Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Are we ready?

Waiting on the attorney.

Waiting on who?

The city attorney.

Oh, okay. We are ready, though. Ready. Should I go down and get him?

I'm starting to wonder if... Travis is checking.

Okay. Patrick was in court this afternoon. Might have got hung up over there.

Was it Kool-Aid?

Grape. No, I just...

Good afternoon. I will call to order the Wednesday, July 22nd, 2026 City of Battle Creek Planning Commission meeting. I would like to, before we begin, bring it to the commissioner's attention. If you haven't already noticed, there are multiple fans in here this evening. So when you speak, please speak clearly and directly into the microphone. Can we get a roll call for attendance?

Commissioner Hughes.

Here.

Commissioner O'Donnell?

Here.

Commissioner Gray?

Here.

Commissioner Morris?

Here.

Commissioner Dennison? Here. Commissioner Fermato? Here. Mayor Behnke?

Here.

And Commissioner Moten and Commissioner White are absent this evening.

Thank you. On to the approval of minutes, this being the June 24, 2026 meeting. Are there any comments or questions regarding the minutes?

Move for approval of the June 24, 2026 meeting.

It's been moved and supported. All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Minutes are approved. Any correspondence?

No correspondence.

Any additions or deletions? The only addition, it's not an addition to the agenda, but you'll notice on your seat in front of you along with your packet today, you have the handout that the applicant presented to the Neighborhood Planning Council that represents that area. So I just wanted to bring that to everybody's attention.

Thank you for that, Travis. Everyone got one I had seen. All right. We will now move on to the public hearings and deliberations. As a reminder to all, with public hearings, we'll hear from staff and then from the applicant and then open the floor for public comment. We ask that when coming forward, you state your name and address. Once comments are completed, we'll close the public hearing. If you want to comment on something not specific to this public hearing, you will be provided time to do so later in the agenda. As a reminder, commissioners, the role of this body today is to hold the public hearing, review the request, and any proposed changes before the recommendation to the City Commission. Any change recommended by the Planning Commission must be approved by the City Commission. We will now open the public hearing for consideration of special use permit request PSUP 26-0002. This is a petition from top brands on behalf of six to five battle Creek LLC for a special use permit to allow for an adult use marijuana retailer establishment to be located at six 25 North Ave. This is within a T three commercial district staff report.

Yeah. Thank you. So as mentioned, this is an application for a special use permit for an adult marijuana retailer on a six 25 North Avenue. Um, this was previously the site of a, uh, like retailer at one time, uh, but it currently sits vacant. Um, this is a new tenant, same use, um, as the staff has reviewed this application, it meets the requirements of the T3 zoning district. It also satisfies all of the buffering requirements, uh, specified in the ordinance. Um, they're, As you'll see with the addition to the packet, there was outreach to the NPC in the area as to make them aware of the intentions. As such, staff is going to recommend the approval of the special use permit at 625 North.

Thank you. Are there any technical or clarifying questions of Commissioner for staff at this time? All right, hearing none, we can move on to the applicant. If someone is present, please state your name and affiliation.

Hello?

Oh, it's already on. My name is David Elwood. My address is 4636 Desert Bridge Court, Highland, Michigan. I do want to point out, Commissioner Hughes, what he said, there's multiple fans. I looked around, I thought you were being facetious because the place is full. Like, oh, fans. So... I appreciate you allowing me to speak today on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is out of town. He tried to make it back in town. He could not make it or they could not make it to speak with the neighborhood committee last week because it was short notice. His flight got canceled, unfortunately, so I got the privilege of making the track. I was going to be here just in case. So I'm the broker of record. I represent both the buyers and I represent the seller. I do want to make note, we have tried to sell this property as a non-cannabis and a cannabis-related property for six months with zero success. The issue that it is, in 2021, it was built specifically for cannabis. The dynamic is, the floor plan, everything about it is for cannabis and would take significant amount of alteration to change it into something else. We've had Some retail operators that have looked at it and have came back and said, no, the amount of expense involved versus what it's valued at, we just wouldn't want to do it. Prior to us, there was another broker for six months. Same situation. This was built in 2021, as I noted, as a cannabis operation. It did change hands during that process. They opened up as Stickies Cannabis of Battle Creek. And for one reason or another, was not successful. The current party in position to purchase is a operator that's been in the business. I wanted to note that they've had zero claims, zero filings, and zero complaints against their licensing in the state of Michigan since they've been in operation. That's huge. They are a family-run business, so it's not an out-of-state party coming in. And the main thing that they do want to point out is that they hire locally. And they manage from within locally. So it'll be a local manager. It'll be local staff. The prior company had about 10 employees. They're feeling that it's going to be about 20 to 25 employees. The prior company has a record averaged about 500 clients coming in to purchase product on a weekly basis. So that is a big significant increase. part of bringing more traffic to the area. It's situated, if you're familiar or not familiar, behind the Arby's and next to, I think it's Walgreens. They do own the parking lot that Arby's utilizes. There's a deed restriction that was in place on Arby's side, not on this property's side, that allows Arby's ingress and egress, but also for use of the parking lot. They're willing to keep that. They have no problem And they're just going to keep maintaining it, paying for it, and not have anything to do with it. The current status, if you were to walk in a building, is literally as if they just mothballed it and shut it. Everything looks identical as if when they were operating, other than taking out their POS systems. So it still has the state-regulated, state-approved Security cameras, security systems, everything's still in place. The new party is going to utilize their own current brand name. They have currently four locations. I've personally worked with them to put them in the place in Burton when they bought it. Everything was on par with professionalism with my own personal dealings with them. Um, what else? What else? What else? There's a few other things that I just want to make sure. Oh, we did meet with Pastor French in the neighborhood committee on July 13th. I noticed nobody has came here to oppose it, but everybody, in my opinion, felt like they were supportive of it. Some of them just gave no opinion. I know this business in itself sometimes has a stigma, but the applicant wants to, you in tune with it is a highly regulated business and it's better to have it in a position where it's highly regulated by the state versus people doing this from their basements or selling them on the street or what have you. That's really it. I could go on, but I won't. Does anybody have questions of me, I guess?

