful retail operation. And we have this 30% kind of limit that you have to stay in. We're going in eyes wide open that if it starts to creep, state law says you can't do that. So it's a fundamental business model shift. We're all understanding of that? **[20:15] Corey Roberts:** Yeah. The... you know, in terms of how we display our product, we've got some plans in mind and in place in terms of being very efficient on how we display our product. And we're probably going to be pivoting to a certain extent too on the apparel side. But no, we do fully understand that. **[20:35] Mayor:** Okay, so good. **[20:37] Corey Roberts:** And really, it's not that much smaller if you take a look at where our checkout is right now. You know, really the space isn't much less than it currently is. **[20:45] Mayor:** Does Council have any other questions for Mr. Roberts? Thank you, appreciate it. **[20:50] Corey Roberts:** Yeah, thank you. **[20:51] Mayor:** All right, for Council, what would we like to do? **[20:53] Councilmember:** I'll move to approve the resolution... this is Sunday is separate? **[21:00] Mayor:** Oh, the Sunday liquor license. **[21:01] Councilmember:** [Move to approve] The Minnesotan. **[21:02] Councilmember:** I'll second. **[21:03] Mayor:** I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion on this? Seeing none, all those in favor say "aye." **[21:08] Councilmembers:** Aye. **[21:09] Mayor:** Any opposed? The motion carries, the resolution passes. All right, Item 9: Discussion. We have nothing scheduled. Item 10: Communications from the City Manager, Ms. Crawford. **[21:20] Lindy Crawford (City Manager):** The Farmers Market begins this Friday. It's now through October 27th from 8:00 to noon at Clark Street between Second and Third streets. This first Friday is donuts and coffee with cops from 8:30 to 10:00 a.m. again at the Farmers Market. And then, of course, the Fourth of July is right around the corner already, so we have fireworks, flyover, and music events. In the event that we have rain, the date will be July 5th. And then Councilmember Walsh and I attended the League of Minnesota Cities annual conference last Wednesday through Friday. There were many more sessions, but these are the ones that either he or I attended. So we learned a lot. Talked about community engagement, public art in public places, child care and economic development, financial planning for challenging times—which I thought I was going to learn some things at financial planning in challenging times, and it was how to implement a financial management plan. So, good job, we've already been doing all of that. All right. Cannabis regulation—Councilmember Walsh attended that. Redeveloping underutilized city-owned properties—so we learned about the city of Sartell and their redevelopment of a paper mill. LGA 101, and then the importance of having a communications plan and a communications employee. Councilmember Walsh, do you have anything to add at all? **[22:50] Councilmember Walsh:** Uh, well no, it was very beneficial. I mean, the sessions were good, well-planned. The cannabis, or you know, the marijuana legalization—we wandered down there with a city council member from Lakeville that I know like 40 minutes early to get to that just in case, thinking that might... it was packed. It was just—that one was the [one that filled up]. They did a very good job going through the law. A couple of new things we'll talk about as we go, but you know, odor is going to be a big deal. Even the plants outside have odor, and that could be a nuisance thing. Nuisance in for landlords is going to be a big deal. And also establishing a petty misdemeanor for use of cannabis in a public place—we could get busy on that before we even get busy on anything else. That was a—I know when the presenter was going through that, everybody in the room kind of wrote that note down: "Oh, we can get a head start on [that]." If we want to—I mean, I'm not saying this, they're making a judgment on that—but that's something we could get going, making decisions on, you know, use in a public place. That's something we can work on. So, I'm looking at my notes. I mean, I went to the LGA one too, that was really good. I'm just... from my personal interest, a good recap of the program and also what happened this year and the future of that. And then I went to the child care and economic development—wasn't a huge issue here, but I don't know, maybe that'll come up sometime. So it was good. There were about 790 attendees this year—788—and I think 88 of them were staff, the rest were elected officials. So I think it's very beneficial for cities of all sizes, and it's nice to mix the big cities with the little cities and from across the state we kind of learn a lot about everybody. So I encourage you, if you're interested in coming next year, it is in Rochester next year around the same time of the year. So everybody but Councilmember Jones can come. No, we'll find a way. That's all I have. Thank you. **[24:55] Mayor:** Thank you. Any questions or comments for Miss Crawford? Thank you for that. **[25:00] Councilmember Edberg:** Mayor, yes. I just wanted to say it was a fine City staff—they did a fine job with Manitou Days. Our parade came off well. City staff, the preparations that went into it, the cleanup, the public safety—all of that stuff is deserving of note and just an expression of my appreciation, I'm sure our appreciation for that. **[25:25] Mayor:** All right, with that I would entertain a motion to adjourn. **[25:28] Councilmember:** So moved. **[25:29] Councilmember:** Second. **[25:30] Mayor:** All those in favor say "aye." **[25:32] Councilmembers:** Aye. **[25:33] Mayor:** We're adjourned. Thank you.