There will be a Community Meeting about the Hawk Fire tonight, Monday, August 24th at 7:00pm at the California Building in Idlewild Park. You can attend in person or watch it on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/HawkFire2026.

As seen on the City’s Current And Upcoming Meetings webpage, the City of Reno is holding four of its regular public meetings this week including those of the Reno City Council (agenda) and Redevelopment Agency Board (agenda) on Wednesday.

Of note: the Reno City Council is likely to appoint a new Planning Commissioner this week with the recent resignation of Tina Gonfiantini, as explained in the Staff Report for Item G.2 on Wednesday’s Council agenda. The pool of candidates includes Piyush Bakane, Jennifer Billat, Daniel Bolton, John Brownell, Fred Darley II, Danielle Dolan, Brian Erbis, Michael Fuess, Andre Gardner, Brett Kanwetz, Janice Mackenzie, Kyle McLauchlin, Jose Miguel, Randolph Starks, Emmrick Volkarin, and Anthony Walker. Their applications are all linked on the agenda.

This is Reno has a preview of the August 26th Reno City Council agenda here:

• City council to consider $50 million wastewater financing, property sale to housing authority (This is Reno 8/23/26)

And they’ve also previewed items on the Tuesday, August 25th Washoe County School District Board of Trustee meeting agenda here:

• Washoe County School District to consider $111.15M major projects program, new elementary school funding (This is Reno 8/22/26)

• Doral Academy’s new south Reno campus plan faces pushback (This is Reno 8/24/26)

Be sure to skim through all of the week’s agendas for other items of interest to you and follow the instructions at the top of each one to submit your comments.

Today I’m highlighting the next step for the Lear, and after that, I’ll wrap up the latest in urban development news regarding data centers, homelessness, and road funding.

THIS WEEK WITH THE LEAR: Commissioning the Economic Feasibility Study

The City of Reno’s methodical plan of action for the historic First Church of Christ, Scientist (Lear Theater) property is well underway. An award is currently pending for the exterior site improvements that were put out to bid last month, with that work on schedule to commence in September.

This coming Wednesday, August 26th, Reno’s Redevelopment Agency Board (City Council) will review the professional agreement to commission an Economic Feasibility Study for the Lear and hopefully give it the go-ahead.

Once they do, that work can also get underway, keeping the City’s timeline on track.

You can review my complete explanation of the entire plan and timeline, including the phased procurement process that will begin in February, in my July 27th Brief:

As I wrote there, completion of the Economic Feasibility Study is critical to ensure that the proposals for the property (to be solicited early next year) are based on accurate and credible data regarding our community’s needs and desires, market conditions, potential operating and management arrangements, and more.

This step will guarantee more realistic proposals for the property.

Here’s a description of what the study will include, from this week’s Staff Report:

City staff have selected Architectural Resources Group from its 2026-2028 pre-qualified consultant list to conduct this study, and I strongly endorse this choice. This firm conducted the 2024 Historic Structure Report for the Lear as well as many other Reno projects, and have completed studies just like this for historic properties across the west. This is highly specialized work, and ARG can hit the ground running.

Please voice your support for this Economic Feasibility Study!

The City Council already voted to approve the budget allocation for this contract, so this item warrants a quick approval after their questions are answered. Let’s all encourage them to give this contract the green light.

You can express your support in several ways:

• Attend the meeting in person, fill out a comment form, and speak.

• Send an email to Publiccomment@reno.gov and in the “cc” line, copy the City Councilmembers’ addresses, which you can find here.

• Register to watch, participate, and comment via Zoom (register here).

In your comments, refer to Item B.1 on the August 26th Redevelopment Agency Board agenda, which you can find here.

(I don’t recommend using the online public comment form for Redevelopment Agency Board meetings since it does not distinguish between City Council or Redevelopment Agency Board agenda items, which can cause confusion.)

The motion we are seeking is for Council to APPROVE the agreement to hire Architectural Resources Group to complete the feasibility study for the Lear Property, which means voting “in favor” of the agenda item.

If you can go the extra mile and also reach out directly to your City Councilmember, that would go a long way toward reminding them that residents of every city ward care about the Lear and want to give its revitalization the best possible chance. You can find their contact information in my Citizen Guide here. Thank you!

It’s a big year for the legacy of Paul Revere Williams!

With these actions, Reno joins a major tide of recognitions and commemorations related to Paul Revere Williams, architect of the First Church of Scientist/Lear Theater. Events and activities include three major exhibits dedicated to his life, work, and influence, all in Los Angeles, where he was based. A recent Vanity Fair article provides some background on Williams and the exhibits:

• The Man Who Built LA (Vanity Fair, 2/24/26)) If you’ve been to Los Angeles, chances are you’ve seen the work of Paul R. Williams—a Black architect ahead of his time. As exhibits at the Getty, LACMA and USC’s Fisher Museum of Art celebrate his work, his family, friends and fans reflect on his influence on Beverly Hills and beyond.

And here’s more on those three exhibits, which I hope to visit:

• Getty Center - Paul R. Williams: Architecture Across the Color Line (December 15, 2026 - March 14, 2027)

• LACMA - Paul R. Williams: Architect for Living (November 15, 2026 - May 31, 2027)

• USC Fisher Museum of Art - Paul R. Williams: An Architect Considered (August 18, 2026 - March 13, 2027)

The City of Reno is finally taking the necessary steps to give the historic 1939 First Church of Christ, Scientist property a fighting chance to join the pantheon of Paul Revere Williams designs that are lovingly preserved and promoted across the country!

If you’d like to know more about all of Williams’ work in Northern Nevada, check out my essay, “Paul Revere Williams in Northern and Central Nevada.”

NEWS DIGEST: The Latest in Local Development

Here’s a sampling of some recent news items regarding hot local development topics.

Data Centers

• Nevada governor candidate Aaron Ford pledges to pause new data center tax breaks (Nevada Independent 8/19/26) He wants to audit all companies with a tax break to determine if the state’s incentives have been worth it. Some proposals could require a change in state law.

• Given chance to take a stand on NV Energy’s demand charge, state lawmakers take a pass (Nevada Current 8/19/26) When given the opportunity to take a public stance on the controversial NV Energy rate scheme set to go into effect next year, seven state lawmakers on Tuesday opted to say nothing at all.

• Data center developer Tract seeks disqualification of NV Energy attorney citing conflict of interest (updated) (This is Reno 8/19/26)

• Nye County totally bans data centers in over-appropriated water basin (Nevada Current 8/20/26) Following a county-wide moratorium on any new data center applications, the Nye County Board of Commissioners voted Tuesday to completely ban data centers in one of the most over-appropriated water basins in Nevada.

• OPINION: Nevada politicians are too slow to reckon with the revolt against data centers (John L. Smith, Nevada Independent, 8/23/26)

Homelessness in Washoe and Clark Counties

• More people on the streets, more shelter on the way: Takeaways from Nevada’s homeless census (Nevada Independent 8/23/26) New data shows Clark County struggling with unsheltered homelessness. Washoe has helped unhoused people get off the street, partly thanks to a massive shelter.

Funding for Road Projects

• Washoe County asking voters to signal support for higher fees on electric vehicles (Nevada Current 8/24/26) Washoe County voters this November will have the opportunity to weigh in on whether electric vehicle owners are “paying their fair share” toward filling potholes and adding new streetlights.

That’s all for today. Please take care and look out for each other.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

The Truckee River is downtown Reno’s most valuable asset. The paths alongside the river are featured on the City of Reno’s webpage (see above) and in local and regional promotional efforts. Multiple recent studies have confirmed the river’s enormous value and urged the city to make it the centerpiece of downtown revitalization efforts. But Reno’s residents can’t appreciate or experience the river’s beauty without consistent access to the paths and walkways that run alongside it.

Public access to a short but central stretch of the downtown riverfront has been the subject of citizen and media inquiries and quiet City of Reno decisions over the past few months—and no, I’m not talking about the City Plaza, although it’s important to retain full public access to that, too.

I’ll get to the riverfront in just a minute. But first, here’s a quick look at what’s on tap at the City of Reno this week along with some recent news in local urban development.

BRIEF DIGEST: Public Meetings & Local Development News

The City of Reno has seven public meetings on its calendar the week of August 17th, including the Arts & Culture Advisory Board, Reno Planning Commission, Wards 2 and 4 Neighborhood Advisory Boards, Parks & Recreation Advisory Board, and more. Consult the City’s Current & Upcoming Meetings webpage for links to those agendas and all supplemental materials.

For reports on last week’s Reno City Council meeting, read the City’s official August 12, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights and the article below:

• Reno council removes city clerk without cause after HR investigation (This is Reno 8/13/26)

And here’s some other recent coverage of local urban development news and some regional/state developments related to data centers:

• Can Reno be a soccer town? A stadium fundraising project puts the question to the test (Nevada Independent 8/16/26) A recent foray was cut short by the pandemic, but showed promising fan interest. Proponents think a dedicated stadium could seal the deal.

• PUCN denies public session on NV Energy’s data center-driven resource plan, advocates call foul (Nevada Current 8/14/26) The Public Utilities Commission of Nevada denied an application for a PUCN-led consumer session last week, an unprecedented move advocates say follows a pattern of cutting public input in recent months.

Now let’s talk about the path along the Truckee River.

The City of Reno is creating a detour around part of the riverfront pathway that was formerly open to the public.

On August 14th, a City of Reno staff memo to City Council revealed that the City plans to create a detour around a stretch of the riverfront pathway between Center Street (University Way) and Lake Streets on the river’s north side, claiming the city has a legal right to some but not all of the stretch. A local citizen, Damien Cole, thinks otherwise, and I think the whole situation warrants additional public scrutiny.

The discussion concerns not just the segment of pathway adjacent to the AT&T building but also the neighboring property at the corner of East 1st & Lake Streets.

Today I’m calling for your assistance in requesting that these discussions be placed on a public agenda ASAP so that we may all better understand what’s happening and what’s at stake, and enable a public discussion about the short and long-term plan for the riverfront.

Indefatigable KRNV reporter Joe Hart has published a few pieces about this issue and additional updates on his Facebook page:

• Public or private? city plans detour as popular downtown path is now off-limits (KRNV 8/5/26)

You can access the August 14th City staff memo here. Here’s its Summary section:

“The City holds an express public-access easement across the AT&T property on the University Way end of the walkway. No comparable easement exists on the Lake Street end. A 1972 agreement under which the extension was built allowed the City to construct a public concrete retaining wall and walkway along the river at no cost to the property owners, it did not grant the public an express easement to use the walkway.

According to the City Attorney’s Office, although the public has long used the walkway and wishes to continue using it, without an express easement, the City has no recognized legal right to require the owner to remove the fence and no legal basis to remove the fence itself. It should be noted the original path includes a stairway at the Lake Street end, so it does not provide a step-free route. Below is an exhibit of the area with the AT&T easement shown alongside the section of path without current easement.”

City staff then includes their history of this stretch of the riverfront path:

“The walkway was built in two phases. Nevada Bell (AT&T) built the first phase between 1970 and 1971 as part of its new telephone-equipment building at First and Center Streets; the path ran along the river from Center Street to the eastern edge of the Bell property. The City completed the second phase in 1972, extending the walkway east to the Lake Street Bridge. Architect Graham Erskine designed that extension at no cost to the City, and the City funded and managed the construction. In 2000, the City secured an express public-access easement across the AT&T portion of the path. The City never secured a comparable easement across the adjoining private property on the Lake Street end, and that gap is the reason the Lake Street closure cannot be resolved today.”

This is followed by the City’s timeline of actions related to this stretch, which I urge you to read in its entirety. Staff then explains what they intend to do next:

“Staff is preparing to install signage to route pedestrians and cyclists around the closure via First Street, rejoining the path near City Plaza and the National Automobile Museum. This work is anticipated to be completed by the end of August. Because the route runs cyclists against one-way traffic on University Way, the City plans to add a two-way bike facility along that block.

The Tahoe-Pyramid Trail organization, which promotes the multi-use path connecting Lake Tahoe and Pyramid Lake through Reno and Sparks, has offered to assist the City in restoring full access.”

I don’t know what staff means by pursuing the restoration of “full access.” Does that mean that they intend to pursue establishing the City’s (and hence, the public’s) legal right to the segment of the path behind both properties? If that’s the case, great.

However, local resident Damien Cole believes the City already has a legal right to both segments. He has been researching the legal status of the riverwalk for a very long time in conjunction with his longstanding interest in bike networks and other local development-related issues, and I have a great deal of respect for his tenacity, his unearthing of historic documents, and his selfless dedication to the public interest.

Cole has written a petition explaining his research and asking residents to join him in demanding that the City of Reno assert its right to the pathway. I’m copying it in its entirety here to save you a click, but please do click over there if you’d like to sign it.

Open the Gates: Save Reno’s Riverwalk, Restore Bike Route 2 & Stop the Trail Destruction!

To: The Reno City Council, Mayor Hillary Schieve, Reno City Attorney Karl Hall, and the Truckee River Flood Management Authority (TRFMA)

A private gate has illegally severed Reno’s public Truckee Riverwalk and Tahoe-Pyramid Trail system at 180 E. 1st Street. By locking this gate, the property owners have completely blocked a section of the Truckee Riverwalk path, forcing families, pedestrians, and commuters off a dedicated path and onto dangerous downtown streets against traffic on a one-way corridor.

City officials claim they lack the legal authority to reopen the path. Our community’s public records completely dismantle this excuse.

Worse, this ongoing obstruction puts our entire riverfront network and federal safety standing in immediate danger. We demand that the City of Reno take swift legal action to assert a public prescriptive easement and clear this gate before our historic public access rights are lost forever, using the unassailable legal trail already in the city’s possession:

• The 1972 Cavallo Agreement: Public records prove that on June 12, 1972, the City of Reno entered into a formal contract to construct this concrete retaining wall and walkway at taxpayer expense, explicitly binding all future “successors and assigns.” In 1972, $35,941.00 in taxpayer funds were used to construct this improvement to the land, which today would be approximately $287,113.56! The walkway was finished in a record time of 4 months from the time the agreement was reached!
  

• The 1976 Master Plan Mandate: On May 17, 1976, the Reno City Council officially legislated the Master Plan of Bikeways, incorporating the Truckee River Path as a permanent municipal transport asset and instructing engineers to maintain it as “Bike Route 2.” Additionally, RTC has studied this path and conducted an inventory to make improvements and adapt it as a mobility corridor.
  

• The 1995 Redevelopment Strategy: On March 28, 1995, the Reno Redevelopment Agency Board adopted a strategy legally mandating that this exact urban riverfront frontage “Must Be Active” to ensure continuous public use. Moreover, this walkway is an extremely important link. It was supposed to connect two blocks east, which now leads directly to Greater Nevada Field and Auto Museum by way of a never-completed footbridge! If we lose access to this walkway, the Riverwalk as it was originally envisioned will never be completed.
  

• The 2013 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers GRR (P.L. 109-103): Federal reports prove that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has officially defined this flood project as a “single unit and non-separable.” (Page S-12). It mandates that local entities must provide and maintain all rights-of-way to secure a $195 million National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance threshold (Page S-10). Leaving a piece of this corridor blocked directly threatens Reno’s federal compliance.
  

• The 2015 TRFMA Flood Protection Plan: Formally authorized by Congress, this plan targets this exact block for the critical Lake Street Bridge Replacement and floodwall upgrades, mandating that downtown river features “shall maintain public access to the river.” When the bridge is completed, the staircase will be removed and become ADA-compliant!
  

• The 2014 Deed Restrictions (Doc #4367793): The current owners’ own property deed explicitly states that their ownership is “SUBJECT TO” all easements, rights of way, covenants, and obligations of record.
  

• In 2024, the Property Owner Admitted the Walkway Belonged to the City: During an email exchange obtained through Public Records, the property owner demanded the city pay for damages to his fence which remains rusty, ill-maintained and a blight to this day; but after demanding money, now he claims bicycle signage was illegally placed by the Tahoe-Pyramid Trail. This is absolutely false. The City of Reno placed and maintains its MUTCD signage, (which the owner removed), made repairs to the staircase with new cement, and placed decorative lighting along the walkway. The property owner is not acting in good faith. — This PDF also include newspaper clippings of walkway construction history, blueprints, shots from 2011-2025 revealing no signs were ever posted as required by NRS 11.165 to notify public walkway was subject to control of owner, map of Truckee River Path as Urban Bicycle Facility leading to the AT&T / Delluchi walkway and staircase.
  

• CRITICAL RISK—The 2000 AT&T Easement (Doc #2467231): The public pathway on the adjacent AT&T parcel is bound by a strict clause stating that if the pedestrian walkway goes unused for two years, the public easement automatically terminates. By allowing the gate at 180 E. 1st St. to remain locked, the city is actively running down the clock to permanently destroy neighboring public path easements!

For over 50 years, the public has used this path openly, continuously, and uninterrupted as a dedicated transportation and safety corridor. Under Nevada law, half a century of government-signed public use establishes an absolute public right-of-way that cannot be quietly bargained away.

Allowing private individuals to override their own deed restrictions, threaten adjoining public easements, and violate federal Army Corps project parameters sets a dangerous precedent. We demand that the City of Reno immediately file an injunction with Washoe County District Court, then issue a quiet title action to regain ownership, assert our historic prescriptive easement, and reopen the Truckee Riverwalk at 180 E. 1st Street!

You can read and sign the petition here, if you like. Also, whether or not you sign it, please consider writing to the Mayor and City Councilmembers to ask that discussion of public access to the riverfront pathway be placed on a City of Reno meeting agenda, to get all of these issues into the light. We need to be thinking long-term and considering the potential repercussions of each decision together, as a city.

You can find the email addresses for City of Reno leadership if you’d like to engage with them on this (or any other) issue in my Citizen Guide.

That’s it for today. Have a great week, everyone.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

Today’s Brief will focus on an application from Jacobs Entertainment for approval to construct two skyways that would extend from the J Resort over adjacent city streets—one to the west over Ralston Street and the other northward over West 4th Street.

Applications to construct skyways are rare. This one will have its first public airing at the Ward 1 Neighborhood Advisory Board meeting this evening, August 10th, at 5:30pm. You can view that agenda here. It will also be reviewed by the Skyway Design Committee and by the Reno Planning Commission. In addition, due to their significant public impact, all skyway proposals require a hearing at Reno City Council.

I’ll get to those skyways in a minute. But first, please note that the City of Reno has TEN public meetings on its calendar this week, including the Wards 1 and 5 Neighborhood Advisory Boards, Reno City Council, the Historical Resources Commission, and more. You can consult the City’s Current & Upcoming Meetings webpage for links to those agendas and all supplemental materials.

This is Reno has a preview of one item on this Wednesday’s Council’s agenda:

• City council to consider city clerk’s termination again, this time with either 3 or 6 months severance (updated) (This is Reno 8/7/26)

Additionally, the Regional Planning Governing Board will meet this Thursday, August 13th at 2pm (Agenda Here). This meeting comes on the heels of last week’s well-attended Data Center Community Meeting and will include a report on that and other engagement efforts (and community survey results) under Item 8.C: “Presentation and possible feedback regarding the TMRPA Data Center Engagement Effort.” Be sure to take the TMRPA’s survey on data centers if you haven’t done so!

Here’s some coverage of last week’s data center meeting and what preceded it:

• EDITORIAL: Don’t like data centers in your backyard? Blame the Reno City Council (This is Reno 8/9/26)

• VIDEO: Residents again express opposition to data centers at community forum (This is Reno 8/10/26)

• TMRPA gets an earful of feedback during data center presentation and discussion (KOLO8 8/6/26)

Now let’s take an initial look at these proposed skyways, which I’m sure I’ll be discussing again, as the application works its way through a series of reviews.

Skyways are a big deal and deserve your full attention.

Elevated pedestrian walkways are defined as “skyways” in Reno city code and can have such a significant impact on the public experience that they are the topic of an entire section of Reno’s land development code—Chapter 18.04, Article 16.

Obtaining a conditional use permit to construct a skyway over a Reno city street requires review by the Planning Commission and City Council, as well as by a special Skyway Design Review Committee that is comprised of representatives from multiple appointed and elected city bodies and professional design organizations.

