OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/St Paul, Minnesota/Planning Commission
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

St. Paul Planning Commission Meeting – February 27, 2026

Planning Commission — Friday, February 27, 2026
BodySt Paul, Minnesota
SessionPlanning Commission
DateFriday, February 27, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:11:23

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:00

All right, the March 6th meeting of the St.

0:03

Paul Planning Commission will now come to order.

0:05

The first item is roll call.

0:08

Commissioner Grill.

0:09

Present.

0:10

Commissioner Hackney.

0:12

Commissioner Holst.

0:14

Commissioner Johnson Becker.

0:17

Commissioner Martinson?

0:19

Here.

0:20

Commissioner Presley?

0:21

Here.

0:23

Commissioner Riley.

0:25

Commissioner Starling.

0:26

Here.

0:27

Commissioner Tagia.

0:32

Oh, he's a it's it's it's tacky off.

0:39

Um next up is approval of the February 20th, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes.

0:52

Do we have a motion?

0:53

So moved.

0:54

Moved by Commissioner Holtz.

0:55

Do you have a second?

0:56

Second.

0:58

Second by Commissioner Martinson.

0:59

Any discussion.

1:02

All those in favor?

1:03

Aye.

1:04

All those opposed.

1:05

Any abstentions?

1:07

All right, the item passes.

1:08

Um if folks are amenable, I'd like to pull item number five up to the front, training uh best practices for quasi-judicial decision making before we do a little quasi-judicial decision making.

1:22

Um I'm seeing nods all around.

1:25

Um if folks are comfortable with that, then we will have a presentation now from the county attorney's office.

1:32

Good morning, everyone.

1:33

Uh my name is Daniel Staley.

1:34

I think I've seen most of you around uh covering for Josh every once in a while.

1:39

So uh I'm assistant city attorney.

1:41

And uh this is a presentation that I've given now to city council and their staff.

1:46

Um it's uh our office had kind of some notes and some memorandums on what a quasi-judicial decision making is, but uh it was kind of lawyerly like, it was kind of difficult to understand.

1:58

Uh, I think I kind of want to just kind of, you know, people tended to not really get it.

2:03

And I I came across this presentation, it's not mine.

2:07

Uh a guy named Sam White out of Colorado.

2:10

He's kind of uh works for the equivalent of like the League of Minnesota Cities and Colorado.

2:15

Uh I saw it, it looks really good.

2:17

It's really easy to understand.

2:18

Um I I think you can get the the slides show a presentation uh to refer back to later.

2:24

It has a lot of good information in it.

2:26

Um and uh I I asked him if I could use his presentation, and he said under two conditions.

2:31

One that I give him credit for that, so that's what I'm doing right now, and two that I just don't accept money for it, and I only give it to the city and city departments and uh uh boards like this.

2:40

So uh that's uh also what I'm doing here.

2:42

So uh and it is about an hour long presentation, but I kind of with time constraints I'm gonna like fast forward it, so try to get it done in about 10 minutes.

2:51

Um the first thing is just uh we we kind of go through uh the differences between legislative and quasi-judicial functions.

3:01

I don't think that's quite as important for you guys because you don't have legislative duties, but just kind of going to uh the quasi-judicial matters.

3:10

Uh I I guess it's called quasi judicial because you're sitting really like a judge.

3:14

Um, you know, the the quasi is just like we're not in a courtroom.

3:18

We're we're in a a boardroom like this.

3:20

So try to think of yourselves all as judges where you you you plot apply the rules, uh the rules of uh uh your policies and procedures.

3:29

Uh you know, uh we we accept evidence that's given at the hearing.

3:35

We don't we don't go out and find our own evidence.

3:37

We you know the evidence is presented to you.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Procedural█████████████████████████████████████37%
Land Use Regulation██████████████████████████████████34%
Historic Preservation██████████10%
Public Engagement████████8%
Personnel Matters█████5%
Public Safety████4%
Community Engagement██2%
Summary of Proceedings

St. Paul Planning Commission Meeting – February 27, 2026

Note: The transcript indicates the meeting occurred on March 6, 2026, but the provided date for this summary is February 27, 2026. This discrepancy is noted; the summary below uses the given date for the title but reflects the content of the March 6 transcript.

The St. Paul Planning Commission met to conduct a quasi-judicial training, approve a conditional use permit (CUP) for an assembly hall at 928 West 7th Street, and elect officers for the coming year. The meeting opened with roll call and approval of the February 20, 2026 minutes.

Consent Calendar

  • Approval of February 20, 2026 Minutes: Moved by Commissioner Holtz, seconded by Commissioner Martinson. Approved unanimously without discussion.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • No members of the public spoke during the public hearing for the CUP item. No public comments were received on any other item.