Yeah. Any commissioner questions at this time? Was there a vote?

Keep your hand off of it. Oh.

My question is, what is the name of the business, Top Brands?

They operate as Top Brands, but they also own the LLC that's buying the property. So as most businesses do, their LLC is buying the property to rent it back to their operating business.

So what is the brand that it's going to be marketed under, I guess, is what my question is. Okay, that's what the sign is going to say, Top Brands? Okay.

Any other questions? Was there a vote taken at the Neighborhood Planning Council meeting?

There actually wasn't. I was surprised when I drove home. I was sort of in the air what the outcome was. Nobody opposed anything. Nobody, you know, wildly was supportive of it. They just said, you know, that's what it is. I will state the pastor said afterwards the meeting that, you know, and I said the same thing. I said, you know, I know there may be a stigma. It's a little weird we're meeting in a church, and it may not be conducive to where we're meeting, but... It's better than having it vacant, and it's better than having people do this illegally. And she came back and made the statement, and this may be hearsay, but it was said to me. She made the statement to me, they would rather have any type of business there than a non-operating business that becomes blighted.

Could you say that again?

They would rather have a business, any type of business, than a non-operating building that becomes blighted. An empty building.

What is your customer gonna do if we defeat this?

What is my customer gonna do? I didn't hear the rest, sorry.

If we defeat this?

They would basically cancel the contract and just keep building in other cities.

Any other questions? All right. We'll move on now to the public. Is there any public comment? Seeing none. We can move on to discussion amongst commissioners. Are there any other questions, comments by commissioners at this time? Uh, if not, I'd be looking for emotion. I will call out to commissioners. The staff recommendations along with conditions are on page nine of your packet.

Oh, sorry. Yes. Um, yeah, I was curious as well as mayor being key about, um, MPC two and, if there was any decisions made. Did we get any inquiries at all from the public in that surrounding area? I know there's nothing in our packet. You would have included it, but I'm just asking for the record. Nothing came in. Okay. For the applicant representative, I forgot your name. I'm sorry.

David Elwood.

Mr. Elwood. Elwood. You were saying that their record as owners of cannabis in Michigan is very solid. What was your, when it comes to this location, what outcome are you looking for that would be different than what was happening at that location before?

So the business is a little peculiar. It is... A lot of the major brands capitalize on going to the growers and the suppliers and doing exclusive contracts. And what happens is if you have a competing business, I'm actually surprised none of them are here because that's what happens in some of these committees that I attend. They, in a competitive environment, I guess manner, they basically go to their growers that might be a cousin, maybe people they've done business with and say, if you sell to this brand or this brand or this brand, we're no longer gonna use you. And the business that was there before Their statement to me was they just couldn't get enough product to keep themselves going. And when they would do product, it was so expensive they couldn't compete with others. And that's why they feel they had to close. And they ended up closing all their operations, by the way. The Sticky Brand had four locations that closed all over the state for the same reason. The new party has those relationships. They've established those relationships. Those relationships allow them to keep their product price lower to be able to sell it at a more economical price to the public. Thank you. One thing I missed, by the way, when we submitted the application, when their attorney submitted the application, the previous stickies, their licensing with the city was still in place and active. It expired in June of 2026. So they applied to just transfer the license while it was still active. But the previous party needed to renew it. They did not renew it between the time the application came in to transfer ownership and the time it was reviewed. It was a pretty short window, but it was right around the 15th of June or so. So it was still, even though they weren't operating, was still approved as a permitted use up until the time they applied, the new party applied.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

I do have a question for you, David. What is the nearest city or what other cities does Top Brands Cannabis operate?