Skyways have come up just twice in Reno over the past six years:

1. In 2020, the University of Nevada fought tooth and nail to exempt their skyway over E. Ninth Street from review by the Skyway Design Review Committee. While I fully supported construction of that skyway (which was necessary to bridge a major elevation change), I fought very hard to try to retain that important level of design review in order to improve its appearance, but I was unsuccessful. Yuck.

2. In 2022, a skyway was proposed to link the former Harrah’s Reno property (then known as Reno City Center, and now Reno Revival) to the Whitney Peak parking garage. I argued against approval of that unnecessary and unsightly skyway, and that plan was ultimately scuttled after the overarching project fell apart.

The skyway ordinance itself dates back to 2000 and was the product of intense public dismay over the construction of multiple skyways and “sky bridges” in and outside of Reno’s downtown in the 1990s.

As I explained back in 2020, those new skyways were deeply unpopular among Reno residents. Not only were they large and unattractive, but over time, it became clear that they directly contributed to the depopulation of downtown by removing much-needed foot traffic from the city streets and sidewalks. The current guidelines to govern the evaluation of any new skyway were enacted after years of discussion and input from casino and other business owners, design professionals, and local citizens but they require your continued vigilance and participation.

Skyways have long been criticized by advocates of urban revitalization. In a Brief that I wrote in 2022 called “Putting People First,” I put together a list of what I believed Reno needs to prioritize in order to restore vitality to the streets and sidewalks of our desolate downtown, and what specifically we should be discouraging.

Here’s what I wrote back then:

As I concluded, “Much of a city is private property controlled by private entities, but the public—through our government—does get ample opportunities to influence what happens there by formulating policy, reviewing specific projects, and designing public spaces that welcome and work for everyone.”

That’s where you come in.

Let’s look at Jacobs Entertainment’s Skyways Application.

My primary goal today is to encourage as many people as possible to read this application and pay very close attention to the required findings and to the applicant’s responses to them, then get involved.

In general, I don’t think enough people read the narratives that applicants write to justify how they believe their projects meet the required findings for whatever permit they’re seeking. And this one truly needs to be read by as many people as possible.

It’s okay if you don’t get to it by tonight’s Ward 1 NAB meeting, but if you can, please try—especially if you are a board member who will be submitting comments on it. It’s a hybrid meeting, so anyone can watch and participate by registering here.

Here’s that complete application.

Pedestrian Walkway Application

17.1MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

The Project Narrative/Findings Analysis (“Exhibit 2”) section of this application is only seven pages long and represents the crux of the applicant’s argument. The rest of the application consists of a cover letter, forms, maps, photos, renderings, and some technical design specs.

The narrative is organized by the findings that need to be made, including these:

1. Consistency with the Reno Master Plan.

2. Compliance with Title 18 (the Land Development Code)

3. Mitigates Traffic Impacts

4. Provides Safe Environment

5. Rational Phasing Plan

6. Conditional Use Permit Findings (i through vi)

7. Skyway Specific Findings (i through iv)

The first question you might reasonably ask is “Why does Jacobs Entertainment want to build these skyways?” And perhaps surprisingly, the answer is not terribly clear. Here’s the introduction to their application:

“As detailed below, the Pedestrian Walkways are a critical component to Applicant’s ongoing efforts to revitalize Downtown Reno by improving connectivity, enhancing pedestrian safety, and facilitating reliable access between key destinations within the Reno’s Neon Line District.”

What are these destinations? The narrative doesn’t say, but the renderings (which are not binding) suggest that the skyway over Ralston Street would connect to a massive future parking garage. It’s not entirely clear what the skyway across West 4th Street would link to, but from the renderings it looks like a private pool complex (also not described and not binding).

Jacobs Entertainment would likely argue that precisely what these skyways would connect to isn’t relevant to the permit, as the only structure subject to these standards is the section extending over the public right-of-way. I beg to differ.

If an applicant is going to argue that their skyways will promote public safety, walkability, and connectivity and contribute to the betterment of the larger urban experience, then there is nothing more relevant than understanding how they are accessed, what they are intended to connect, who is allowed to use them, and how much use is expected.

Here’s more from the applicant’s introduction, where you’ll find such lofty claims:

“Pedestrian safety is a central priority in Downtown Reno’s ongoing revitalization efforts, particularly as increased density, tourism, and mixed-use development intensifies in the area. The proposed Pedestrian Walkways are designed to address this need through a proactive approach that separates pedestrian circulation from vehicular travel, thereby enhancing overall public safety. In furtherance of these objectives, the Pedestrian walkways will provide continuous, accessible, and efficient pathways that improve circulation throughout Downtown Reno. By creating safe, weather-protected connections between key destinations, the structures will not only enhance pedestrian safety, but also promote walkability, support economic activity, and contribute to a more cohesive and integrated downtown environment.” [emphasis in bold added by me]

That’s a lot to unpack, but unpacking is precisely what we need to do.

For instance, with respect to public safety, let’s introduce a little context here. RTC Washoe has just, within the past month, completed its West Fourth Street Downtown Project, which they claim “enhanced safety, accessibility, and the overall streetscape within the corridor” (this exact area) through the following:

• Pedestrian and landscaping enhancements;

• Wider sidewalks for comfort and safety

• ADA-compliant ramps at key locations

• New “Neon Line” streetlights from Keystone Avenue to West Street.

As they state, “Together, these upgrades will create a safer, more inviting environment for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers while supporting the ongoing revitalization of the West Fourth Street corridor.”

And yet Jacobs Entertainment wants us to believe that this street is not safe for pedestrians? With all that new lighting, wider sidewalks, and pedestrian amenities that they themselves have so actively celebrated?

Promoting public safety is just one of the claims being made in this application to justify these skyways. The bulk of their analysis attempts to demonstrate “consistency with the Reno Master Plan” by citing the numbers and titles of sections of the Master Plan and then stating how they think these skyways would support that goal.

The problem is, the applicant’s citations of the Master Plan don’t also include any of its actual language, which makes an enormous difference in determining whether or not their argument demonstrates conformance with the goal in question.

So let’s do our homework. Consult the Master Plan yourself (you can read it here) and compare each cited section’s language with what the applicant is claiming.

For instance, here’s what section 3.2A of the Master Plan says about public safety:

And here’s how the applicant argues that their skyways would help meet that goal:

“3.2A: Public Safety. The Pedestrian Walkways foster a safe, more orderly, and well-activated public space in Downtown Reno. The project will support active use of streets and public spaces and reinforce a welcoming downtown environment consistent with the policy’s objectives.”

Wait just a minute. How does a privately operated skyway located above public sidewalks and streets support active use of them? This section of the Master Plan is about ensuring that streets and public spaces are clean, well-maintained and safe. Jacobs’ interpretation of this goal doesn’t address any of that, instead asserting that creating a bubble above the street for the private use of its patrons would “reinforce a welcoming downtown environment.” Are they serious? A privately-owned skyway literally channels people from public space into private space and rather than reinforcing a welcoming downtown environment, removes people from it, making the streets below less populated and less safe.

Here’s what the Master Plan says about the Pedestrian Realm in section 3.2C:

And here’s Jacobs Entertainment’s explanation of how their skyways promote that:

“3.2C: Pedestrian Realm. The Pedestrian Walkways directly advance public safety by prioritizing pedestrian comfort, safety, and enjoyment while creating an active and engaging streetscape. By separating pedestrian movement from vehicular traffic, the project enhances accessibility and encourages foot traffic thus supporting the concentration of pedestrian activity as envisioned by this policy.”

Say what??

Do they not understand what a “streetscape” is? This entire section of the Master Plan is about designing public pedestrian spaces for the use and enjoyment of everyone. Constructing an elevated walkway for private use is the exact opposite of “creating an active and engaging streetscape” and “encourag(ing) foot traffic.” Additionally, there is nothing in that Master Plan goal about “separating pedestrian movement from vehicular traffic.” We already have that: it’s called a sidewalk.

Again, RTC Washoe in direct partnership with Jacobs Entertainment just completed an intensive project to improve the pedestrian experience of West 4th Street.

So which is it? Has Jacobs Entertainment been working to create a safe and walkable mixed use, pedestrian-oriented district, or a busy vehicular corridor that requires removing pedestrians from street level to keep them safe?

Here’s another response I need to point out, related to Transit-Oriented Development, another important Master Plan goal:

Here’s how Jacobs responds to this one:

“2.5B: Transit Oriented Development. The Pedestrian Walkways reduce reliance on vehicular travel for short-distance trips within the downtown area, thereby supporting a measurable reduction in vehicle miles traveled and associated greenhouse gas emissions. By providing safe, direct, and attractive pedestrian connections between key destinations, the project advances a more accessible and efficient urban environment that is consistent with the City’s objectives for sustainable growth and enhanced walkability.”

We’re in serious word salad territory at this point. Please keep in mind that each of these skyways would cross a single city street. Are we seriously to believe that the presence of a pedestrian skyway that crosses a single street would keep people from using their own greenhouse gas-emitting private vehicle to get to the other side of it? Or that skyways linking the J Resort’s hotel to its parking garage and private pool (I guess?) would promote the walkability of the surrounding urban environment?

While we’re on the topic of traffic and transportation, here’s what’s written under the required findings of “Mitigates Traffic Impacts” and “Provides Safe Environment”:

3. Mitigates Traffic Impacts. The project mitigates traffic impacts based on applicable standards of the City of Reno and Regional Transportation Commission.

Here’s Jacobs’ response:

“The proposed Pedestrian Walkways mitigate traffic impacts by reducing pedestrian activity at the street level, thereby decreasing conflicts with vehicular circulation and improving traffic flow within Downtown Reno.”

4. Provides Safe Environment. The project provides a safe environment for pedestrians and people on bicycles.

And here’s Jacobs’ response to that:

“The proposed Pedestrian Walkways substantially enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety by physically separating non-vehicular circulation from vehicular traffic within the Downtown Reno corridor. By providing an elevated, enclosed, and weather-protected pathway system, the Project reduces potential points of conflict at street level, improves visibility and predictability of pedestrian movement, and promotes a more secure and comfortable environment for users.”

I want you to look closely at that argument. They are arguing that these pedestrian walkways would make the street safer for both pedestrians and bicycles, and more importantly, that a major advantage of the skyways would be the reduction of pedestrian activity at the street level.

Let me take you back to the Skyway Ordinance itself, where under Article 16, Section 18.04.1601, you will find its overall purpose, to ensure that the proposed skyways:

(a) Are consistent with the orderly development of the project;

(b) Are architecturally compatible with the supporting buildings and the surrounding environment;

(c) Will not have a significant detrimental effect on the volume of street level activity;

(d) Have been designed to enhance the aesthetics of the community, lessen the “tunnel effect” of elevated structures, and include appropriate aesthetic treatment above and along the covered roadway; and

(e) Preserve view corridors in Reno.

Jacobs Entertainment is explicitly arguing that these skyways would not only impact the volume of street level activity, but that it is their express intent to do so, under the guise of public safety.

I don’t have the space today to go over this entire application, but I am urging you to dedicate some time to reading it yourself. Under the Findings Analysis, closely scrutinize the sections related to 1.1B: Community Development (where they claim the skyways would be “enhancing walkability, safety, and the overall urban experience”) and 1.5A Quality of Life. As you do so, carefully consider what you think is meant by the terms “walkability,” “public safety,” and “the urban experience.”

The actual design of these proposed skyways is another issue entirely, and one I’ll have to address at another time. But it’s critical for everyone to understand that neither of these skyways has prior approval, and that Jacobs Entertainment’s argument that the skyway over West 4th Street “will incorporate the Archway Sign (as defined under the Development Agreement) into its design, serving as an area identification sign identifying Reno’s Neon Line District” is completely inaccurate.

This new proposed skyway is not a sign but a decorated skyway; it is in a completely different location than the pre-approved Archway Sign (below, to be located between Keystone & Vine), with an entirely different design and wording. They are unrelated.

And don’t get me started (yet) about their proposal to use the imagery of the City of Reno’s 1964 Reno Arch to brand their private resort. That’s a topic for another time.

Stay safe out there, everyone, and get reading!

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

RELATED SCHOOL DISTRICT NEWS

• When do WCSD schools start and when is the first break? (RGJ 8/3/26)

• Back to school: What to expect with unexpected school closures (This is Reno 7/30/26)

• New Washoe superintendent seeks ‘happy medium’ on screen time concerns (Nevada Independent 7/31/26)

You can view the week’s upcoming City of Reno meetings on the Current & Upcoming Meetings webpage. They include Monday’s meetings of the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (Agenda) and Ward 6 NAB (Agenda); Tuesday’s meeting of the Ward 3 NAB (Agenda); and Wednesday’s meeting of the Reno Planning Commission (Agenda). View that webpage for other meetings and all supplementary materials.

If you want a sneak peek of the August 12th Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency Board meetings, you can view those DRAFT agendas at 08-12-26 Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency Board Meetings Draft Agenda Memo.

Today I’ll have an important data center alert, recaps of recent meetings, an update on Jacobs Entertainment’s highway sign, and the latest news in local development.

Your support of my work is always appreciated! If an optional paid subscription is too much, there are many other ways to show your support. Heartfelt thanks to all who have generously contributed so that I may continue to publish these weekly Briefs.

Buy me a coffee!

ALERT! Attend the TMRPA Data Center Engagement Community Conversation this Wednesday, August 5th

The Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (TMRPA) is hosting a community conversation about data centers this Wednesday, August 5th at 6pm at the Reno Public Market at 299 E. Plumb Lane in Reno.

As a reminder, the TMRPA serves as a hub for regional discussions of data centers, as explained on their Data Center Engagement Effort webpage. The ultimate goal is for the TMRPA to formulate a set of recommendations regarding rules and regulations related to data centers in our region, including the City of Reno.

At this meeting, TMRPA staff plans to do the following:

• Share an update on the collaborative process

• Review draft recommendations

• Answer questions and gather community feedback

According to the TMRPA’s timeline, this conversation will be followed by reports to the Regional Planning Commission and Regional Planning Governing Board on the entire community engagement effort, including feedback and survey results (their survey is still online, if you haven’t yet taken it).

RECENT DATA CENTER-RELATED NEWS

• Northern Nevada’s economic development agency rebrands; abatement-driven strategy to stay (Nevada Independent 7/23/26) The Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada is now Northern NV Now. Its CEO says data centers are “finding their way” to the region on their own.

• Data center developer punches back against NV Energy in lawsuit (This is Reno 7/31/26) Data center developer Tract, also Reno Power, in court pushed back against NV Energy’s claims in a lawsuit filed last week by the public utility.

• Nevada’s electric utility is suing a major data center company. Here’s why. (Nevada Independent 7/28/26) Utility: Tract’s attempts at arbitration would shift data center cost burdens onto customers and bypass state energy regulators.

• OPINION: We’re in that phase of the data center rush where the corporations are fighting (John L. Smith, Nevada Independent 8/2/26)

• No land? No problem: Why many Nevada data centers don’t own the land they’re asking to develop (Nevada Independent 8/3/26) There’s often a scant paper trail on big projects when developers have the uncertainty of government approval processes in front of them.

Also see This is Reno’s recap of the July 29th Reno City Council meeting (below), which includes how EDAWN’s Executive Director responded to Councilmember questions about the organization’s position on data centers.

UPDATE: July 29 Reno City Council & RDA Board meetings

At their July 29th meeting, the RDA Board (City Council) approved a minor streamlining of the Lear Theater timeline, as I previewed last time (it’s a good thing). The meeting also saw an update from EDAWN Executive Director Taylor Adams, who explained the agency’s recent rebrand and fielded questions about data centers. See both This is Reno’s article for a full report on that and the City’s official recap below:

• The City of Reno’s official July 29, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights.

• Positive economic update touts jobs and downtown vibrancy, prompting housing and data center questions (This is Reno 7/31/26)

OTHER RENO CITY GOVERNMENT-RELATED NEWS & COMMENTARY

• Backlash grows in Reno area as AI license plate reader and surveillance camera numbers increase (This is Reno 7/24/26)

• EDITORIAL: Reno council’s Flock Safety contract approval even more alarming in hindsight (This is Reno 7/26/26)

• Two departments, one chief. Reno OKs second joint firefighting agreement (Nevada Independent 7/29/26) Reno and Sparks will now share a fire chief as a state study looks at possible consolidation. An earlier partnership led to a “divorce” and lawsuits.

• EDITORIAL: Leading versus cheerleading (This is Reno 8/2/26)

• OPINION: Believe Plaza was never theirs to negotiate (Nathaniel Phillipps, RGJ 7/24/26)

• OPINION: Everyone has ideas for downtown. Where are the candidates? (Mark Curtis, RGJ 7/28/26)

NEWS DIGEST: The latest in local urban development

• Electric shutoffs are higher in Nevada than elsewhere in the West, new data shows (Nevada Independent 8/2/26) While gas shutoffs are less than the national average, Nevadans face one of the highest electricity disconnection rates in the country.

• Peg’s Glorified Ham n Eggs closes longtime downtown Reno location (RGJ 7/30/26) Reno breakfast institution Pegs Glorified Ham n Eggs has permanently closed its longtime downtown Reno location on Sierra Street.

• What’s being constructed on Terminal Way just north of Reno airport? (RGJ 7/29/26) Terminal Way is partially closed from construction just north of the Reno airport. What is being built at the site? [Spoiler: it’s the airport’s new ground transportation structure.]

• Costco just one option for new retail center planned in south Reno | Exclusive (RGJ 7/29/26) A potential Costco store is just one piece of a major retail center planned for south Reno, the Reno Gazette-Journal has confirmed.

The City of Reno says that Jacobs Entertainment’s 60-foot highway sign along Interstate 80 doesn’t need a minor site plan review after all and can go straight to permits.

So remember a few weeks ago when I wrote an entire Brief laying out all the technical reasons why Jacobs Entertainment’s minor site plan review application for a 60-foot tall sign along Interstate 80 advertising their trademarked brand should be denied?

After that, I had some productive exchanges with City staff, and on July 10th, I asked a series of detailed questions about the process (I’ll include that exchange below). On July 14th, Angela Fuss of Development Services informed me that the City’s legal team was reviewing the application to review many of the same questions I had brought up and that she expected to have a response in a few days.

I heard nothing for more than a week. By Wednesday, July 22nd, two days before the decision was supposedly to be made, my assumption was that City staff must have decided that the application required some kind of public hearing and that there was now a new timeline for its review.

I was wrong. I sent an email to Fuss to check in, and she replied that after further deliberation, City of Reno planning staff and the City’s Attorney’s office had concluded that this sign didn’t require a minor site plan review after all and could go straight to building and electrical permits.

Wow.

If you’d like some insight into how the City of Reno applies its technical and legal analysis to development decisions, read on. If not, I’ll just see you next week.

We already knew that the Development Agreement that the City of Reno entered into with Jacobs Entertainment in 2021 included a map that identified this cemetery site along Interstate 80 as the intended location of a sign, and that the City and Jacobs agreed to categorize it and two others as “area identification signs.”

This was a greater gift that any of us could have imagined at the time, since the City of Reno apparently has no regulations governing the allowable size of an “area identification sign”—much less how close it has to be to the “area” in question. That was all confirmed by the Nevada Supreme Court, as I’ve previously explained.

In this case, Jacobs Entertainment was applying for a minor site plan review for its desired 60-foot-tall highway-adjacent sign because although it had already been classified as an “area identification sign,” the location where it would stand is zoned PF (Public Facility), and in a PF zone, structures cannot exceed 45 feet tall.

Table 2-32 in the City’s development code (below, and found here) establishes “Lot and Building Standards” for the Public Facilities (PF) zoning district and you can see that maximum height of 45 feet listed there. A footnote states that “additional height is possible through a minor site plan review,” which is what Jacobs was applying for, to secure permission for that extra fifteen feet in height.

Here’s where it goes off the rails, in my opinion.

From what staff told me, the City decided upon reflection (they clearly didn’t believe this when they accepted the application) that the regulations in this table don’t pertain to Jacobs’ sign because they only govern “lots” and “buildings” (see the Table’s title) and the City defines a “building” as “a structure that shelters human activity.”