Discussion Items

  • Quasi-Judicial Decision-Making Training (Item 5, pulled forward): Assistant City Attorney Daniel Staley presented a training on best practices for quasi-judicial decision-making, adapted from a presentation by Sam White. Key points included: treating the commission as a judge, avoiding ex parte communications, relying only on evidence presented at the hearing, and the importance of findings. Commissioner Sah raised a clarifying question about legislative vs. quasi-judicial matters (e.g., rezoning is legislative; CUPs and variances are quasi-judicial). Commissioner Presley asked about encouraging public participation; the attorney advised only logistical information (date, time) can be shared for quasi-judicial items, but not opinions on the merits. The commission requested a copy of the slides.
  • Conditional Use Permit – 928 West 7th Street (Keg House): Staff presented a CUP for an assembly hall (seating capacity 607) in the former Keg House food hall, which closed in 2025. The applicant (Outlaw Development, represented by Colin Obelsbay, Tanner Elts, and owner Sean Devine) plans to operate a boxing gym and event space, with potential for car shows in the parking lot. The staff recommended approval, finding all five CUP standards met. Commissioners discussed parking (72 on-site stalls plus an additional 40 nearby and overflow options), occupancy (previous occupancy 1,000; new combined occupancy 1,100, but typical events about 200 people), and the historic preservation value of the building. Commissioner Riley proposed adding policies HP6 and HP15 from the comprehensive plan to the findings; after discussion, HP15 was removed via friendly amendment, leaving only HP6. The motion to approve with the amended finding passed unanimously.
  • Election of Officers (First Vice Chair, Second Vice Chair, Secretary): The election was conducted via a slate nominated by Commissioner Riley: First Vice Chair – Commissioner Starling; Second Vice Chair – Commissioner Thomas; Secretary – Commissioner Riley. Commissioner Holtz initially withdrew from consideration for first vice chair. The slate was seconded by Commissioner Martinson. After discussion (including a suggestion for a nominations committee in the future), the vote was 6 in favor and 3 opposed (Commissioners Hackney, Holst, and Tagiaff voted nay). The slate passed.
  • Site Plan Review: Staff announced upcoming site plan review meetings (March 3 and March 10, 2026) for projects at 1488 Grand Avenue, 120 Plato Boulevard West, and 1645 Energy Park Drive. Commissioners asked for clarification on the purpose of site plan review and the process for pulling items; staff explained these are technical reviews delegated to DSI, and the commission can pull items if desired. A request was made for a future presentation on site plan review procedures.

Key Outcomes

  • Approved: February 20, 2026 meeting minutes (unanimous).
  • Approved: Conditional Use Permit for an assembly hall at 928 West 7th Street, with the addition of comprehensive plan policy HP6 to the findings (unanimous).
  • Elected: 2026-2027 officers: First Vice Chair – Commissioner Starling, Second Vice Chair – Commissioner Thomas, Secretary – Commissioner Riley (vote 6-3).
  • Next Steps: The city attorney’s office will distribute the quasi-judicial training slides. A presentation on site plan review processes will be arranged for a future meeting.

Meeting Transcript

All right, the March 6th meeting of the St. Paul Planning Commission will now come to order. The first item is roll call. Commissioner Grill. Present. Commissioner Hackney. Commissioner Holst. Commissioner Johnson Becker. Commissioner Martinson? Here. Commissioner Presley? Here. Commissioner Riley. Commissioner Starling. Here. Commissioner Tagia. Oh, he's a it's it's it's tacky off. Um next up is approval of the February 20th, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes. Do we have a motion? So moved. Moved by Commissioner Holtz. Do you have a second? Second. Second by Commissioner Martinson. Any discussion. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed. Any abstentions? All right, the item passes. Um if folks are amenable, I'd like to pull item number five up to the front, training uh best practices for quasi-judicial decision making before we do a little quasi-judicial decision making. Um I'm seeing nods all around. Um if folks are comfortable with that, then we will have a presentation now from the county attorney's office. Good morning, everyone. Uh my name is Daniel Staley. I think I've seen most of you around uh covering for Josh every once in a while. So uh I'm assistant city attorney. And uh this is a presentation that I've given now to city council and their staff. Um it's uh our office had kind of some notes and some memorandums on what a quasi-judicial decision making is, but uh it was kind of lawyerly like, it was kind of difficult to understand. Uh, I think I kind of want to just kind of, you know, people tended to not really get it. And I I came across this presentation, it's not mine. Uh a guy named Sam White out of Colorado. He's kind of uh works for the equivalent of like the League of Minnesota Cities and Colorado. Uh I saw it, it looks really good. It's really easy to understand. Um I I think you can get the the slides show a presentation uh to refer back to later. It has a lot of good information in it. Um and uh I I asked him if I could use his presentation, and he said under two conditions. One that I give him credit for that, so that's what I'm doing right now, and two that I just don't accept money for it, and I only give it to the city and city departments and uh uh boards like this. So uh that's uh also what I'm doing here.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com