So the supplemental package that I supplied has it, but I'll also...

Number four on the second page.

I'll put it on record as well. So Bay City, Saginaw, Michigan, River Rouge, and Burton. And they have two other cities that they're negotiating for property in right now outside of the one that's the subject.

Okay, thank you. I see that. I apologize.

Glad you asked.

John.

Yeah.

I have a comment. Currently, and I just did a quick little look on the Internet, but currently right now we have 30 marijuana shops in Battle Creek and at least 10 in Emmett Township. So we have 40 pot shops here right currently. I just I don't know. How something like this? How they can sustain themselves? So. That was just a comment.

Any other questions or comments?

John, I would prefer some additional time to make our decision on this. Because of the location, I think it's important that I get a better feel of what. Ward 2. is demanding here. They may be supportive of it. I'm not sure. I know that previously we had two votes down in the Michigan Avenue area and they were defeated. So I think I need to check with more of the people and the citizens in that area of the community to find out. And maybe we can get the owner of the business here and sell it to us too if we do it next month. Is there a motion? I'll move that we postpone or table this to next month.

Support. The motion has been made to postpone until our August meeting. It has been supported. Are there any other questions or comments by commissioners?

I'm sorry to ask you one more time, David, but because of the name Top Rands, it's really hard for me to find any kind of presence, even though I know the city. What's the website name that they operate under?

My concern is...

is branding how cannabis shops usually brand and you know in the 90s when cigarettes went through this whole thing with marketing to children i personally find that very difficult to handle communally even though it's legal and everything so my concern is i want to see what the marketing looks like before i say obviously it's okay legally but i don't think the branding is appropriate but i can't find anything that ties all my literature to some sort of a presence.

Yeah, I think most of their shops were top brand outlet, but they're getting rid of the cannabis outlet part of it.

What would it be? Is that a dot com?

I can find out here real quick.

Are there any other questions or comments on the motion?

Patrick? I am in support of waiting it for next month with more information.

Okay. I THINK WE MAY WANT TO CHECK JUST TO CONFIRM THEY'RE HAVING A MEETING. SOMETIMES IN THE SUMMER THEY TOOK JULY OR AUGUST OFF. SO WE MIGHT WANT TO CHECK THAT AS WELL AND CONSIDER THAT IN THE MOTION. to September if no August meeting is held or something. I don't know.

I think at that point in time, at the August meeting, we would want to wait and see, and then there would be another motion at that time, if the NPC had not met, to postpone it until September.

OK, thank you.

Good move. All right.

Are we in a position to vote? OK, let's vote.

Commissioner Denison?

No.

Commissioner Gray?

Yes.

Commissioner Fermato?

Yes.

Commissioner Hughes?

Yes.

Mayor Behnke?

Yes.

Commissioner Morris?

No.

Commissioner O'Donnell?

Yes. Motion to postpone carries. Thank you all. We will see you next month. We have no other public hearings or deliberations at this time. Is there any old business?

No old business.

Any new business?

No new business.

Comments by the public?

Comments by commissioners? I do understand this comment by the city attorney, but I also think about people traveling from the petitioners traveling. So it'd be difficult to get here. Yes, we can make a new motion to say postpone until September when they meet. But I also wanted to see if there was a way to know so that at least we could let those petitioners know so that they don't travel. If we're more than likely haven't heard from the NPC or the public, to be able to have this conversation again, that they be notified so they don't waste their time in that way.

So just for the record. Thank you. Any other comments?

So... Maybe we suggest that we find out soon enough if we got enough information and can remove it from the agenda before. Is there a certain time where you have to remove stuff from the agenda?

Well, the MPC2, they meet on the second Monday. So we at least have that date in mind.

All right. Any other questions or comments?

Can I add one thing? I apologize. I just want to make note. The sellers have a contractual obligation with the buyer, and a postponement may affect that where they just withdraw. I just want to make that comment because they came into a position where they thought the application process at the city, we did check with the application process, and previous application processes did not have to go into the planning committee as they are now. They were informed that it would basically just need to apply and the planning department would review it and approve it. They did not understand they had to go in front of the planning committee. Now that they do, there is contractual obligations that are extending that may not get extended. I just want to make that a note that by the next meeting, it may be nil and void.

Thank you, sir. Thank you. Melody.

Just wanted to make a note that NPC2 does meet August 10th.

Okay.

Thank you.

Perfect. Seeing no further comment, meeting adjourned.