Because Jacobs’ 60-foot sign does not “shelter human activity," planning staff and the City Attorney’s office have concluded that it’s not subject to the 45-foot height limit in the PF zoned area and that therefore, this sign doesn’t require any additional review or approval (besides a permit) to be built taller than 45 feet. It’s just allowed by right.

What if it were taller than 100 feet? 200 feet? I’m not sure, but I guess so?

So if you’re keeping up, we’ve apparently learned a few more things from this Development Agreement debacle:

1. “Area Identification Signs” in the City of Reno are subject to no size limitations whatsoever (they can also, like this one, be a mile away from the “area” in question, which isn’t even a defined area). Shouldn’t this loophole for one sign category be modified immediately in order to avoid an onslaught of applications for enormous “area identification signs” throughout the city?

2. Any structure that “does not shelter human activity” is not governed by any City of Reno code that refers to “Lot and Building Standards” because such structures are neither lots nor buildings. Does this seem like a problem to anyone else? THAT’S LITERALLY EVERY ZONING DISTRICT IN THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT CODE. Can you now build a structure of unlimited height anywhere in the City of Reno, so long as it doesn’t shelter human activity?

Since I usually provide links to all my sources, I’ll copy the short version of my queries to City staff and their responses below, and below that, provide a PDF of the entire exchange with my full queries and explanations of them, for anyone interested.

QUERY #1: To what extent, if at all, does anything in Jacobs Entertainment’s Development Agreement with the City of Reno govern this application?

Staff Response: “The Development Agreement identifies three area identification signs and establishes their general locations. In Reno Real Estate Development, LLC v. City of Reno, the Nevada Supreme Court held that these signs are area identification signs, not billboards or on-premises advertising displays. The proposed sign is reviewed as an area identification sign consistent with the Development Agreement and the Court’s decision.”

QUERY #2: Whether this project is being considered and reviewed as a “sign” or a “structure” (and if it’s the latter, what governs that review)

Staff Response: “The proposed area identification sign is a structure. The relevant question is whether the 45-foot height limitation in Table 2-32 of the Reno Municipal Code applies to all structures or only to buildings. Table 2-32 establishes lot and building standards for the Public Facilities (PF) zoning district and limits the maximum building height to 45 feet, with additional height permitted through a Minor Site Plan Review. The Reno Municipal Code defines a building as a structure that shelters human activity. Because an area identification sign does not shelter human activity, it is not a building. While the sign is a structure, the 45-foot height limitation applies only to buildings and, therefore, does not apply to this sign.”

QUERY #3: Why this application is only subject to a minor site plan review.

Staff Response: “An area identification sign is neither an on-premises sign nor an off-premises sign, and is not subject to the dimensional standards applicable to those sign types under the Reno Municipal Code. Additionally, the Reno Municipal Code does not establish height or dimensional standards for area identification signs. As a result, no land use entitlement, including a Minor Site Plan Review, is required. The project will require a building permit for the structure and an electrical permit for the installation of the sign’s illumination.”

Barber Emails With City Staff Re Jacobs Signs 2026

2.7MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

So there you have it. The City’s Development Agreement with Jacobs Entertainment is truly the gift that keeps on giving—to Jacobs Entertainment. The Development Agreement clearly states that aside from the Archway Sign:

At the “time of application” and indeed, at any time prior to July 2026, a 60-foot tall sign at this site was believed by the City to warrant a minor site plan review to determine if it met a whole slew of findings including compatibility with the City’s Master Plan. City Council (and residents) obviously could not have anticipated back in 2021 that five years later, City staff would determine that the sign wasn’t subject to the height limitations clearly laid out for this zoning district in the Land Development Code or, indeed, that it wasn’t subject to any entitlement review whatsoever.

One might expect that such a significant reinterpretation of the city code would warrant returning to City Council to explain that even though the tallest sign depicted within the City’s 2021 agreement with Jacobs was only 35 feet tall, the City’s brand new interpretation of code allows the “area identification sign” at the cemetery site to be not just 25 feet taller than that, but of apparently unlimited height—and then allow City Council (and residents) to decide whether they find that acceptable and wish to amend the agreement.

Apparently staff does not share that expectation, and Jacobs gets to reap the rewards of a ridiculously vague agreement that keeps granting them more and more leeway.

Lucky them.

That’s it for today. Stay cool and safe, and please look out for each other.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

This is Reno has a preview of one City Council item here:

• Reno city manager’s annual review heads to city council after favorable employee evaluation (This is Reno 7/24/26)

And Mike Van Houten of Downtown Makeover (who serves on the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board or RAAB) previews an important item coming in front of the Redevelopment Agency Board on Wednesday:

• RAAB recommends ‘no’ to sponsoring Dancing in the Streets with redevelopment funds (Downtown Makeover 7/27/26)

Note that his discussion there involves not just Dancing in the Streets, but all of the recommendations formulated by the RAAB on July 13th regarding whether many of the RDA’s programs are in compliance with Nevada state redevelopment laws.

After discussing the Lear, I’ll have a few updates and previews of other public meetings occurring this week plus the latest news. And after that, I want to draw your attention to a national issue with potentially devastating consequences for historic and cultural resources throughout our community, region, and state.

But first, let’s talk about the Lear.

The City’s new common-sense timeline for the Lear Theater

This past week, City of Reno staff provided the Reno City Council and RDA Board with an updated timeline for implementing their recent decisions about the 1939 First Church of Christ, Scientist property, known locally as the Lear Theater.

You can read about the revised timeline in This is Reno here:

• City outlines timeline for Lear Theater study and redevelopment bids (This is Reno 7/22/26)

And here’s the original staff memo on which this article was based:

• MEMO: Update on Lear Property RFI and RFP Processes and Exterior Site Improvements

I was honored to participate in the meetings with City staff members and Councilmember Naomi Duerr to formulate this timeline, which I heartily endorse, and I’d like to make sure everyone understands what’s involved and how this represents an exciting step forward—I promise!

It’s important to note that this new timeline doesn’t introduce any new actions, just lays out the sequencing for the two directives that City Council approved last spring:

1. Issue a Request for Proposals for the property (decided in April)

2. Dedicate $2 million in Redevelopment Agency funding to some basic exterior improvements for the property (decided in May)

The new timeline integrates these two directives in a manner that can best facilitate the desired result: identifying a development partner to help accomplish the responsible preservation and adaptive reuse of the property.

There’s a vote coming up this week to tweak the proposed procedure a tiny bit, so I’ll get to that in a minute. But first, let me take you through the timeline and explain what it means and why I support it.

STEP 1: Complete Basic Exterior Site Improvements

CURRENT TIME FRAME: Bid request issued July 24, 2026; contract to be considered by the RAAB on September 14th and by the RDA Board on September 23rd; construction work to commence October 2026 (this could shifted to start a bit earlier—see “SIDE NOTE” below)

This is the first of the expenditures approved by City Council in May, and the request for bids was issued last week. These exterior improvements were previously designed using ARPA funds, have already undergone necessary reviews by the State Historic Preservation Office and CCCHP and will include the following:

• replacement of deteriorated concrete at the south entrance steps and terrace landing

• installation of ADA-compliant handrails

• replacement of landscaping consistent with the historic landscape plan

• installation of irrigation and architectural landscape lighting

• construction of a temporary wrought iron perimeter fence and gates

As City staff write, “These improvements will enhance the appearance of the property, improve public safety and accessibility, protect the site, and address deferred maintenance while long-term planning continues.”

I’m excited that these improvements are finally underway and when completed will not only better secure the building but could enable use of the porch, stairways, and grounds while planning for the building continues.

STEP 2: Commission a Feasibility Study

CURRENT TIME FRAME: Consultant Agreement to be considered by the RAAB on August 3rd and by the RDA Board (City Council) on August 26th; work to commence in September (also potentially to be expedited this week—see “SIDE NOTE” below).

I already can hear the groans of “Not another study!!” But don’t be alarmed; this is a fantastic and important step, was approved in May along with the above expenditures, and will provide new information critical to moving this whole process forward.

This study will not replicate information contained in the Historic Structure Report that the City of Reno commissioned in 2024. That report (accessible here) centered on the property’s history, development, physical condition, maintenance recommendations, and regulatory requirements, and provided suggested layouts for its potential use as a performing arts space or cultural center, as requested by the City. It focused on what is required to responsibly preserve the physical property.

This new study is all about feasibility and will include the following:

• Community and stakeholder outreach, including focus groups and public meetings

• Evaluation of potential adaptive reuse scenarios

• Market analysis, including demographic, economic, and real estate conditions

• Financial and operational feasibility

• Preliminary implementation strategies and rehabilitation consideration

This study will provide everyone with the most up-to-date and comprehensive data regarding the community demand and desire for various uses and help to determine whether a venue of this size and layout could fulfill those demands and desires.

That data can then help anyone interested in the building to develop more realistic proposals for it, whether they ultimately propose that the property be used as a performing arts space, cultural center, museum, visitor center, or something else.

STEP 3: Issue a Request for Interest (RFI)

CURRENT TIME FRAME: February-March 2027

As previously explained, the solicitation process to adaptively reuse the Lear will involve two steps: a Request for Interest (RFI) followed by a Request for Proposals (RFP). This approach has been followed with success elsewhere and will allow the public (and City Council) to decide which ideas and teams they believe are best suited to develop more thorough proposals without requiring all interested parties to expend considerable resources toward developing highly detailed plans at the outset.

It will also provide the community with more time to review, understand and lend their support to the proposals that most appeal to them before Council makes a final decision. And I think it’s safe to say that no one is going to get this project accomplished without significant community support.

It’s important that the Request for Interest be issued after the Feasibility Study is completed so the City can incorporate its findings into the RFP solicitation, and so all interested parties can fully digest, consider, and incorporate that data into their proposals. As staff indicates, it will also help the City better evaluate those proposals.

The RFI will ask respondents to provide the following:

• An initial redevelopment concept

• A general idea of the components of the project team

• A preliminary operational and financial approach

The responses to this Request for Interest would then be evaluated and the teams deemed most qualified would be invited to participate in the subsequent RFP process.

One question that the staff memo doesn’t answer is precisely WHO will be evaluating these responses and selecting the teams that will move on to the RFP phase, or what is meant by “most qualified.” It states that “Staff” will do the selection, but not which staff, and I think any selection committee should also have other representatives, too. I’d also like to see these proposals discussed at public meetings such as those of the Historical Resources Commission, Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board and/or City Council/RDA Board so any discussions and decisions regarding these proposals are clear and transparent.

STEP 4: Issue an Invitational Request for Proposals (RFP)

CURRENT TIME FRAME: April-September 2027

The teams shortlisted through the Request for Interest phase will be invited to respond to the subsequent Request for Proposals, which will require much more specificity. Required elements for those responses will include the following:

• Detailed financial pro forma

• Financing strategy

• Operations and management plan

• Conceptual design and architectural approach

• Project implementation schedule

This is all highly detailed, as it needs to be for the City of Reno and its residents to feel confident that the selected team will be qualified to get the job done. And they’d have five months after the invitation to put the plan together, which seems reasonable to me, since financial pro formas and these other components are no joke. This could also provide the time to get any potential public partners on board, considering the lead time required for consideration at publicly-noticed meetings.

I know we are all impatient to see this property in use, and I truly believe that this approach will get us there. It’s thoughtful and methodical and fulfills the City of Reno’s self-imposed obligation to serve as a responsible steward for this important property as a plan is developed for its adaptive reuse. It’s important that we do this right, so let’s all lend the City our support and get this thing done!

More Local Meetings for the Week of July 27, 2026

Washoe County School Naming Committee - Monday, July 27th at 5:30pm

• PREVIEW: School district committee to recommend finalists for new elementary school name (This is Reno 7/26/26)

• Meeting info here.

Washoe County School Board - Tuesday, July 28th at 2pm

• PREVIEW: WCSD trustees to consider bus financing and school safety initiatives (This is Reno 7/27/26)

• Meeting info here.

NEWS DIGEST: The latest in local urban development

Updates on the July 22nd Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency Board meetings can be found here:

• The City’s official July 22, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights

• Reno City Council considers code updates for massage parlors, alcohol-related businesses (This is Reno 7/23/26)

And here’s some other recent local and regional development-related news:

• Reno median home price surges past $700,000 for the first time (RGJ 7/27/26) Affordability concerns continue as the median home price in Reno broke past $700,000 for the first time while Sparks also set an all-time high in June.

• Titus calls on Lombardo to freeze data center tax abatements (Nevada Current 7/23/26) Nevada Rep. Dina Titus is targeting state tax breaks for the only data center project approved on U.S. Bureau of Land Management acres, a controversial proposal three miles outside Boulder City limits.

• Henderson City Council rejects data center moratorium (Nevada Current 7/22/26) The Henderson City Council rejected a proposal Tuesday to implement a six month moratorium on new data center applications, instead choosing to change the city’s development agreement process.

• OPINION: Big Pahrump data center proposal turns heads of skeptical residents (John L. Smith, Nevada Independent 7/26/26) Can an aggressive PR campaign and windfall promises for a cash-strapped region persuade the cynics and critics?

• Idaho real estate investment firm acquires Legends at Sparks Marina (This is Reno 7/26/26) A real estate investment company has acquired the Legends at Sparks Marina shopping center in Sparks, the company, Alturas Capital Partners, announced Friday in a press release.

NATIONAL ALERT: Federal actions regarding historic preservation could have disastrous consequences for cultural and historical properties throughout Nevada.

If you care about historic properties like the Lear, I want to make sure you’re aware of some recent federal actions with potentially dire consequences for historic properties.

On Friday, July 24, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) voted to advance some sweeping revisions to the regulations governing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).

As the National Trust for Historic Preservation explains, the proposed revisions would include (but are not limited to) the following changes:

• Federal agencies will no longer be required to try to avoid or minimize damage to America’s historic architecture, neighborhoods, and landscapes.

• State and local governments will no longer have the right to be notified or have the opportunity to comment when federal agencies propose to damage or destroy historic places within their jurisdiction.

• The public’s opportunity to comment on federal historic preservation policies or actions would now be entirely optional, at the discretion of the federal agency.

• The federal government will no longer be required to consult with Native American tribes or seek their expertise regarding their own significant cultural resources.

For more details on these and other proposed changes, visit the National Trust’s webpage titled Section 106 is Under Threat: What You Need to Know.

A webinar organized by the National Trust this coming Thursday, July 30th at 10am (REGISTER HERE) will “outline some of the more serious aspects and potential impacts of the proposed changes, provide information about next steps and the timeline for the process, and what you can do to push back against this threat to the work of historic preservation.” I’ll be tuning in, and I hope you will, too.

If this proposal advances further, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will be issued in the Federal Register, followed by a 30-day period of formal public comment—and that’s when we will need everyone to get involved. More on that here.

In the meantime, have a great week, stay cool, and please look out for each other.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

The Barber Brief

Promoting awareness & engagement in Reno's city development

By Alicia Barber

CITY OF RENO MEETINGS: Week of July 20, 2026

You can find a calendar of City of Reno events and meetings on the City’s redesigned home page at https://reno.gov/. Click on “Watch Meetings and View Agendas” for a list of all upcoming meetings, with links to agendas and supporting materials.

The Reno City Council is back in session this week, with their first post-summer hiatus meeting on Wednesday, July 22nd starting at 10am. Agendas below:

• Reno City Council agenda

• Redevelopment Agency Board agenda

This is Reno has previewed a surprising item (H.1) on the Council’s agenda—the possible firing of the City Clerk (City Council, not the City Manager, has that power):

• City Council to consider firing city clerk at July 22 meeting (This is Reno 7/16/26)

Items D.1 to D.4 on the City Council agenda concern annexation and rezoning of the Ladera Properties development in south Reno (see maps).

Other City of Reno meetings this week include Tuesday’s Ward 2 Neighborhood Advisory Board (NAB) meeting (agenda) and a Special Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (agenda), among others.

You can preview what may be discussed at the July 29th Reno City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board meetings by checking out their DRAFT agendas here.

INPUT REQUESTED: Updates to City of Reno Policies on Trees & Shrubs

The City of Reno is updating Municipal Code Title 8, which relates to public trees and vegetation. They’re collecting public input through Monday, July 27th. To learn more, you can attend a virtual public workshop this Thursday, July 23rd from 12-2pm by registering here. The online feedback form includes a link to the proposed changes on the City’s Urban Forestry webpage.

COMMENTS REQUESTED on Western Nevada’s Five-Year Economic Priorities

The Western Nevada Development District is inviting public comments on its draft 2026-2030 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, a five-year regional plan that outlines economic priorities and helps position Western Nevada for federal funding opportunities. Read more about that from This is Reno here:

• Western Nevada Development District seeks public input on regional economic development strategy (This is Reno 7/11/26)

The WNDD is a Federally Designated Economic Development District that was formed in 1983 by four counties: Carson City, Douglas, Lyon, and Storey. In 1985, the U.S. Department of Commerce officially designated the region an Economic Development District under the Economic Development Administration. Over the years, additional local jurisdictions (including Reno) joined the District.

Currently representing Reno on its Board are Ward 6 Reno City Councilmember Brandi Anderson and City of Reno Revitalization Manager Bryan McArdle.

You can review the draft plan and submit comments through Aug. 10 on the Western Nevada Development District website at https://wndd.org/ceds/.

VIDEO: The Fiscal Cliff of Property Tax in Nevada

If you’re a regular reader of Downtown Makeover (and if you’re not, you certainly should be!) you know that Mike Van Houten not only keeps Reno residents informed about new and ongoing developments, but occasionally produces phenomenal narrated videos like Problem Properties in Downtown Reno.

Well, Mike has done it again, this time with an incredibly clear and informative video about property tax in Nevada. BUT WAIT! Before you yawn and move on, I enthusiastically recommend that you take 20 minutes to watch this video, which explains in an accessible and approachable way why property tax is so important as a revenue source for municipalities like Reno, how it’s currently calculated, and why that poses a problem for our city coffers.

So can or should anything be done about it? Nevada’s state legislators have contemplated such actions as resetting the property tax valuation when a home is sold, but so far haven’t had any luck moving such legislation forward. Will 2027 be any different? Expect a lot more discussion along these lines as the year goes on, and in the meantime, this video can help you understand what everyone is talking about.

PODCAST: What Does Affordable Housing Actually Mean?

Speaking of informative broadcasts, the City of Reno has a new podcast episode focusing on affordable housing. It’s actually the second in a two-part series, and you can find both episodes plus the entire archive on YouTube, the City of Reno website, and various platforms like Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

• The July 9th episode features Elaine Olson, Housing Administrator for the City of Reno Housing and Neighborhood Development team; Angela Fuss, Assistant Director of Development Services; and Matthew Fleming, Executive Director of Northern Nevada Community Housing.

• The July 16th episode asks the question, “Why does it take so long and cost so much to build housing in Reno?” It features Fuss and Fleming discussing “the steps a project must go through before construction can begin and how state requirements, limited developable land, aging infrastructure, labor shortages, interest rates, tariffs and supply-chain delays can affect timelines and costs.”

CITY OF RENO ELECTIONS & CAMPAIGN FINANCING

The most recent campaign expenditures for Nevada’s 2026 elections (including City of Reno races) were announced recently, and Mark Robison of the Reno Gazette-Journal has calculated the approximate amount that Reno’s mayoral candidates spent per vote received, based on their expenditures and the election results:

• Money in Reno mayor’s race balloons — 4th-place finisher spent most (RGJ 7/16/26)

Here’s a list of those expenditures per vote for the top five mayoral candidates in order of number of votes received (from most to least).

• Kate Marshall: $14.94 per vote ($337,144 spent for 22,562 votes)

• Kathleen Taylor: $42 per vote ($401,052 spent for 9,548 votes)

• Eddie Lorton: $6.71 per vote ($61,511 spent for 9,161 votes)

• Devon Reese: $64.43 per vote ($302,043 spent for 4,688 votes)

• Tim Ross: $22.55 per vote ($50,273 spent for 2,229 votes)

The article also lists the top contributors to the campaigns of Kate Marshall and Kathleen Taylor, who will be battling it out for the office of Reno mayor in the fall.

If you’d like to see the full lists of donors, here are the links to their Contributions & Expenses Reports for the period of April 1, 2026 through June 30, 2026:

• Kate Marshall

• Kathleen Taylor

Want to know who’s financing these and other local campaigns? Head to the Secretary of State website, where you can pull up all of the Contributions & Expenses Reports and Financial Disclosure Statements here. And in the meantime, I’m continuing to add to my 2026 City of Reno General Election Guide.

REMINDER: Send comments on Jacobs’ highway sign ASAP

City Staff will be issuing a decision this Friday, July 24th regarding Jacobs Entertainment’s application to install a 60-foot tall sign along Interstate 80, so please send in your comments right away and focus on those required findings, which I am certain this sign does NOT meet.

NEWS DIGEST: The Latest in Local Development

• Will the new law Trump refused to sign help you afford a house in Nevada? (Nevada Independent 7/19/26) The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act tackles everything from reining in corporate investors to easing tiny home construction. Here’s what it will do.

• Large industrial complex gets ready to break ground in Reno (RGJ 7/16/26) Panattoni Development is seeking leases as it prepares to break ground on a large industrial complex just north of Reno.

• Apartment project to add hundreds of units to Kiley Ranch in Sparks (RGJ 7/16/26) Sparks is getting hundreds of new apartment units as the Santa Barbara at Kiley Ranch project breaks ground.

• Reno, Sparks police, Washoe sheriff consolidation idea. What to know (RGJ 7/15/26) Regional consolidation of the Reno Police Department, the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office and Sparks Police Department is back in the center of discussion after all three agencies issued statements about its potential.

• PODCAST: Reno politics and development: Public lands, equine rules and the ‘Neon Line District’ (This is Reno 7/15/26) Hosts Kristen Hackbarth and Bob Conrad return to discuss several of the week’s biggest stories affecting northern Nevada.

• Hundreds of fish die at Paradise Park pond (This is Reno 7/14/26) A reader reached out to This Is Reno asking about potentially hundreds of fish that died at Paradise Park.

FOCUS ON DATA CENTERS - Local, Regional, and National

• Expletives, fear and anger: A data center fight turns nasty in Boulder City (Nevada Independent 7/16/26) After feds OK federal land for massive project once proposed for municipal parcel, city officials want to pump the brakes. But they don’t have final say.

• Lyon County Planning Commission approves Monarch Data Center (KOLO8 7/15/26) The 1 GW facility will need further approval from Lyon County commissioners.

• Battle against data centers grows nationwide amid concerns over electricity, water usage (CBS News 7/15/26) There’s growing backlash nationwide against AI data centers and now New York is hitting pause.

• Oracle revises plans for massive Project Jupiter data center to reduce emissions (KANW New Mexico Public Radio 7/16/26) Environmental groups in New Mexico say those efforts are not enough

• OPINION: Sorry, governor, but citizens remain heated up about data center development (John L. Smith, Nevada Independent 7/12/26)

That’s all for today—have a great week, stay cool, and please look out for each other.

Subscribe now

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

Buy me a coffee!

You can check out the entire meeting schedule on the City’s Current and Upcoming Meetings webpage. The City has just launched a new website design, too, and the calendar now appears on its main homepage at https://reno.gov/. Be sure to browse through the list and agendas for issues of importance to you.

OF NOTE: The Ward 1 NAB meeting takes place on Monday the 13th (agenda), and the Planning Commission on Wednesday the 15th (agenda). The Ward 4 NAB meeting on Thursday the 16th (agenda) is especially packed with a bunch of proposed projects.

My theme today is City policy, pointing out some of the week’s key discussions, recommendations, and decisions regarding everything from the allowable uses and disposition of public spaces to approval of signs and skyways, allowable expenditures of the Reno Redevelopment Agency, and the City of Reno’s own administration.

Consistency and predictability are always among the top goals of City policy, and yet with both City code and the law in general, there’s also often room for discretion, subjectivity, and interpretation. Ultimately in our local government, policy is created by elected (and sometimes by appointed) individuals, not by attorneys or staff.

And the role of the public is to help ensure that those individuals (who are human, after all) aren’t abusing that discretion (intentionally or not), that subjectivity doesn’t veer into favoritism or undue privilege, that perceived short-term advantages don’t conflict with long-term sustainability or sense, and that all potential repercussions have been considered before making permanent changes to law, policy, or code.

Let’s dig in.

PUBLIC SPACES: The owners of The Eddy Have Withdrawn their Proposal for the City Plaza

This is somewhat old news by now, but I haven’t provided updates for a while, so in case you don’t know, the owners of the bar/outdoor lounge called The Eddy have withdrawn their proposal to lease or buy the City Plaza and the neighboring Reno Redevelopment Agency-owned parcel. I discussed that proposal back in June here:

The news of the withdrawal was first conveyed through a memo written from City Manager Jackie Bryant to Reno City Council (memo here) and you can find coverage of it from various media including the following:

• The Eddy withdraws proposal to take over City Plaza after city says it would’ve violated city codes (updated) (This is Reno 7/1/26)

• The Eddy withdraws proposal to lease, buy Reno City Plaza (RGJ 7/1/26)

As the Memo clarifies, City code currently prohibits selling or leasing the City Plaza. Unsolicited proposals ARE allowed for the Redevelopment Agency-owned parcel adjacent to the plaza, but I would hope that the City will head that off by prioritizing a permanent plan for both parcels and then taking the steps to make it happen.

Refer back to my June 5th Brief above for the most recent City-approved visions of the plaza, which are quite similar to each other and preserve abundant open gathering and free speech space while making it a more welcoming destination for everyone.

The Memo above also indicates that several City Councilmembers have suggested modifying how the City handles unsolicited proposals for City-owned property, and I couldn’t agree more. For one thing, I don’t think that City Council should have the option to enter into an exclusive agreement with someone who’s bringing them an unsolicited proposal at the very first meeting where it’s publicly discussed. I’m sure we’ll be hearing more about all of this very soon, so stay tuned.

SIGNAGE AND SKYWAYS: Proposals from Jacobs Entertainment can test established definitions & processes.

Since writing my last post about Jacobs Entertainment’s application to erect a sign along Interstate 80, I’ve taken a closer look at their Development Agreement with the City of Reno and have submitted a bunch of questions to the Development Services staff, who have been very responsive to my queries so far. Hopefully, I’ll have some updates for you on that next week.

In terms of City policy, relevant questions here include how much the company’s plans can deviate from the provisions laid out in the Development Agreement before a formal amendment to that agreement is required, how much their proposed projects can deviate from standard City policy before a public hearing is required, and more.

Unlike their proposed highway-adjacent sign, which is supposedly only subject to staff review, not a public hearing, the two skyways that Jacobs Entertainment now wants to construct over city streets require conditional use permits and will be coming to the Ward 1 NAB and the Reno Planning Commission for review.

However, that will not happen this week.

The City’s Development Projects newsletter indicated that the two skyways would be discussed at the Ward 1 Neighborhood Advisory Board meeting on Monday, July 13th, but they’re not on that agenda, and I’ve learned from City staff that the item has been moved to the August 10th Ward 1 NAB meeting.

City staff are also working on convening a meeting of the Skyway Design Review Committee, which is only assembled when a skyway is up for review. It last convened in 2021 and includes members recommended by the local chapters of the American Institute of Architects, American Planning Association, American Society of Landscape Architects, the Planning Commission, and the body that’s currently known as the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee (RAAB).

That group is still being formed and will likely meet in late August. They have to convene and formulate their recommendations on both skyways before the Planning Commission considers the application, so that Planning Commission discussion may get moved to September.

This Wednesday, however, the Planning Commission will designate a representative and alternate to serve on that committee under Item E.4 (Staff Report here).

I’ll have a lot more to say about these proposed skyways, but it can wait, for now.

LEGAL COMPLIANCE: Is Reno’s Redevelopment Agency operating in compliance with Nevada state law?

On Monday, July 13th, the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (RAAB) will consider making recommendations to the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board (City Council) regarding the legality of certain RDA programs (agenda).

Items B.2 through B.6 ask this citizen advisory body to formulate recommendations regarding whether certain programs and expenditures are actually in compliance with what Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 279 allows redevelopment agencies to do. You can find the entirety of NRS 279 at https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/nrs-279.html.

Here are the programs and expenditures in question (the agenda includes links to a Staff Report and proposed Resolution for each):

• B.2 - the Activation Program

• B.3 - the Dancing in the Streets Sponsorship Program

• B.4 - the ReSecure Program

• B.5 - the Small Walls Program

• B.6 - the ReStore Facade and Tenant Improvement Program

The very appearance of these items on the agenda suggests that the legality of funding and/or administering them either has come into question or at least needs formal justification in order to ensure the RDA is not in violation of state law.

Two of the programs in question (B.2 and B.3) involve the sponsorship of special events, which raises the question of whether or not special events actually fit into the goals of the Redevelopment Agency, or whether they’re better placed under the auspices of some other public, quasi-public or private agency or group (like the City of Reno, Downtown Reno Partnership, or nonprofit).

The Small Walls program (B.5) involves murals, so the same question is being asked of public art. The others involve funding modifications to buildings and property.

These are great questions, and I’m noticing that the proposed justifications for many of these cite their contributions to “placemaking,” a word has been added to the rebrand of the Redevelopment Agency without very much discussion (that I’ve seen, anyway) of what that actually means and how the RDA itself is pursuing it.

The agency’s new website has apparently renamed the agency the “Reno Redevelopment and Urban Placemaking Agency,” and honestly, I’m not sure how I feel about that. I’m a placemaking professional (the name of my historical consulting firm is Stories in Place!) and I’m not a fan of the widespread effort (especially in Reno, I feel) to brand things into existence without the substance to support it.

It’s certainly desirable to integrate placemaking into redevelopment, but it all comes down to how you’re going about it. For instance, historic preservation is both an established goal of the Redevelopment Agency and is fundamental to placemaking, but I don’t think preservation has yet been properly integrated into the RDA’s programs and policies, as I’ve written before:

This will hopefully be a fruitful discussion, and the RAAB’s recommendations will be discussed by the RDA Board (City Council) at a future date.

CITY ADMINISTRATION: The Reno City Charter Committee recommends changes to certain City policies.

The last meeting I’ll highlight today is the joint meeting of the Reno City Council and Reno City Charter Committee this Thursday, July 16th (agenda). The City Charter Committee convenes the year before each state legislative session to recommend changes to the City Charter. The Reno City Council then decides whether or not to accept these recommendations and pursue any of them at the legislature.

Here are this year’s recommended amendments to the City Charter (Staff Report here).

The online agenda also includes links to the committee’s final report and presentation.

That’s it for this week. Have a good one, stay cool, and please look out for each other.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

BRIEFLY: Jacobs Entertainment has submitted an application to erect a massive sign alongside I-80 advertising its trademarked “Reno’s Neon Line District.” It will not be reviewed in any public meeting but decided by City of Reno staff. I argue that it should be denied, for a whole plethora of technical, legal, and logical reasons.

The public can submit comments on this application until July 24 by writing directly to planner Leah Piccotti at PiccottiL@reno.gov referencing Case Number LDC26-00102: Reno’s Neon Line District Area Identification Structure. You can also submit comments via the City of Reno Development Services Comment and Review Form.

Why would you want to? I’ll explain my position, and you can decide for yourself.

As you may have heard, Jacobs Entertainment has applied to erect a massive sign along Interstate 80 that advertises their sprawling resort complex, which they have named “Reno’s Neon Line District” (more on the name below):

• Jacobs Entertainment files pre-planning app for large freeway-visible sign for Reno Neon Line (Downtown Makeover 6/23/26)

• Jacobs Entertainment moves ahead with sign along I-80, seeks approval for two skywalks (This is Reno 6/30/26)

The City’s notification is here and the complete application is below.

Combined Application

12.8MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

In it you’ll find this rendering of the proposed sign, which would stand 60 feet tall at 437 Stoker Avenue, on land owned by the Reno Lodge No. 13 Free and Accepted Masons d/b/a Masonic Memorial Gardens (APN 006-152-01). It would become visible to eastbound traffic just as downtown Reno comes into view and direct motorists to exit at Keystone and then turn on West 4th Street to reach this supposed “district.”

Because this sign is only subject to a “minor site plan review,” it will not be reviewed in a public meeting but decided by City staff on July 24th. Here’s a rendering of the proposed highway view as included in the company’s application.

This proposed sign is a crown jewel amid the bounty of riches that the City of Reno bestowed upon Jacobs Entertainment in the bonkers Development Agreement that was approved nearly five years ago and required pretty much nothing of Jacobs—no housing, no shops, no street-level activation, no public spaces, no timelines.

I’ve written about that extensively, so feel free to revisit my many posts if you need to catch up. Here’s one I wrote right after Council’s approval of it in October of 2021.

Among the valuable perks given to Jacobs was the right to design the new programmable lighting just installed by RTC Washoe along West 4th Street, giving this private company an astonishing degree of control over public infrastructure.

Also in the Development Agreement, the City agreed to let the company install three signs that the City allowed to be categorized as “area identification signs.”

This categorization is critical, because thanks to Scenic Nevada, the City of Reno can no longer issue permits for the construction of new billboards (also called “off-premises advertising displays”). You can read more about the City’s prohibitions and regulations regarding billboards in Reno’s Land Development Code, Chapter 18.05, Article 2.

Of course, once Jacobs Entertainment came along and bought the Gold Dust West and Sands Regency and practically everything around them, they entered a competitive marketplace where Reno’s other major gaming and entertainment entities already had billboards along the highway that were grandfathered in and therefore allowed.

But get some promotional signage for it classified as a different kind of sign entirely, namely, “area identification signs,” and Jacobs could get some big signs of its own.

Here’s the city’s definition of an “area identification sign” (scroll down to “Signs” on this list of definitions):

Can these signs be used to identify a commercial complex? Apparently yes, when you are at them. Their purpose is to to IDENTIFY, not to promote, advertise, or direct.

An off-premises advertising display, in contrast, PROMOTES a commercial interest from afar and may provide directions for how to reach or contact the advertised entity.

When the City of Reno granted Jacobs Entertainment the right to erect three big signs advertising their resort complex in contradiction to the City’s own code, the nonprofit Scenic Nevada rightfully sued both Jacobs Entertainment and the City of Reno for mis-classifying these signs and paving the way for them to be erected.

And in 2023, Scenic Nevada partially won at the district level, when the district court judge prohibited two of the three proposed signs including the highway sign (known in the Development Agreement and in the case as the “cemetery sign” for its proposed location on cemetery grounds), determining that they were not “area identification signs” at all, and that the cemetery sign was, in fact, a billboard.

But the City of Reno (at the direction of City Council) appealed that decision, and in May 2025, the State Supreme Court ruled against Scenic Nevada, asserting basically that since these three proposed signs were not billboards according to the City, Scenic Nevada lacked legal standing to sue over them, and ruled that they were area identification signs, after all.

But here’s what the State Supreme Court wrote to defend that assertion:

“The plain language of these RMC provisions reveals that area identification signs and premises advertising displays have two distinct purposes: the principal purpose of an area identification sign is to identify an area of the community, while the principal purpose of an on-premises advertising display or a billboard is the promotion of a particular commercial interest” (page 6-7 of the ruling).

Exactly.

A highway sign promoting “Reno’s Neon Line District” is a billboard promoting a particular commercial interest because the phrase is a trademark (one of many related ones) registered by Jacobs Entertainment, a for-profit commercial entity.

Here’s the definition of a trademark from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office:

“A trademark can be any word, phrase, symbol, design, or a combination of these things that identifies your goods or services. It’s how customers recognize you in the marketplace and distinguish you from your competitors.”

Here’s that trademark registration (click to search by owner).

The State Supreme Court’s decision said nothing about trademarks, but Jacobs’ trademarks for the “neon line” are incredibly pertinent.

When did this trademarking happen? In close association with the resort’s naming.

• Jacobs Entertainment filed the trademark application for “Reno’s Neon Line District” on November 1, 2018.

• The Development Agreement with the City was approved in October 2021.

• The trademark for “Reno’s Neon Line District” was officially registered on November 29, 2022.

• The trademark application for “J Resort’s Reno Neon Line” was filed on February 13, 2024 and is apparently “pending.”

• In March of 2024, Jacobs Entertainment announced the new name of their entertainment complex: “J Resort’s Reno Neon Line,” while retaining the trademark for “Reno’s Neon Line District” (and a bunch of others).

The name itself is a clever gimmick. If you want to convey the impression that the name of your private resort complex actually refers to a city-designated, city-authorized space, what do you do? Slap the name of your city at the front of it!

Note that it’s not the “Neon Line District,” or even the “Reno Neon Line District” (both of which the company actually filed to trademark and then abandoned)—it’s “Reno’s Neon Line District.” See what they did there with that little apostrophe? It implies ownership and endorsement, as though the entire city has objectively recognized and endorsed this as our city’s neon district and wants you to exit here.

IT HAS NOT.

J Resort’s “Reno’s Neon Line District” is not the place to view authentic neon in Reno (more on that below)—far from it. Moreover, the City of Reno has not given the area this name—not in the Development Agreement, not in the Master Plan, not anywhere.

The agreement itself describes the project it concerns as “A mixed-use entertainment district that the Master Developer is calling Reno’s Neon Line District in downtown Reno, Nevada” [emphasis mine]. The City planner presenting the agreement to City Council even said at the time, “I’m not aware that we’ve actually branded this the ‘Neon Line District.’” I wrote about all of this back in October of 2023.

The words “Neon Line” appear nowhere in the City’s Master Plan, unlike the terms “Midtown,” “Riverwalk District,” and “East 4th Street.” It is not one of the six “Downtown Districts” identified in the plan (“Entertainment District, University District, Innovation District, Riverwalk District, Northwest Quadrant, and Powning District”) nor in Title 18, the land development code.

Visit the website https://jresortsrenoneonline.org (below) and you’ll see the same logo style as the proposed highway adjacent sign and the full name of “Reno’s Neon Line District Presented by J Resort.” (You are also redirected to that webpage from the less corporate-sounding URL, https://www.renosneonlinedistrict.org/.)

And precisely what is being promoted on the webpage for “Reno’s Neon Line District Presented by J Resort”? Here’s the list:

1. J Resort (owned by Jacobs Entertainment)

2. Gold Dust West (owned by Jacobs Entertainment)

3. J Resort’s Festival Grounds (owned by Jacobs Entertainment)

4. J Resort’s Glow Plaza (owned by Jacobs Entertainment)

5. Glow Gardens (which doesn’t exist but if/when it opens, will be owned by Jacobs Entertainment)

6. Original Art (on Jacobs Entertainment property)

7. 245 North Arlington, Gibson Apartments, and Renova Flats (one constructed and two renovated residential buildings, all owned by Jacobs Entertainment)

That’s it. Maybe they’ll soon add the Gold ‘N Silver, now that it’s reopened (and is also owned by Jacobs Entertainment). Click on “Contact Us” on the website and your email goes to jresortsrenoneonline@jresortreno.com.

And where is this supposed “district,” anyway? What are its boundaries? The website claims it refers to “West 4th Street and the surrounding area,” but you can’t brand a public street or someone else’s private property. So how can this be a designated “area” when it doesn’t even have a clear location?

So, to summarize: Did any other area property owner ask to be included in this “neon line district”? Nope. Does any other area property owner advertise themselves as being located in this “neon line district”? Nope. Does Jacobs advertise any other property as being located in this district? Nope. Does it matter? Apparently not!

It’s obvious that only one commercial interest is being promoted here.

So maybe you’re saying “Who cares?” “What harm does it do to let Jacobs Entertainment have this one big sign along the highway?”

The first victim is the City of Reno’s reputation. Yes, the City may have legally exercised its discretion in classifying Jacobs Entertainment’s promotional signs as “area identification signs” despite the fact that these signs would clearly promote a single commercial interest from a distance, serving not as “wayfinding” (“you are here!”) but as advertising (“come here!”). But it was inaccurate and unfair to do so.

What are some additional harmful repercussions? I can think of a few.

Setting a Precedent

If the City allows this sign to be categorized and installed as an “area identification sign,” it will not only subvert the intent of its own signage code but will set a dangerous precedent that could allow any private entity to skirt the legal prohibitions against new billboards by concocting fake “districts” comprised solely of their private holdings, trademarking their names, and asking the City of Reno to categorize far-flung signs advertising these private interests as “area identification signs” rather than as the (prohibited) off-premises advertising displays that they obviously are.

With such a precedent in place, the same pathway could be followed by any number of private entities, both existing and yet to be created—particularly those that are in the process of creating large, entirely private mixed-use developments, such as these:

• The “Reno Experience District” (RED)

• The Grand Sierra Resort

• The proposed professional soccer stadium on Kietzke Lane

• Downtown Damonte

And that’s not even counting other major property owners and private development projects like The ROW, the Reno Revival (former Harrah’s Reno), the development planned around Greater Nevada Field, and whoever else decides to follow their lead.

Blurring the line between the authentic and the fake

If the City wants to argue that this is an “area identification sign” then the City is endorsing its description of West 4th Street and some vague area surrounding it as “Reno’s Neon Line,” where visitors can witness the height of Reno neon. It is not.

I have repeatedly, as a historian, historic preservationist, and purveyor of truth, pointed out the hypocrisy of calling this private resort complex a “neon line” when the company singlehandedly destroyed multiple motels brandishing historic neon signs and has lined its properties with not neon lighting but LED. Do they include some authentic neon? Sure. But most of that actual neon is on replica signs, not originals.

And that matters because neon is not just a color but an actual element—it is, in fact, Nevada’s official state element. It is endangered, it is precious, it is unique.

It matters because despite Jacobs Entertainment’s campaign of destruction, Reno still has plenty of authentic neon throughout the city. And if people are looking for the highest concentration of authentic neon signage in the city of Reno, neon preservationist and restorer Will Durham is about to open his Light Circus, a stunning collection of authentic neon signs from across Reno and Nevada, inside the National Bowling Stadium—on the other side of downtown from Jacobs’ complex.

In naming its resort complex “Reno’s Neon Line District,” Jacobs Entertainment aims to profit from collective nostalgia for something whose historic context they have methodically destroyed. And in doing so, they not only imperil the recognition and preservation of authentic neon but diminish its value by blurring the distinction between the real and the fake. It’s even worse that agencies and institutions from the City of Reno to RTC Washoe to Visit Reno-Tahoe are helping them do so.

Unanticipated consequences of redirecting traffic to West 4th Street

Jeff Jacobs has directly stated his intent to make West 4th Street, where his two casino properties are located, the new vehicular entrance to downtown Reno. And through their recent actions, the City of Reno and RTC Washoe appear to be endorsing this plan even though there was no public decision directing them to.

It’s not a coincidence that the proposed erection of this sign follows closely on the heels of the completion of J Resort’s new 4th Street-facing vehicular entrance and the installation of RTC Washoe’s out-of-scale streetlights. In the Jacobs era, West Fourth Street has not become a walkable mixed-use district; it’s become a driveway.

Meanwhile, Virginia Street continues to struggle from lack of vitality and visitation. What would happen if this sign successfully convinced travelers to exit at Keystone to reach what they are led to believe is the heart of Reno’s tourist district, based on its misleading language? Does the City have any idea? Does the RTC? Does NDOT?

(And speaking of NDOT, don’t they have their own regulations of billboards?)

Any other downtown business, along with any Reno business or entity featuring authentic neon or any commercial interest that isn’t being allowed to erect an off-premises advertising display would certainly seem to be an aggrieved party here (with standing to appeal the decision, should the City approve this application).

It all comes down to findings.

Approval of this application rests on the staff’s ability to make the required findings. You can read the application for the company’s responses to all of these. Keep in mind that the “proposed land use” or project here is just the sign, not the resort complex.

1. Is the proposed land use and project design compatible with surrounding development (cemetery, street, neighborhood, interstate)?

2. Is the proposed land use and project design consistent with applicable development standards (like the actual definition of area identification signs)?

3. Are public services and facilities available to serve the project, or will be provided with development (probably N/A—it’s a sign)?

4. Are the characteristics of the use as proposed and as may be conditioned reasonably compatible with the types of use permitted in the surrounding area (new billboards are not permitted in the City of Reno)?

5. Will the granting of the minor site plan review be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare?

The sign also must be consistent with the Reno Master Plan, in compliance with Title 18, and mitigate any anticipated traffic impacts. I find it to be inconsistent with the first two and to fail to do the latter, as stated above.

Those are my thoughts. If you have your own concerns, PLEASE send them to the City ASAP using the links up top. The decision date is July 24th. Take care, all.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

On a regional level, the Community Homelessness Advisory Board (CHAB) meets on Monday, June 29th at 9:00am (agenda here).

Last week, I revisited the first five of ten development issues that I had identified in January 2026 (see Part 1 & Part 2) as critical topics for local discussion (Casinos, Data Centers, Downtown Revitalization, Historic Preservation and Homelessness).

Today, we’ll cover the final five: Housing, Politics, Public Spaces, the Reno Redevelopment Agency, and the Truckee River. And below that, I’ll have links to some new and continuing public input opportunities.

ISSUE #6 - HOUSING

Here’s what I wrote in January. The update since then isn’t great; according to recent reports, Reno’s housing market continues to break records for both renters and buyers, and not in a good way:

• Reno-Sparks median home price hits record amid sharp drop in supply (RGJ 6/24/26) The combined median price for an existing home in Reno-Sparks set a record high in May as inventory continues to fall sharply.

• See the Reno-Sparks neighborhoods with lowest, highest apartment rents (RGJ 6/15/26) Apartment rents in Reno-Sparks hit a record high for two quarters in a row. Which neighborhoods have the highest and lowest rent?

Tenants’ rights remain an important topic, too:

• State’s eviction prevention program on shaky financial footing, lawmakers told (Nevada Current 6/25/26) Rental assistance funding allocated by state lawmakers last year has prevented evictions for nearly 1,700 households in Nevada, but there still is a need for bolstering tenant protections, state lawmakers were told last week.

Along with issues of affordability, the Reno-Sparks area continues to contend with urban sprawl, which increases reliance on automobiles, exacerbates traffic congestion, requires the ongoing extension of infrastructure into outlying areas, and in many cases, involves building in areas on the wildland-urban interface (WUI). At the same time, subdivisions in outlying areas continue to be planned and approved:

• Sierra Reflections approved by regional planning commission (This is Reno 6/16/26)

These intersecting dynamics continue to make housing an issue to watch in 2026.

ISSUE #7 - POLITICS

Here’s what I wrote on this topic in January. Long before that, in May of 2025, I asked “Will land use planning and development be the central issue of the 2026 City of Reno elections?” I think what I wrote there (yes!) still holds true. Here’s part of it:

“I’ve lately been pondering how issues of land development and planning have grown to occupy such a central place in our local politics. Of course there are many other critical local issues, from the budget to public safety to homelessness to supporting small businesses, and I hope this will finally be a local election where we actually discuss candidates’ positions and (where relevant) voting records regarding all of them.

But land use planning—deciding what can and should be built, and where—pertains to all of those issues and more. It’s the subject that hits all of us literally where we live (and work and play), whether we’re talking about Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), data centers, digital signs, affordable housing, historic preservation, wild horses, parks and public spaces, infill, transportation, wildfire prevention, redevelopment, revitalization, and more. And there’s a lot of money at stake, too. A lot.

Land development will shape the landscape of Reno’s future. Do you like where things are headed? Now’s the time to start asking yourself that question. Nothing about development is predetermined, but once a course is set, it’s difficult to change.”

We’re now past the primaries, and the general election candidates have been set, as Bob Conrad and Kristen Hackbarth of This is Reno discussed in a recent podcast:

• PODCAST: Reno’s primary election results: Major upsets, City Hall shakeups and what’s next (This is Reno 6/16/26)

As they recap in their summary:

“The biggest story of the election was Kate Marshall’s dominant performance in the Reno mayoral race. She is headed for a runoff against Council member Kathleen Taylor, but her commanding primary lead over the rest of the field suggests many voters are looking for a new direction at City Hall. We discuss the struggles of incumbent-backed candidates, public frustration with development issues and whether growing dissatisfaction with the status quo contributed to the results.”

It’s four months until the General Election, and it’s going to be critical to distinguish between these candidates’ statements, priorities, and (when available) voting records, in order to elect a candidate you feel you can trust. I’ll do my best to help out with that.

To that end, I have updated my 2026 RENO ELECTION GUIDE and will continue to add more information to it, providing links to media coverage, informational sources, and upcoming opportunities to hear from candidates. Let’s really get the word out this year and encourage our friends & neighbors to VOTE!

ISSUE #8 - PUBLIC SPACES

Here’s what I wrote in January. Back then, I was already bemoaning the fact that the City of Reno was focusing on just about every other public space but the City Plaza. Since then, we’ve seen an unsolicited private proposal to put development and operation of the plaza into private hands, as I wrote about earlier this month:

I’m not entirely sure what’s next for this proposal, but I’d imagine it’s likely to be brought up in a joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency Board discussion either upon the return of those two bodies on July 22nd or soon thereafter.

On an adjacent note, the inaccessibility of a block of the Tahoe-Pyramid trail along the north side of the river has been a topic of inquiry by News4’s Joe Hart, who asked why the path is gated and locked between Center and Lake Streets:

• Truckee River path gated and locked next to City Hall. Who blocked public access? (News4 6/18/26)

To be honest, I hadn’t realized that this entire path wasn’t subject to a public easement. If you’re on Facebook, you can follow Joe’s reporting on this issue here.

Like the City Plaza, this pathway issue draws attention to the incoherence of Reno’s central riverfront. Wouldn’t it be something if Reno could finally figure out how to make that whole five-block stretch along the Truckee River from Arlington Avenue to Lake Street attractive, active, safe, and universally accessible? It’s not that long.

Why, for instance, hasn’t the current site of The Eddy been developed into housing? Can the Masonic Building at the NW corner of the Virginia Street Bridge be modified or replaced to activate its river-facing facade? Does the AT&T Building really have to remain on the north bank of the river, where it does absolutely nothing for activation? And there were once plans to convert the parking lot between the historic post office building and the river into seating, plantings, something attractive. Can the City of Reno do something to encourage all of that to happen? Right now, its primary attribute is squandered potential.

ISSUE #9 - RENO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (RDA)

Here’s what I wrote in January on the RDA. As I reported then, the Agency may be on the cusp of some major changes. For one thing, it’s apparently been rebranded as “re:up” with a new website at https://renoreup.com/.

Even more importantly, as I discussed just a few weeks ago, the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (or RAAB), which is the citizen advisory board to the RDA Board (Reno City Council) recently held a workshop to formulate a whole slew of recommendations to revamp the RDA’s policies, programs, and administration. We’ll be seeing those in a final form when they’re compiled and presented to the RDA Board at a future meeting. If you want a sneak peek, you can check out their June 15th Special Workshop on YouTube.

ISSUE #10 - THE TRUCKEE RIVER

Here’s what I wrote in January on the river. At the time, my thoughts included these:

“Over the past few decades, increased attention has been paid to the critical role the river could and should play in downtown Reno’s revitalization. In September 2024, Council adopted the 223-page Truckee River Vision Plan for a central 17-mile stretch (including City Plaza), but its designs are mostly unfunded, so expect more discussion of which areas and projects to prioritize as the budget allows….There’s still a lot of room for discussion of how to better plan for development along the Truckee River, particularly in the section that falls into Redevelopment Area #1.”

We’ve since seen the reopening of the Arlington Avenue bridges and the completion of a larger berm and expanded pedestrian path along Riverside Drive.

And I’ve become aware of a citizen-led petition urging the City of Reno to repair, complete, and maintain the Whitewater Park. Click the image below to access that.

That’s a brief update on my initial selection of ten top local development issues, but they’re not the only ones we need to monitor closely. For instance, SUSTAINABILITY is something else that deserves our focused attention, as are matters of public and private TRANSPORTATION, from bicycle networks to ongoing highway expansions. I’m sure there are others of concern to you, too.

Drop me a line at thebarberbrief@substack.com or just reply to this email if you’d like to tell me what’s of greatest concern to you in the realm of land development.

CURRENT PUBLIC INPUT OPPORTUNITIES

Some of these input opportunities are new this week, while others have been mentioned before. Remember that these opportunities are an important way to ensure that your opinion on important matters is recorded and factored into decisions.

FEEDBACK REQUESTED: City of Reno Strategic Plan

You have until Tuesday, June 30th to provide your input on Reno’s updated Strategic Plan. See my prior explanation of this at PUBLIC INPUT OPPORTUNITY: The City of Reno requests feedback on the City’s new Strategic Plan.

Washoe County School District: Help name a new elementary school!

The WCSD is requesting resident input on the name for a new elementary school to be built on the site of Pine Middle School. The final 11 options are listed here:

• School Naming Committee Asks Community to Help Select New School Name

As that report indicates, three final options will be chosen at a public meeting on July 27th at 5:30 p.m. at the school district’s administration building, and then sent to the board of trustees for the final decision. You can find a link to the survey on the above website. The deadline to submit the survey is Tuesday, June 30th at 5pm.

SURVEY: The Locust Taylor Kirman Wells Corridor Study

The Locust–Taylor–Kirman–Wells Corridor Study is intended to improve transportation safety and circulation in this area. The project is being conducted by RTC Washoe in collaboration with the City of Reno, the Washoe County School District, and the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT). Here’s a link to the Project Information Webpage and Fact Sheet.

The proposed transportation improvements you can read about there were developed based on input received during the Neighborhood Network Plan and follow-up traffic safety and mobility analysis. The RTC is now asking for residents to complete a survey to let them know what you think of these options. The survey is open through July 10, 2026 (Link to Survey here).

That’s all for today. Have a great week and HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY!

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

In the meantime, the Reno City Council is on their summer hiatus until July 22nd, but there are still some public meetings this week including the Reno City Charter Committee on Thursday, June 25th (agenda here). For the rest of Reno’s public meetings, check out the City’s Current and Upcoming Meetings webpage.

Other local meetings of relevance to Reno this week:

• Tuesday, June 23, 10am - WASHOE COUNTY COMMISSION (agenda here). This is Reno has a meeting preview here: Washoe County commissioners to consider golf course contract, opioid funding, EV tax question.

• Tuesday, June 23, 2pm - WCSD BOARD OF TRUSTEES (agenda here). This is Reno meeting preview: Washoe County school board to weigh $50M bond, charter school fate and major facilities decisions

• Thursday, June 25, 6pm - TMRPA REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION. (Meetings page here and Agenda here) Items up for consideration include Clear Acre Commons and the Lemmon Valley Plaza.

UPDATE: TEN RENO DEVELOPMENT ISSUES FOR 2026

Back in January, I brought up ten local development issues that I believed would be important to follow in 2026 (see Part 1 & Part 2). They’re all likely to remain front and center this campaign season, so I’d like to take stock of where things stand with each. I’ll start this week with the first five, and address the second five in my next Brief.

ISSUE #1 - CASINOS

Here’s what I wrote in January. In the intervening six months, we’ve seen some major developments and announcements related to local gaming properties:

• Fertitta Entertainment will acquire Caesars Entertainment, owner of The ROW.

• Jacobs Entertainment completed its new entrance and some artificial turf soccer fields and released renderings of a 55-story hotel tower and other ambitious ideas.

• Reno Pro Soccer announced plans for a stadium and entertainment district on Kietzke Lane that will include a “small establishment casino experience.”

• The skyrocketing popularity of prediction markets has quickly become a major force for the gaming industry to contend with, potentially impacting brick-and-mortar casino properties everywhere.

Over the next few months, we’ll see if the change in ownership of the Eldorado, Silver Legacy, and Circus Circus translates into any significant changes to the properties—ideally beginning with a cleanup of their exterior decay, which was featured among that of other problem downtown properties in a recent video by Downtown Makeover.

ISSUE #2 - DATA CENTERS

Here’s what I wrote in January. Since then, the Reno City Council voted to impose a temporary moratorium on accepting any new permit applications for data centers, effective through August 31, 2027 or until the Council adopts new regulations. They also voted to direct staff to begin the process of putting together those regulations.

Here’s a great explainer of that decision and what it means:

• Reno extends its data center moratorium into 2027. Here’s what happens next. City staff are casting a wide net of topics — ranging from water usage to community benefit agreements — as they craft proposals on how to oversee the industry. (Nevada Independent 6/2/26)

This pause on accepting new permits will not only allow the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (TMRPA) to continue its ongoing regional efforts but will allow Reno to coordinate its new regulations with any new actions or policies adopted by the 2027 Nevada State Legislature.

And Reno is not alone among Nevada municipalities in considering a pause in permitting for data centers in order to catch up with the industry’s vigorous pace:

• Henderson considers data center pause amid construction boom across Clark County (Nevada Independent 6/17/26)

• Las Vegas data center expansion approved as officials ponder need for future regulations (Nevada Independent 6/18/26)

If you haven’t already, be sure to take the TMRPA’s survey on data centers, which you can find at https://www.tmrpa.org/data-center-engagement/.

And be sure to check out the following resources:

• TMRPA: Exploring TMRPA’s Role in the Energy Sector

• Desert Research Institute: DATA CENTER WATER AND ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION IN NEVADA (features link to full report and StoryMap)

• Truckee Meadows Data Center Policy Consortium website (features calendar of upcoming regional meetings and related resources)

ISSUE #3 - DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION

Here’s what I wrote in January. I’m treating Reno’s Redevelopment Agency as a separate issue (#9), so this one is about City of Reno actions related to downtown, and how various City policies might either help or hinder its revitalization. Also, the City Plaza recently emerged as a topic of intense discussion and I’ll have more on that next week under Issue #8: Public Spaces.

Just before their summer hiatus, the City Council passed a “pilot” phase of a new Live Entertainment Ordinance that temporarily suspends conditional use permit requirements for indoor live entertainment venues in the downtown, MidTown and 4th Street corridors (see Item F.1 here). The program will end on December 31, 2027.

This spring brought a flurry of citizen-written op-eds about downtown, and before the primary election, This is Reno featured thoughts from Reno candidates (including those who won the primaries) on what could be done for downtown Reno:

• Reno’s council and mayor candidates differ on what to do about downtown (This is Reno 6/5/26)

Look to downtown Reno to be an ongoing topic of discussion by our local candidates as their campaigns continue through November—and let’s do everything we can to press them on specific downtown policies or actions they’d like to see the City take.

ISSUE #4 - HISTORIC PRESERVATION

Here’s what I wrote in January when we had just conducted the hugely successful community meeting for the Lear. Several months later, the Reno City Council (as the Redevelopment Agency Board) voted in two separate meetings to issue an Request for Proposals for the property and to dedicate $2 million toward a feasibility study for the property along with landscaping and some basic protective efforts for the building.

I worked this spring with City Councilmember Naomi Duerr and City staff to help determine how to coordinate these directives and I’m happy to say that we came up with a workable plan and timeline that will allow everything to be accomplished in the appropriate order and with ample advance notice, beginning later this summer and extending into the fall and winter. Expect more information from the City soon, and be sure to sign up for the Lear newsletter if you haven’t already done so.

The Lear, of course, is not the only historic preservation issue in Reno. Here are a few more updates and items of interest:

• In May, a segment of East 4th Street was added as a commercial historic district to the National Register of Historic Places! More on that here.

• The MidTown District was named a 2026 Main Street accredited program. This recognizes the district’s commitment to creating meaningful improvements through preservation-based economic development and community revitalization using the Main Street Approach.™” Check out the district’s history & current historic buildings through this virtual tour of Historic MidTown.

• I’m thrilled to announced the completion of a project I’ve been working on for the City of Reno: a Historic Context Study and Survey related to the History and Heritage of Reno’s African American Community. This was a truly collaborative effort with my colleague ZoAnn Campana and the deep involvement of Demetrice Dalton of Our Story, Inc. and many members of our local community. The 381-page document (linked above) includes a narrative, architectural survey, and oral histories intended to help identify, interpret, preserve, and recognize more local historic properties related to the African American community. Check it out!

• It’s walking tour season with the Historic Reno Preservation Society! View all the options and sign up on their website here. RESERVATIONS ARE REQUIRED.

ISSUE #5 - HOMELESSNESS

Here’s what I wrote in January. It wasn’t clear at the time if the Community Homelessness Advisory Board (CHAB) would be dissolved. Happily, it was not, and according to the Washoe County calendar, the CHAB is next scheduled to meet on Monday June 29th at 9:00am. An agenda will be posted on that page when available.

The CHAB last met on May 11th, as reported by This is Reno here. Representing the City of Reno on this public body are Ward 6 Councilmember Brandi Anderson and Ward 1 Councilmember Kathleen Taylor.

Homelessness remains a major issue in our community as elsewhere, and those CHAB meetings are really the only centralized place for focused discussion of ongoing regional policies, actions, resources, and concerns. So mark June 29 on your calendar and in the meantime, here’s some more news and information to keep you up to date:

• One measure of local homelessness can be found on Washoe County’s Real-Time Shelter Data at a Glance webpage, which provides “a real-time snapshot of bed occupancy across Washoe County Housing and Homeless Services programs.”

• The Reno Initiative for Shelter (RISE) won the contract to take over operation of the Safe Camp at the Nevada Cares Campus, to begin on July 1st.

• The Reno Housing Authority broke ground last month on Hope Landing, a 15-unit project providing permanent supportive housing for residents who are chronically homeless at the lowest income levels. It should open in spring 2027.

We’ll stop there today with my top ten local development issues to watch this year. Next week I’ll have updates on the final five: Housing, Politics, Public Spaces, the Reno Redevelopment Agency, and the Truckee River.

YOUR INPUT IS NEEDED NOW, SO DON’T DELAY!

I’ll end today with a number of requests for residents to weigh in on some major local issues, projects, and plans. It’s important to make a habit of doing so, since public input is generally weighed quite heavily, but you have to participate in these formal processes for that feedback to be recorded, tabulated, and considered.

NDOT: Proposed Changes to Interstate 80

Through June 26, you can watch a Virtual Public Meeting related to NDOT’s plans to modify Interstate 80 through Sparks. Here’s some coverage with a quick explanation:

• NDOT seeks public input on proposed I-80 changes in Sparks for Spaghetti Bowl project. (News4 6/5/26)

These proposed changes deserve your full attention. This phase is focusing on the stretch of Interstate 80 between Rock Boulevard and McCarran Boulevard in Sparks, where NDOT is proposing widening I-80 to three lanes in each direction and rebuilding key interchanges.

You can access the virtual materials at https://spaghettibowlphase2a.com/ and fill out the comment form. The materials include some striking Before & After views of Victorian Plaza and Victorian Avenue looking south including the following.

BEFORE (current)

AFTER {proposed)

City of Reno Strategic Plan

You have until June 30th to provide your input on Reno’s updated Strategic Plan. See my prior explanation of this at PUBLIC INPUT OPPORTUNITY: The City of Reno requests feedback on the City’s new Strategic Plan.

Washoe County School District: Help name a new elementary school!

The WCSD is requesting resident input on the name for a new elementary school to be built on the site of Pine Middle School. The final 11 options are listed here:

• School Naming Committee Asks Community to Help Select New School Name

As that report indicates, three final options will be chosen at a public meeting on July 27th at 5:30 p.m. at the school district’s administration building, and then sent to the board of trustees for the final decision. You can find a link to the survey on the above website. The deadline to submit the survey is June 30th.

That’s all for today. Have a great week, stay cool and hydrated, and please consider donating a new fan to the annual Summer Fan Drive for Seniors.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

I’ll preview both of those Monday meetings below, followed by updates and other items of interest for the week of June 15th.

As usual, agendas and materials for all of the coming week’s public City of Reno meetings can be found on the Current and Upcoming Meetings webpage. The week’s meetings also include the Arts & Culture Advisory Board (Monday), the Ward 2 NAB (Tuesday), the Reno Planning Commission (Wednesday) and the Ward 4 NAB (Thursday), among others.

But first, how about those (still unofficial) election results?

Primary Election results will be certified on June 18th.

The top two candidates for the Reno mayoral and Ward 2 Reno Councilmember races appear to be settled, but nothing’s final until the votes are certified. Still, it’s almost certain to remain how it’s looking on Sunday, with Kate Marshall v. Kathleen Taylor for Reno Mayor. Here are the current results for the top five Mayoral candidates.

And for the Ward 2 Reno City Council seat, it’ll be Matt Johnson v. Summer Pellett.

For the latest tally, go to the Washoe County results on the Secretary of State website or the Washoe County Registrar of Voters website.

The Reno City Council will certify the results in a Special Meeting on Thursday, June 18th at 10am and the Board of Washoe County Commissioners will do the same. Then it’s on to November’s general election for the winners. Get your signs now!

Monday, June 15, 11am - SPECIAL Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board workshop

The RAAB is the citizen advisory board to the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board (Reno City Council) and they have a special workshop on Monday. (Agenda here)

For a full explanation of this meeting—and more encouragement for residents to participate—please read Mike Van Houten’s new preview on Downtown Makeover:

• RAAB Special Workshop preview: five big topics on the table Monday (Downtown Makeover 6/14/26)

As Mike writes: “This could be one of the most substantial discussions on Reno’s redevelopment future in decades.” He continues:

“There are five business items, and they range from "here's how property tax works and why it matters" to "should the City Council keep running this thing the way it does?" None of them are quick conversations, which is why four hours have been allotted for this meeting. Some of these discussions could have downstream consequences for downtown Reno for the next decade or more.”

The meeting will consist of two presentations as well as several action items under which they can make important recommendations to the RDA Board. I’ll include agenda links below, but read Mike’s post for full explanations of each.

• B.1 - Presentation and discussion on property tax, including an overview of the tax structure and distribution methods (For Discussion Only) (Presentation)

• B.2 - Discussion and possible recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency Board regarding a legislative extension of Redevelopment Area 2 (For Possible Action) (Staff Report) (Presentation)

• B.3 - Discussion and presentation from SB Friedman on Redevelopment Best Practices Guide (For Discussion Only) (Presentation)

• B.4 - Discussions and possible recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency Board regarding updates to the City of Reno Redevelopment Agency’s Participation Programs and Processes (For Possible Action) (Staff Report) (Presentation)

• B.5 - Discussion and possible recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency Board regarding additional policies and governing structure of the Redevelopment Agency (For Possible Action) (Staff Report) This one has multiple attachments—see the agenda for links.

As Mike indicates, Monday's meeting starts at 11am at Reno City Hall, 14th floor. It's also on Zoom at https://links.reno.gov/RAAB06-15-26 for anyone who wants to follow along remotely. Public comment is open and limited to three minutes per person.

Monday, June 15th, 6pm: Regional Planning Commission

The big item at Monday’s Regional Planning Commission meeting is the delayed conformance review for the proposed Sierra Reflections development. (Agenda Here) (Full Meeting Information Here)

• 5.A. - [For possible action] PUBLIC HEARING continued from the May 28, 2026 RPC Meeting – Regional Plan Conformance Review – Washoe County Project of Regional Significance (PRS), Sierra Reflections (CR25-026)

This is a proposal for a 940-lot common open space development located between Interstate 580 and old U.S. 395. You can view the developer’s website here. The proposal has generated its own resistance movement called Stop Sierra Reflections.

As the Staff Report indicates, the Washoe County Planning Commission unanimously denied the proposal on January 6, 2026. The Washoe Board of County Commissioners then heard the proposal at their March 10th meeting and overturned the recommendation of the Planning Commission by a vote of 3 to 2. The request for a conformance review by Regional Planning was received on March 16, 2026.

You can attend in person at the Washoe County Commission Chambers at 1001 East Ninth Street, or register to view and participate view zoom at https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89282598705. The meeting will also stream live on YouTube.

Tuesday, June 16th, 10am: Washoe County Board of Commissioners

This is Reno has a preview of Tuesday’s Washoe County Commission meeting here:

• Washoe County commissioners to review housing ordinances, Swan Lake land purchase, library appointments (This is Reno 6/12/26)

You can access the full agenda here and meeting details here.

NEWS DIGEST: The latest in local urban development

You can read the City of Reno official summary of this past week’s Reno City Council meeting here: June 10, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights.

Here’s some coverage of what was discussed in their role as the RDA Board:

• Redevelopment board backs city manager authority over executive director role (This is Reno 6/11/26)

And here’s some more development-related news from the past week:

• Arlington Avenue Bridges reopen, reconnecting downtown Reno (KOLO 8 6/9/26)

• School board approves new superintendent contract, new administrative facilities funding (This is Reno 6/11/26)

• Hundreds protest horse fencing project in Washoe Valley (2 News Nevada 6/13/26)

• Reno names Love Your Block CommUNITY mini-grant recipients for Ward 1 projects (News4 6/12/26)

• OPINION: Data center gold rush threatens to crush our clean energy goals (John L. Smith, Nevada Independent 6/14/26)

And I want to give a heartfelt tip of the hat to Brett McGinness of the Reno Gazette-Journal, who took my reference to his online survey about the City Plaza in the spirit with which it was intended. I lamented that even the RGJ was asking for open-ended opinions on whether the City should do anything with the plaza despite the fact that the City has included visions for the plaza in three recent commissioned plans.

As Brett and I both conclude (and thanks for the shout out to the Brief, Brett!), the problem isn’t that the City of Reno doesn’t have any good ideas for the plaza; it’s that they haven’t yet committed to one and made financing it a priority.

• The Eddy’s pitch means it’s time to finalize plans in Reno City Plaza (RGJ 6/12/26)

The majority of you appear to agree with us, so when City Council returns in July from their summer break, let’s be sure to start insisting that they DO make the plaza a priority and not only pledge to keep our City Plaza public but finally get serious about collaboratively planning and funding the public plaza that all of us deserve.

PUBLIC INPUT OPPORTUNITY: The City of Reno requests feedback on the City’s new Strategic Plan.

As I mentioned last time, the City of Reno has drafted its new Strategic Plan for the fiscal years 2027-2029 and now they’re asking for community feedback on it. You can read more about that in the City’s news release:

• City of Reno Seeks Community Input on Final Draft of Strategic Plan for Fiscal Year 2027-2029

The community feedback form can be accessed via the City’s Strategic Priorities webpage along with a link to the 23-page draft plan. There will also be a webinar outlining the plan, what it means, and how you can help shape it on Tuesday, June 23rd from 12-1pm. You can register for that on Microsoft Teams via the webpage.

This can seem like dry and general stuff, but I’m telling you, it’s something that the City uses to shape and justify almost everything they do, so it’s critical to pay attention, think about what it’s saying and let the City know if you agree with these priorities or have suggestions for how they could be improved.

That’s it for now. Please stay cool and consider donating a fan to Washoe County’s annual fan drive for seniors (and taking advantage of it if you qualify and need one).

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

This week’s City of Reno meetings can all be found on the City’s meetings webpage. I’ll focus on a few items from the City Council/Redevelopment Agency Board but meetings also include the Ward 1 NAB (today, Monday) and the Historical Resources Commission (Thursday), where staff will provide an update on the Lear Theater.

For my new readers: WELCOME! Just so you know, I highlight items that are related to local urban development & that I think will be of broad interest, but I definitely don’t cover everything, so always be sure to skim the agendas for items of interest to you. Below that are updates and recent news coverage related to development issues.

Subscribe now

This Wednesday marks the final meetings of the Reno City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board (also City Council) before their short summer break, which lasts until July 22nd.

Here’s a preview of those two agendas from This is Reno:

• Reno City Council to consider affordable housing land transfer, downtown parking garage and redevelopment agency changes (This is Reno 6/8/26)

I just have one item to highlight from each of them.

Wednesday, June 10th: Reno City Council

Here’s the Meeting Agenda for City Council My highlight concerns strategic planning:

• C.4 - Presentation, discussion, and potential direction to staff on major opportunity areas tied to the FY27-29 Strategic Plan priorities Well-Maintained City Infrastructure and Access to Natural Spaces. (Staff Report)

As part of its ongoing Strategic Plan Update (you can check out the broader overview with the public participation schedule here), Council is being asked to weigh in on “Major Opportunity Areas” to focus on over the next 2-3 years, this time discussing two of the priorities they adopted last October. Staff is refining the draft now and according to the schedule I linked to above, a feedback form will be published on June 11th with a community webinar on June 23rd. So we’ll have plenty of time to chime in.

Here are the proposed focus areas for Well-Maintained City Infrastructure:

• Maintenance Assessment - “Complete a full inventory, accurate condition assessment, and lifecycle analysis of all City-owned assets.”

• CIP Reform - “Reimagine the capital improvement planning process to prioritize, fund and deliver infrastructure projects based on community and organizational needs.”

And here are the proposed focus areas for Natural Spaces:

• Parks District - “Complete the regional parks service plan and pursue a regional parks model to increase funding, provide streamlined governance and maintenance responsibilities to build, maintain, and enhance public parks.”

• Truckee River - Improve public access to and activation of the Truckee River by enhancing river safety, cleanliness, and accessibility.”

These look good to me and seem especially timely considering the current issue with The Eddy, where a private entity has proposed to permanently lease and/or purchase a city-owned public space. Focusing on these priority areas can help clarify city policy regarding the evaluation and disposition of city-owned property and assets; refine how the city prioritizes improvements to city infrastructure; and create a clear path to planning and funding city parks and open access to the Truckee River.

If these things are important to you, too, consider letting them know, and let’s all be prepared to continue participating once the process is underway later this week.

Wednesday, June 10th: Redevelopment Agency Board

Here’s the Meeting Agenda for Wednesday’s Redevelopment Agency Board meeting. Item C.1 involves planning for the Parking Gallery at the corner of Sierra & W. First Streets (Staff Report here), and the other action item, B.1, concerns the operations of the Redevelopment Agency itself.

Here, sitting in their capacity as the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board, the Reno City Council could update a whole slew of items related to the governance and administrative structure of the RDA. This is pretty niche for our readership here, but this could actually have some major ramifications for how redevelopment works in Reno, and I think it bears some examination for anyone who’s interested.

• Item B.1 - A Resolution updating the governance and administrative structure of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Reno; appointing the Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, Secretary; designating the City Manager or their designee as Executive Director; designating legal counsel; establishing contracting authority; repealing or superseding certain prior resolutions; and providing other matters properly relating thereto. (Staff Report)

The provision that really stands out to me here is naming the City Manager or their designee as Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency. The City Manager assumed that role when the RDA was relaunched, but with this resolution, she could immediately appoint someone else from City staff to that position rather than hire the Executive Director of this newly relaunched agency in a competitive hiring process.

Nothing personal against any of the possible in-house contenders, but I would really like to see what kind of expertise we could attract to this important role and weigh a few options rather than enabling the City Manager, with no input from City Council or the public, to appoint a person who is learning as they go. It’s also critical to think beyond the current moment (and people) when determining policy, and consider whether this is a process that we’d be happy with in the future, regardless of the specific personnel involved.

If you want to comment on anything on the agendas for the Reno City Council or Redevelopment Agency Board meetings, you can always attend in person or participate via Zoom. If you want to send in public comments in advance, do so by 4pm on Tuesday, June 9th for them to be distributed to Council before the meeting by filling out the public comment form at http://reno.gov/PublicComment or sending an email to Publiccomment@reno.gov (if you do that, I also recommend cc-ing the email addresses of the Mayor and City Councilmembers, which you can find here).

Friday, June 12th - Truckee River Flood Management Authority Board of Directors meeting

I know a lot of people are interested in the plans for developing the area abutting the Truckee River from Rock Boulevard to McCarran Boulevard. Plans include trails, sports fields, and river access, and the design is at 30% completion. On Friday, the Board of Directors is being asked for feedback, which means you can weigh in, too.

Here are the Meeting Details and Meeting Agenda. It’s a hybrid meeting which you can join via Zoom or watch on YouTube. The item is No. 4.

• Item 4 - Presentation and discussion of the Truckee River Rock to McCarran Reach Flood Project 30% Design Report from J-U-B Engineering, Inc. The Project is located primarily along the south bank of the Truckee River between Rock Boulevard and McCarran Blvd. in Reno, Nevada. Possible action to direct design elements or approaches be changed, added to, or deleted from the design for the 60% design level. (For Possible Action)

You can view conceptual images of the current design here.

DATA CENTERS: A City of Reno Moratorium & more

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you know that the Reno City Council just passed a moratorium on issuing any new permits for data centers through August 2027 (the vote was 6-1 with Ward 1 Councilmember Kathleen Taylor voting against).

• Reno City Council approves data center moratorium through August 2027 (This is Reno 6/2/26)

• Reno City Council extends data center moratorium, promises effort is not political (Nevada Current 6/3/26)

Local & State News related to Data Centers

There’s been some news relevant to data centers beyond the moratorium, too.

• NV Energy betting the house on data centers (Nevada Current 6/3/26)

• Lombardo backs natural gas pipeline expansion for data centers (Nevada Current 6/4/26)

National Context on Data Centers

And of course let’s all continue to keep track of the national conversation and policy decisions related to data centers in other jurisdictions. Here are just a few:

• Most states offer tax breaks for AI data centers. Polls show Americans don’t want them. (News4 New York 6/3/26) According to an analysis by the National Conference of State Legislatures, 38 states offer dedicated tax incentives for data centers, including property tax abatements and exemptions from sales or use taxes. New York, Connecticut and New Jersey are among the states that offer data center tax breaks.

• Seattle advances AI data center moratorium bill (KUOW 6/3/26)

• Arkansas’ largest city approves new data center ordinance (Arkansas Advocate 6/3/26)

• New York passes data center moratorium and consumer protections as environmental, and housing proposals stall (News10 6/5/26)

Be sure to keep up with what’s happening regionally by following the Data Center Engagement Effort of the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (take their survey at that link!) and the Truckee Meadows Data Center Policy Consortium.

NEWS DIGEST: The latest in local urban development

For the City’s recap of the June 3rd City Council meeting, read the official June 3, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights.

You can also listen to the Reno City Manager’s podcast, “On the Agenda,” which just posted a new episode with some discussion of the June 3rd City Council meeting results, firefighting investments, and a bit about what’s coming up on June 10th.

And here’s some related media coverage of that meeting and more:

• Reno sells land near train trench for downtown RTC bus stop expansion (RGJ 6/3/2026)

• No decision made on Sierra Reflections at regional planning commission (This is Reno 6/1/26)

A little more on The Eddy’s play for Reno’s City Plaza

If you missed my special post about the City Plaza and The Eddy, please give it a read.

Since I published that post, the owners of The Eddy have issued a statement and a Google survey asking the public to “share your ideas, your concerns, and your vision for this space” and managed to get it distributed by a lot of local media outlets. Participate if you want, obviously, but I just want to make sure it’s clear to everyone that this is a private survey that is not in any way affiliated with the City of Reno, that the City of Reno has not made any statement or determination about the availability of the plaza for lease or sale, and that The Eddy has no control over what happens to the plaza or any obligation to share any or all of their survey results with the public.

The only way for you to tell the City of Reno how you feel about any of this is to contact City Council or staff directly (you can find their contact info here) and/or deliver comments to them in a public meeting. (Heads up that the NAB meeting for Ward 1, where the City Plaza is located, is tonight, June 8th at 5:30pm, and will include an update from RTC Washoe on all of their current and upcoming projects in Ward 1 including the Sierra Street Bridge replacement).

If you want to better understand the context for this proposal, I invite you to watch the April 6th meeting of the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board, where RTC Washoe provided the RAAB with an update on the Sierra Street Bridge construction project. The discussion by RAAB members including The Eddy co-owner Kurt Stitser about the RTC’s plan to help mitigate impacts on local businesses starts about here.

That’s it for this week. See you after the election!

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

It was on their draft agendas but it’s not on the final agendas. We don’t yet know if it will be on a future agenda. But we do know that after June 10th, City Council will be on a break until July 22nd, so no action will be taken anytime soon on this matter.

We still need to talk about it, however—not only because it might come back, but because the fact that this proposal was even heard, much less moved forward by a public body, has pinpointed the need for clarity on at least three important matters:

1. The city’s procedures regarding unsolicited proposals for city-owned property,

2. The current status of the City Plaza (also called the Believe Plaza), and

3. What is envisioned for the plaza’s future.

I’ll be publishing a separate Brief in a few days with the usual updates & previews, but this one is all about the City Plaza. So let’s get into it.

Just to catch everyone up, as I mentioned last week, Kurt Stitser, owner of the outdoor shipping container bar called The Eddy, sent the City of Reno an unsolicited “letter of intent” to enter into a five-year lease for $1.00/year (with an option to extend and even purchase) to turn the City Plaza and adjoining parcel into a permanent “privately operated outdoor entertainment venue.” He said this request is “100% driven” by the impending replacement of the Sierra Street Bridge, planned to start in April 2027, which he fears would put The Eddy out of business.

Stitser’s letter is dated May 21, 2026. Just eleven days later, on June 1st, his proposal was on the agenda of the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (RAAB), which advises the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board (City Council). Stitser is himself a member of the RAAB (he’s also the president of a construction company).

When introducing the item, RDA staffer Bryan McArdle stated that staff had done no analysis or review of the proposal and had no recommendation, but that it was policy to bring any unsolicited proposals forward, and the RAAB was an interim step before taking the proposal to the RDA Board since one of the parcels is owned by the RDA.

That’s the smaller parcel on the right, shaded in blue below. It’s currently being used primarily as a surface parking lot (see Google Street View).

The larger parcel (the main City Plaza) is owned by the City of Reno, so a proposal for that part would (according to staff) go directly to City Council.

After the presentation and discussion (which you can watch here), the other RAAB members (Stitser recused himself) voted 4-3 to recommend that the proposal be forwarded to the RDA Board for consideration and due diligence, but not a specific recommendation for approval. Voting against were Mike Van Houten, Colin Robertson, and Nettie Oliverio, who each made excellent and well-informed points about the need to retain the plaza as a public space. Here’s coverage of that:

• A bar wants to move to Reno City Plaza. Here’s what to know (RGJ 6/1/26)

Then came the backlash. As you can read below, the City Council heard the uproar and obviously the public comments from some of you at their June 3rd meeting:

• City removes The Eddy’s City Plaza takeover proposal from next week’s meeting agenda (This is Reno 6/3/26)

In their free comment period (H.1), which you can watch here, Councilmembers Naomi Duerr and Meghan Ebert and Mayor Schieve voiced concerns about the current process for unsolicited proposals, and Councilmember Duerr requested a future agenda item to discuss and possibly revisit that procedure. Councilmember Ebert also asked for a future discussion of the current status of existing plans for the City Plaza including the recent Placemaking Study.

So let’s go through these primary and pressing issues—the city’s current policy for unsolicited proposals for city property and the status of plans for the City Plaza.

First, does the City really have to consider offers for any City property?

Obviously part of what made this proposal so shocking is that the City Plaza is an active public space, and the request for a private entity to exclusively lease or purchase it seems ludicrous. It’s one of our City Parks and Facilities, for pete’s sake.

If anyone can make an unsolicited offer for the City Plaza, doesn’t that mean that the City has to consider any offer for any piece of City-owned property? I’m pretty sure City staff would tell you that the answer is no, you can’t just make an offer for, say, Wingfield Park or City Hall or the Police Headquarters.

Or can you? How do offers to lease or buy City or RDA property usually work? The City created a policy for the Disposition of City-Owned Property “to establish a procedure by which unused and marginally used City-owned real property is reviewed for its potential public use, and for designated unneeded parcels for sale or lease.”

How does the City decide which properties are “unused” or “marginally used”? They conduct regular reviews. They last did so in February 2025 when, out of 800+ City-owned parcels, they identified “51 properties that are considered underutilized for municipal purposes.” Here’s the Staff Report and Staff Presentation for that item.

Here’s the approved List of Properties. The City Plaza is not on it. So no matter who might consider the plaza “blighted” or “underutilized,” the City of Reno does not.

The RDA-owned parcel next to City Plaza, however, is on the list of underutilized properties, although it’s in the “hold” category, meaning that it’s not recommended for disposal. So the generous way to interpret what happened here is that the nature of Stitser’s proposal confused the issue. It seems the RAAB could legitimately have discussed a proposal for the RDA parcel alone, but it also seems pretty apparent that the inclusion of the City Plaza should have put the kibosh on the whole thing.

So that’s the first step. The City must clarify its policy for leasing or selling city-owned property by doing three things:

1. Clearly state that the only city property available for unsolicited offers to exclusively lease or buy is the list of “unused and marginally used properties.”

2. Post that list online in a visible place.

3. Don’t entertain unsolicited proposals to lease or purchase any city property that’s not on the list. You can propose a project on them or rent them for temporary special events, but not an exclusive long-term lease or sale.

The second step is to clarify the status and plans for the City Plaza.

What makes proposals like this especially galling is when they don’t appear to acknowledge pre-existing conversations and plans. Just today, the Reno Gazette-Journal asked, “Should we do anything with Reno City Plaza, or is it great as it is?” as though the City hasn’t been honing in for years on a specific vision for this space.

You know how people always claim that the City keeps commissioning a million studies and then never follows through with them? This is why. So let’s be clear:

The City Plaza has been included in THREE major City-commissioned studies in the past three years with all three including some version of a public plaza with a number of public amenities and a lot of open space.

First, the Virginia Street Placemaking Study (2023) envisions a concession stand, info kiosk, ample movable seating and shade, a play amenity (e.g. a splash pad), an extensive tree canopy, and open space for skating and other activities (p. 112-113).

Second, the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan (2023) envisions “shady seating and gathering areas, a destination play space, a public art space, and an iconic water feature” plus “two dining facilities that call for the building to have transparent walls with indoor & outdoor seating, shared restrooms, and events space” (pp.117-121).

Third, the Truckee River Vision Plan (2024) envisions some of the same common themes: open and flexible space, shade, planting, seating, and play areas (pp.100-102).

Yes, these suggest three different configurations and components. But they’re all some version of the same concept: a public space with a large open area for the public to gather and for anyone to enjoy. And not a perimeter fence or outdoor bar in sight.

What all these plans—all of which have been accepted by City Council—acknowledge is that the City Plaza is a much-needed public space and town square. That’s why City Council decided in 2003 to make this site a civic plaza in the first place. It is used all the time for all sorts of public gatherings and events: marches, rallies, protests, concerts, candlelight vigils, memorial services, commemorations, skating and skateboarding, bicycle meet-ups, food distribution by Family Soup Mutual Aid, the roller derby, City-sponsored events like Bike Month Bike Expo, the Menorah Lighting, Christmas Tree Lighting, and Holiday Lights Festival, and innumerable city announcements and ceremonies. It is a much-used and appreciated centrally located free speech zone and a space for public art.

Does the plaza need improvement? Obviously! In fact, it’s kind of a miracle that the plaza is already used for so many things despite its relatively hostile appearance.

Imagine how many more uses the plaza will attract when it’s finally improved as the public space we have been shown—and not just for special events but as a welcoming site of everyday comfort and universal enjoyment of the beautiful Truckee River.

The choice here isn’t between The Eddy’s proposal or nothing. The choice is whether to move forward with the planning process that is already underway for an improved City Plaza OR to throw yet another round of City-commissioned studies out the window.

The fact that none of those lovely concepts for the City Plaza has moved forward to a specific design and work plan isn’t because there’s something fundamentally wrong with the site or the fact that the City has no money to spend on it.

It’s because the City of Reno hasn’t made the City Plaza a priority.

The City has spent millions of dollars on Locomotion Plaza, turning it into yet another fenced special event space. They’ve spent millions more on programs like murals, storefront improvements, and special events and capital projects like the Lear (thank you!), the Biggest Little Dog Park, and lighting for the Bowling Stadium. They’ve given hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Downtown Reno Partnership.

I’m not saying these things aren’t worthy expenditures, but that they were choices.

In a January 2025 piece in the Reno Gazette-Journal, City Revitalization Manager Bryan McArdle admitted that no concrete designs for the plaza had been in place since 2005, but that he hoped it would be a priority for the City going forward, saying, “I would say it’s probably a year away from before we have the funds available to get serious.”

So here we are. Let’s get serious.

Let’s refine the plan for the plaza and figure out to fund it. Some initial ideas:

• Designate the plaza as a capital improvement project in next year’s Redevelopment Agency budget (those funds are increasing every year).

• Apply for outside grants for placemaking and civic spaces.

• Enter into a public/private partnership to name the plaza, as the University of Nevada and cities including Las Vegas have done.

• Issue a Request for Proposals to build something permanent on the RDA-owned parcel. (The Eddy is welcome to submit a proposal just like everyone else.)

Some of the existing visions for the plaza include a stage or structure on the RDA parcel, where there’s plenty of room to construct a permanent building while still retaining enough room to create our dream City Plaza. The ice rink plan included a permanent multi-story building (see below) to support the rink in winter and offer year-round climate-controlled comfort for restaurants and more.

Sometimes it takes a point of crisis to get a conversation back on track. So let’s use this moment as an opportunity to start formulating a long-term plan for our plaza and work together to ensure that unlike so many others, this plan becomes a reality.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

And once you’re briefed, PLEASE be sure to vote in the primaries. Early voting is underway, and your friends and neighbors are sending in their mail-in ballots. How many? Check out the Secretary of State office’s Statewide Mail-In Ballot Tracker. And also be sure to check out my primary election guide, with links to candidate websites, campaign finance contributions, media coverage, and more. Don’t delay, vote today!

Special Reno City Council meeting on DATA CENTERS - Monday, June 1 at 10am

As widely anticipated and promoted by many including myself, the Reno City Council is meeting at 10am tomorrow morning (Monday, June 1st) to vote on a resolution that would impose a moratorium on the acceptance of conditional use permit applications for data centers. They adopted a pending moratorium on May 14th, but that only had a 30-day limit. As written, the new draft resolution would extend the moratorium through December 31, 2026 or until the City Council adopts a new ordinance governing data center regulations—whichever is earlier.

Here’s a preview of the meeting from This is Reno:

• Reno City Council to debate data center moratorium, possible future regulations (This is Reno 5/27/26)

How to watch and participate in the June 1st special meeting

Read the meeting agenda for all the details, attend in person at City Hall, or register here to watch/participate via Zoom.

New materials including the staff presentations and the latest public comments have been posted. The meeting will proceed in two stages: feedback & potential adoption.

• Item B.1 - Feedback and direction to staff regarding the data center regulation text amendment, including discussion about timing, process, and regulation topics. (Staff Report) (Staff Presentation-Text Amendment Feedback)

• Item C.1 - Resolution implementing a final moratorium under the procedures provided by Reno Municipal Code (RMC) Section 1.07.010 to impose a moratorium until December 31, 2026, or until the City Council adopts a new ordinance regarding data center regulations, whichever is earlier, on the acceptance of conditional use permit applications for data center uses, as defined in RMC 18.09.301 and required by RMC 18.03.206. (Staff Report) (Staff Presentation) (Resolution Text).

Here’s staff’s suggested timeline for how this would proceed:

Finally, here’s some recent coverage of the local and national situation, for context.

Relevant Recent Local and National Coverage of Data Centers

• Reno has six data centers, here’s where construction stands (RGJ 5/29/26)

• See current progress on the 6 data centers within Reno city limits (RGJ 5/29/26)

• Gov. Lombardo [Nevada], construction companies break ground on 2 million sq. ft. data center in Storey Co. (KOLO 8 5/20/26) Fleet data centers president said a dozen more could be built

• More cities are pressing pause on data centers as local backlash grows (Stateline 5/28/26) Residents are concerned about rising electricity prices and environmental harms.

• New Tennessee law requires data center owners to pay full electricity, infrastructure costs (ABC24 5/31/26) The law, sponsored by Memphis Republican Senator Brent Taylor, does not allow cities to pay for the centers’ infrastructure or electrical needs.

• Gov. Shapiro [Pennsylvania] announces plan to attract ‘responsible’ data center development (WHYY 5/28/26) The plan would require data centers seeking tax incentives to mitigate their impacts on the environment and electric grid.

• Utilities report as many as 30 data centers under discussion in Kentucky (Kentucky Lantern 5/29/26)

Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (RAAB) - Monday, June 1 at 11am

I’ve said this before, but anyone interested in the revitalization of downtown (and the other redevelopment areas) really needs to keep a close eye on the meetings of the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (RAAB). Fortunately for us, one of its members is Downtown Makeover publisher Mike Van Houten, who has previewed two items on their June 1st agenda:

• The Eddy wants to move to the City Plaza - Here’s the proposal (Downtown Makeover 5/28/26)

• Downtown Reno’s parking gallery assessment results: A fixable hot mess (Downtown Makeover 5/29/26)

The first concerns an unsolicited proposal from Kurt Stitser, the operator of The Eddy, to lease the entire City Plaza, right there in front of City Hall, for $1.00 a year, and turn it into a private, fenced attraction. If your jaw just hit the floor, you’re not alone. It’s been lighting up social media ever since Mike posted about it last week.

As the letter states, “The proposer identifies the project as a response to anticipated operational impacts associated with the Sierra Street Bridge construction project and resulting disruption to operations at the Eddy’s current location.”

Ah. So he’s worried his business will suffer from bridge construction and wants to move it to a stable and more accessible place—the city’s main public plaza. For five years. With a possible extension for another 15 years. And also have an option to buy it. I mean, I guess you can’t blame a guy for trying, but seriously?

Stitser, operator of the Eddy, also happens to sit on the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board—the very body that will be hearing this proposal. Presumably he can’t participate in this discussion beyond answering questions as the proposer, but it’s a bit odd, to say the least.

The entire proposal can be found in the meeting packet (starting on p. 165) but here’s a taste of his proposed layout of attractions.

According to current city policy (which is also included in the packet), all letters of interest, or intent, or whatever this is, for city property must be brought in front of City Council and/or the Redevelopment Agency Board (whichever is the owner) and this site actually consists of two parcels, one owned by each. So it’ll get an initial discussion here, and unless Stitser withdraws the proposal, it will be heard by those bodies, too. If that happens, I’ll have quite a bit more to say about it, but not today.

The RAAB is just a recommending body here, and staff is giving them four possible recommendations to consider forwarding on. Read Mike’s piece for more on that.

The RAAB will also be discussing the somewhat problematic and definitely under-maintained Parking Gallery. And under Item B.3, they’ll be providing discussion and feedback to update the City of Reno Redevelopment Agency’s Participation Programs and Processes framework. Here’s the Staff Report for that, and a copy of the current Participation Programs and Processes. This is such a huge and critical topic that I hope they plan to extend this discussion across multiple meetings.

Reno City Council meeting - Wed., June 3rd at 10am

This week’s regular City Council meeting is on Wednesday, as usual, and you can check out the full agenda here. Be sure to skim through it for items of interest.

This is Reno has a preview here that includes everything I would want to highlight:

• Reno council to consider downtown land sale, regional housing governance changes (This is Reno 5/30/26)

It’s important to be attuned to all prospective sales of City of Reno land, and Item C.1 would initiate the sale of three parcels just north of the RR tracks to RTC Washoe.

• C. 1 - Resolution declaring intention to sell City-owned property located between Lake Street, East Plaza Street, Evans Avenue, and the railroad tracks (APNs 007-311-21, 007-311-22, 007-311-23) to the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County (RTC) for the public purpose of expanding the 4th Street Bus Station at the appraised fair market value of $1,350,000. (Staff Report)

Also on the agenda is the potential adoption of the Live Entertainment ordinance:

• F.1 - Potential adoption of the Live Entertainment Temporary Exemption ordinance. Staff Report.

There’s not much going on with the RDA Board but here’s their full agenda.

BRIEF DIGEST: The latest local development-related news

Reno Casinos

• Caesars to be acquired by Fertitta Entertainment in a $17.6B transaction (Nevada Independent 5/28/26) “Earlier this month, J.P. Morgan analyst Daniel Politzer said the merger could result in casino sales in six U.S. markets, including three Nevada markets, which would net the merged company an estimated $2.3 billion in proceeds.”

• Jacobs teases next phase of Reno Neon Line entertainment district (RGJ/MSN 5/19/26)

Local Real Estate News

• Homebuyers paying more in Reno-Sparks, median price hits record again (RGJ 5/29/26)

• City of Reno designates Lucky Motel ‘unsafe to occupy’ due to code concerns (2News 5/29/26)

Local Transportation News

• Reno-TRI Center commuter rail proposal shelved because of funding, legal issues (This is Reno 5/27/26)

• Virginia Line BRT upgrades set to begin May 31 on South Virginia Street (This is Reno 5/29/26)

• DMV opens new kiosk in North Valleys (This is Reno 5/29/26)

Wildfire Risk and Fire Department Training

• Fire experts say wildfire risk is elevated this year; fuels reduction work declined in 2025 (This is Reno 5/29/26)

• Fire officials warn lawmakers of impending fire season (Nevada Current 5/29/26)

• Sparks Fire Department plans wildland fire training, helicopter operations near Point View (This is Reno 5/26/26)

Washoe County Government

• Washoe County expands advisory board boundaries, updates bylaws (This is Reno 5/28/26)

That’s it for today. Welcome to June, and have a great week.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

Today I bring you an assortment of previews and updates—including a reminder about the June 1st City meeting on data centers, which is right around the corner.

But first, early voting for the Reno primaries has begun, so I want to again draw your attention to my comprehensive Guide to the 2026 Primary Elections for the City of Reno. It’s your one-stop shop for the primaries, with links to the following resources:

• Reno candidate websites

• Election/Voter Guides compiled by our local media outlets

• State of Nevada official campaign contribution reports

• Recent local election coverage (UPDATED!)

Next, let’s look at what’s happening in the week ahead.

PUBLIC MEETINGS FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 25, 2026

It’s a relatively quiet week at Reno City Hall, but you can find agendas and materials for this week’s scheduled meetings on the Current & Upcoming Meetings webpage. There’s more going on at the county and regional level.

Tuesday, May 26 at 10am: WASHOE COUNTY COMMISSION

The Board of County Commissioners meets on Tuesday. Here’s that agenda. Items include the Prado Ranch North subdivision agreement, the first reading of an ordinance to establish density bonuses for attainable housing developments, and much more. You can find more info on how to view and participate on the Washoe County website and read a meeting preview from This is Reno below:

• Washoe County commissioners to review housing, road fee and Prado Ranch items (This is Reno 5/23/26)

Tues., May 26 at 5:30pm & Thurs., May 28 at 9:00am: CITY PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE UPDATES (Virtual Only)

The City of Reno is proposing changes to align local standards with the 2024 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) and introduce enhanced requirements for redevelopment areas. You can participate in two virtual workshops this week, with links and more info on the City’s Code Enforcement Updates webpage.

And here’s more on that from This is Reno:

• City of Reno to host workshops on property maintenance code updates (This is Reno 5/23/26)

Thursday, May 28 at 6:00pm: REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

The Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency’s (TMRPA) Regional Planning Commission meets on Thursday evening. You can find links to all the meeting materials here and find the agenda and full meeting packet here.

The meeting will include three public hearings of note. The projects under items 7.A and 7.B were reviewed and approved at the April 23rd meeting but are being reopened for additional public comment due to a noticing error. The staff recommendations are unchanged and they recommend that the commission affirm their April 23rd recommendations to the Regional Planning Governing Board:

• 7.A. - 1200 Golf Club Drive (continued from April 23)

• 7.B. - 500 Highland Ranch Parkway (continued from April 23)

The big-ticket item here is a regional plan conformance review for Sierra Reflections:

• 7.D. - Regional Plan Conformance Review (Project of Regional Significance) for Sierra Reflections

This proposal was unanimously denied by the Washoe County Planning Commission on January 6th but their denial was overturned by a 3-2 vote of the Washoe Board of County Commissioners on March 10th. It is now being submitted to the Regional Planning Commission for a determination of conformance with the Regional Plan.

Read more about this project and those prior decisions below.

• Washoe commissioners approve controversial Sierra Reflections subdivision in South Valleys (News 4 Reno 3/10/26)

• County commissioners reverse denial of Sierra Reflections tentative map following hours of public opposition (This is Reno 3/11/26)

You can watch and participate virtually or in person. More details here.

PREVIEW: FUTURE CITY OF RENO MEETINGS

Final agendas have not yet been posted for the City of Reno meetings to be held on June 1st and June 3rd, but we already have a pretty good idea what will be on them, and it’s smart to plan ahead if you want to participate. So here’s the rundown.

Monday, June 1 at 10am: Special Reno City Council meeting on DATA CENTERS

On May 16th, the Reno City Council approved a temporary 30-day moratorium on accepting any applications for conditional use permits for new data centers. On June 1st, they will bring forward a FINAL moratorium resolution for possible adoption. That pause could be significantly longer than 30 days, if desired by a Council majority.

The agenda, supporting materials, and Zoom link will be added at least three business days prior to the meeting at Reno.Gov/Meetings.

For more info on the temporary moratorium adopted on May 16th, click here.

And here’s some relevant news coverage and other info:

• Voters are fired up over data centers. Do Nevada candidates care? (Nevada Independent 5/20/26) From the races for governor to a rural county commission seat, candidates are wrestling with the economic and environmental effects of the divisive industry.

• Humboldt County Advances Temporary Data Center Moratorium to Public Hearing - reported by Truckee Meadows Data Center Consortium 5/18/26. Click the link and scroll down to view a link to the Humboldt County Board of Commission’s discussion, the Staff Report, Draft Ordinance, and more.

• A kind reader sent me this example of how the City of Aurora, Illinois is going about formulating its data center ordinance, and I highly recommend you take a look: Proposed Changes to Data Center Requirements: Aurora, Illinois. They established a 180-day temporary moratorium to allow for research & public input.

DRAFT AGENDAS for Wednesday, June 3rd Reno City Council and Reno Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board meetings

I love that we can see draft agendas for Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board meetings several weeks in advance. Of course, they can (and often do) change, but the sneak peek gives residents a bit more time to learn and prepare.

That said, here’s the Draft Agenda for the June 3, 2026 Reno City Council & RDA Board meetings.

Almost certain to remain on this agenda is a second reading and possible adoption of the live entertainment temporary exemption ordinance that was voted through in its first reading last week. Here’s some media coverage of that:

• Reno council advances live entertainment ordinance amid noise and enforcement concerns (This is Reno 5/22/26)

• Reno may drop $5K permit for late-night indoor music (RGJ 5/21/26)

Go ahead and read through the rest of that draft agenda for other items of interest.

RTC UNIVERSITY GATEWAY PROJECT: Take a Survey and Submit Comments

This past week, RTC Washoe announced a proposed redesign for Evans Avenue that would create a landscaped pedestrian and bicycle passage over Interstate 80. You can read more on the RTC’s University Gateway Transportation Project webpage, where you’ll find links to a community survey and a public comment submission.

• Public learns more about University Gateway Transportation Project during meeting (2 News Nevada 5/21/26) Officials say this project is estimated to cost between $60 to $90 million. They said they will be looking for local, state, and federal funding, and depending on that, the construction window will be from 2029 to 2030.

NEWS DIGEST: The latest in local development

Updates from the May 20, 2026 Reno City Council & RDA Board meetings

Here are the City’s official May 20, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights and more local coverage:

• Reno council confirms Corey Solferino as police chief (This is Reno 5/20/26)

• Former Reno Police building on Keystone Avenue seeks buyers (RGJ 5/21/26)

• Reno launches new plan to fill vacant downtown stores (RGJ 5/21/26)

Other local development-related news

• PODCAST: Reno transit fee hikes, data center moratorium and the Reno police shake-up (This is Reno 5/24/26)

• Truckee River ready for summer as Reno construction projects wrap up (RGJ 5/22/26)

• Reno airport gets largest grant yet from $5B Biden-era program (RGJ 5/21/26) Reno-Tahoe International Airport received a third grant — $20 million for new concourses — from the Biden-era Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

• Nevada’s wildfire season is coming. Should NV Energy customers help utility fund insurance? (Nevada Independent 5/22/26)

• Commissioners approve final budget, capital improvement plan for next fiscal year (This is Reno 5/20/26)

• Washoe County commissioners weigh housing growth, infrastructure strain at strategic planning session (This is Reno 5/21/26)

JUNE 1 SCREENING - “Cycling Connections: The Making of the Biggest Little Bike Network”

A screening of the new documentary, Cycling Collections: The Making of the Biggest Little Bike Network, will take place on Monday, June 1st from 5:30-8:00 pm at Reno Public Market, 299 East Plumb Lane.

From the event organizers:

“Community members, cycling advocates, city leaders, and residents are invited to a free exclusive screening of Cycling Connections: The Making of the Biggest Little Bike Network, Part I on Monday, June 1 at 5:30 p.m. at the Reno Public Market. Created by University of Nevada, Reno filmmaker Richard Bednarski, the new multi-part documentary series explores the long and often difficult journey toward building a safer, more connected bicycle network throughout Reno. The film honors the advocates, public officials, planners, and community members who helped transform years of stalled projects and failed bike lane efforts into what is now the city’s most ambitious active transportation initiative to date.”

Have a good week, everyone.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

Do you still have questions about our local primaries? Not sure who the candidates are, and what distinguishes them from each other? If so, I have good news! I have just published my new Guide to the 2026 Primary Elections for the City of Reno.

Access it by clicking on the image below below and directly on my Substack website at https://thebarberbrief.substack.com/p/2026-city-of-reno-primary-election.

It’s your one-stop shop for the primaries, with links to the following resources:

• Reno candidate websites

• Election/Voter Guides compiled by our local media outlets

• State of Nevada official campaign contribution reports

• Recent local election coverage

• Upcoming candidate forums & more!

Please educate yourself about our local elections and then make a plan to VOTE!

PREVIEW: City of Reno meetings for the week of May 18th

You can view dates and information for all of this week’s City of Reno public meetings on the City’s Current & Upcoming Meetings page. They include Reno City Council and the Redevelopment Agency Board (previewed below), the Reno Planning Commission, the Wards 2 & 4 Neighborhood Advisory Boards, the Reno City Charter Committee, and more.

The Reno City Council, acting in their capacity both as the City Council and as the Reno Redevelopment Agency Board, will (among other things) finalize next year’s budgets for both the City of Reno and the Redevelopment Agency on May 20th.

Here’s a preview of their meetings from This is Reno: Reno council to consider police chief confirmation, $266M water project and live entertainment ordinance (5/16/26)

Reno City Council

Here’s the May 20th Reno City Council Agenda. The City of Reno budget will be discussed under Item D.2 (Staff Report here and FY27 Final State Document here)

Other highlights on the City Council agenda include the following:

• C.1 - Potential Confirmation of Corey Solferino as the Chief of Police

• C.3 - Appraisal and potential direction for disposal of City-owned parcel at 264 Keystone Avenue

• D.5 - Live Entertainment Temporary Exception Ordinance Introduction

• G.4 - Appointment of one Reno Planning Commissioner for a partial (approximately one year) term to replace resigning commissioner Kerry Rohrmeier

Reno Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board

Here’s the May 20th Reno Redevelopment Agency Board Agenda. On the RDA side, the budget adoption for Redevelopment Area 1 is Item C.1 and Redevelopment Area 2 is Item C.2. Links to the Staff Reports and documents are available on the agenda.

Other items on the RDA Board agenda include the following:

• B.1 - Discussion, direction, and possible selection of a preferred strategy for the Vacant Storefront Activation Program within Redevelopment Area #1.

• B.2 - Presentation and Acceptance of the Redevelopment Agency’s FY 2026 (Q3) Quarterly Update on Key Initiatives.

RELATED: Redevelopment Agency launches security grants, board approves $2 million for Lear stabilization (This is Reno 5/12/26)

UPDATE: Reno City Council Adopts a Temporary Data Center Moratorium

Public comment for the Reno City Council’s consideration of a moratorium on data centers on May 14th lasted more than six hours, extending into the late afternoon. The ensuing City Council deliberations lasted another two hours or so, beginning here, if you’d like to view for yourself precisely what each individual said.

Ultimately they voted 6-1 (with Councilmember Kathleen Taylor voting no) to pass a temporary moratorium prohibiting new data center applications. They’ll decide in another special meeting on June 1st whether to continue that moratorium and if so, for how long.

Meanwhile, the process to research and potentially adopt a text amendment that would regulate data centers is proceeding slowly. You can find a brief description of that process on the City of Reno’s Initiatives and Updates webpage.

As you can read there:

“On April 22, 2026, City Council initiated a text amendment to Title 18 (Annexation and Land Development Code) related to data center regulations. City staff will be working with the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (TMRPA) to engage the public and stakeholders. City of Reno staff and TMRPA staff have been, and will continue to research best practices and engage with the community throughout this process.

TMRPA will be taking the lead on conducting a variety of engagement opportunities for key stakeholders and the public. This information will be used by TMRPA staff to create a recommendations report based on their findings and feedback. It is anticipated that this report will be used by Reno to then draft proposed amendments to data center regulations.”

That process has now begun. This past week, the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (TMRPA) launched its Data Center Engagement Effort webpage, where you can find the following description of the TMRPA’s role and goals:

“The Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency has launched a Data Center Engagement effort to better understand the opportunities, impacts, and community perspectives surrounding data center development in the region. This page serves as a centralized hub for transparent access to the process, including background information, timelines, and ongoing updates. Throughout the engagement, TMRPA will gather input from stakeholders, partner organizations, and the public through surveys, interviews, and community conversations. The insights collected will inform a final set of recommendations for rules and regulations to address decision-making for data centers seeking to locate in our region.”

On that webpage, you’ll find a timeline (May through August 2026), a list of stakeholders (including the City of Reno), a mailing list sign-up form, and a survey.

Related data center coverage

The proceedings and associated issues have garnered extensive media coverage, including the following:

• Reno hit pause on approving data centers. Now what happens? (Nevada Independent 5/15/26) It’s the biggest step a Nevada government has taken in response to growing data center opposition. But there’s disagreement over what should happen next.

• Reno council passes temporary data center moratorium as citizens push for permanent ban (This is Reno 5/15/26)

• Reno City Council adopts pending moratorium on new data centers (News4 5/15/26)

• Temporary pause put on new data centers in Reno. Now what? (RGJ 5/15/26)

• Data centers in spotlight as Lake Tahoe scrambles for power source (RGJ 5/15/26) Data centers being blamed as 49,000 Lake Tahoe residents face uncertainty over their power supply. But the actual circumstances are more complicated.

This Tuesday, May 19: Youth + Community-Focused Reno Mayoral Candidate Forum

A Reno Mayoral Candidate Forum sponsored by the Radical Cat, Holland Project, and KWNK 97.7 FM and moderated by Vanessa Vancour will be held at Reno Little Theater at 147 East Pueblo Street this coming Tuesday, May 19th at 6:30pm. RSVP encouraged to receive a questionnaire about your questions & priority issues.

NEWS DIGEST: Recent local development-related stories

Reno

• Washoe County schools break ground on $58M new Echo Loder Elementary in Reno (News4 5/15/26)

• EDITORIAL: Optics-based messaging and decision-making (Bob Conrad, This is Reno 5/17/26)

Recent Media Coverage of Reno Political Candidates

• What Reno mayor candidates say about police transparency, firings (RGJ 5/15/26)

• Reno mayoral candidates participate in forum (2 News Nevada 5/13/26) This story contains a link to the entire May 13th Reno Mayoral Forum.

Washoe County & Sparks

• Washoe County advances code changes aimed at smaller, more affordable homes (This is Reno 5/14/26)

• Washoe County to clean up Sun Valley nuisance properties, remove squatters (This is Reno 5/15/26)

• Homelessness advisory board weighs new members with lived-experience (This is Reno 5/13/26)

• Tensions fly at community meeting over 764-home plan at Red Hawk Golf Course (News4 5/14/26)

That’s all for today. Have a good week, everyone, and don’t forget to make a plan to VOTE!

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

Here’s a preview of the May 14th Reno City Council meeting from This is Reno:

• Reno City Council to consider data center permit moratorium (This is Reno 5/10/26)

There’s only one action item on the agenda:

Here are the documents being provided for your advance perusal:

• Meeting Agenda

• Staff Report for Item B.1

• Draft Data Center Moratorium Resolution

The Staff Report is short. Here’s the crux of it:

As described in Reno Municipal Code (RMC) 1.07.10, Council may declare a temporary moratorium on the acceptance, processing and approval of certain land use and/or business license applications. The moratorium procedure is a two-stage process, which requires the adoption of a pending moratorium resolution, followed by a final moratorium resolution at a subsequent meeting.

A pending moratorium resolution is attached for discussion and consideration. Council may adopt, modify, or deny the pending moratorium resolution. If adopted, the pending resolution will be in place for 30 calendar days, or the day after Council formally considers the adoption of the final moratorium resolution.

If you’d like to participate in this meeting, here are the details:

• Attend the meeting on Thursday, May 14th, 10am, Reno City Hall

• Participate via Zoom by registering at https://links.reno.gov/Council05-14

• You can also watch on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/@cityofreno/streams

• Contribute public comment either live in Council Chambers or via Zoom. To provide comment in advance, submit the online public comment form at Reno.Gov/PublicComment or send an email to Publiccomment@reno.gov (I always recommend copying your emailed comment to the individual Councilmembers’ email addresses, which you can find here). You can comment in the initial Public Comment period (A.3) or under the specific item (B.1).

DATA CENTERS: How did we get here?

You may recall that the Reno Planning Commission voted to recommend that City Council impose a moratorium on data centers back in February of 2025. That recommendation came close on the heels of their January 15, 2025 meeting when two data center permit applications appeared before them, as I reported at the time. Those were the Oppidan Data Center on N. Virginia Street and Stead Boulevard and the Keystone Data Center at Keystone Avenue & West 4th Street. Both projects required Conditional Use Permits from the Planning Commission (and both were ultimately approved).

The City’s review process for data centers was discussed at length by Reno City Council in their January 8, 2025 meeting (click here to view it) when they asked staff to explain the recent change that had separated out data centers as a different category of use from warehouses and imposed the requirement that they receive a Conditional Use Permit. As I reported back then, Councilmember Naomi Duerr asked what the process would be for imposing a temporary moratorium on data centers:

City Manager Jackie Bryant indicated that the idea of implementing a moratorium on data centers would need to be brought back on another agenda but she understood the Council direction for staff to initiate a text amendment specifically related to data centers and would be “bringing back something” at a future date

And then what happened?

On January 22, 2025, the Reno City Council upheld the Reno Planning Commission’s decision to grant a Conditional Use Permit for the Webb Data Center in the North Valleys. During that appeal hearing, they had another extensive discussion of data centers. Here’s a detailed report on that:

• City Council denies North Valleys data center appeal after multiple messy meetings (This is Reno 1/28/25)

The Reno Planning Commission then voted 4-2 on February 5, 2025 to recommend that City Council impose a temporary moratorium on data centers.

That recommendation came in front of the Reno City Council on February 26, 2025, when, as I reported, City Council stalemated on the idea, with Councilmembers Naomi Duerr, Meghan Ebert, and Miguel Martinez voting in favor of initiating a text amendment to add new regulations for data centers and Councilmembers Kathleen Taylor and Brandi Anderson and Mayor Hillary Schieve voting against the idea. Councilmember Devon Reese was absent.

As I wrote back then:

At the end of the item, Mayor Schieve, who voted against initiating a text amendment, said, “We’ll bring it back to a future agenda so we can maybe get there.”

Click on my March 2, 2025 Brief for links to all the media coverage of that stalemate.

What else do you need to know, to get up to speed?

Manny Becerra, one of the Reno Planning Commissioners who spearheaded the recommendation for a moratorium on data centers more than a year ago and is among the co-founders of the Truckee Meadows Data Center Policy Consortium, has just published an overview of those events, what’s been happening since, and other related information that I highly encourage everyone to read before Thursday:

Manny Becerra

Closing the Loop: A Statement on the Truckee Meadows' Emerging High-Energy Land Use Gap

The Truckee Meadows is changing, as is the course of life. Some of that change is arriving faster than our policies, our infrastructure, and our public processes were written, built, and implemented to handle. Data centers are among the clearest examples. Over…

Read more

4 months ago · 5 likes · Manny Becerra

Also check out the website of the Truckee Meadows Data Center Policy Consortium for more helpful links and information.

SPOTLIGHT: Washoe County School Buildings

I don’t generally write about Washoe County School Board meetings, but there’s been a recent flurry of coverage pertaining to the School District’s plans for schools including Wooster High, its overall building plan, and use of WC-1 funds for expenses other than capital projects, including this recent coverage in the Reno Gazette-Journal:

• Once in line for a new building, Wooster’s future now uncertain (RGJ 5/8/26)

• Oversight committee says WCSD should not use tax money for textbooks (RGJ 5/8/26)

• Wooster High Student Body President on the future of his school (RGJ 5/8/26)

Items related to Wooster High School, the Administrative Facilities Master Plan and the 10-year Capital Improvement Plan were all scheduled to be discussed at the Tuesday, May 12th meeting of the Washoe County School District Board of Trustees, but when you visit the meetings calendar page and click on the May 12th calendar item, a notice now pops up stating that those particular items will NOT be considered at this meeting, and will be on a properly noticed meeting at a future date.

Here’s that announcement:

The Washoe County School District (WCSD) wishes to inform the community that Agenda Items 3.03 and 3.04 on the May 12, 2026 Board of Trustees Regular Meeting Agenda will not be heard at the May 12, 2026 Board meeting. These items are being removed from consideration and will be brought back to the WCSD Board of Trustees at a future meeting on a properly noticed agenda, in accordance with Nevada’s Open Meeting Law.

The affected agenda items are summarized as follows:

Item 3.03 – Presentation, discussion, and possible action related to the Administrative Facilities Master Plan

Item 3.04 – Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Revised 10‑Year Capital Improvement Plan (Fiscal Years 2027–2036)

The School Board will still be meeting on May 12th, however, so consult that agenda for full info on how to view and participate, if you like.

Recent Reno City Council & other meeting updates

For the City of Reno’s official recap of their May 6 meeting, consult the City of Reno’s May 6, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights.

The City of Reno’s latest “On the Agenda” podcast also covered some of those meeting items, focusing on the Redevelopment Agency’s (RDA) budget.

More coverage from local media of last week’s public meetings:

• Reno council approves key budget changes amid police spending criticism (This is Reno 5/7/26)

• Parks district idea gains support but faces complex path forward (This is Reno 5/8/26)

• Reno tests cutting red tape for live entertainment downtown, Midtown (RGJ 5/8/26)

This is Reno’s recent podcast provides analysis of the past week’s City Council meeting and related events, and includes video clips from the May 6th Council meeting, community protests, and more. Their editorial below follows up on that.

• PODCAST: Police training scandal, housing crisis, heat mitigation and city hall tensions (This is Reno 5/8/26)

• EDITORIAL: How much madder do Reno residents have to get? (Bob Conrad & Kristen Hackbarth, This is Reno 5/10/26)

The Latest on the Lear Theater—and it’s good news!

I’m not going to devote a lot of space to the Lear Theater today, but Bob and Kristen of This is Reno talk about it a bit in their podcast, from about the 29:00 to 39:00 mark.

The WONDERFUL news is that in their capacity as the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Board, Reno City Council approved allocating $2 million toward the Lear in their May 6th RDA budget discussion. The wording of Councilmember Reese’s motion was to “direct staff to prepare the 2027 budget as amended with the following funding allocations,” for which he included adding $2M to the Lear for “interior stabilization, exterior blight remediation, including fencing, irrigation, landscaping, electrical, concrete steps & railings, and a feasibility study for future uses.”

The motion was seconded by Naomi Duerr and the Council vote was unanimous in passing it (Councilmember Kathleen Taylor was not in attendance). It was a long discussion and there’s a lot more to it, but as you will recall, this allocation was top of the list of recommendations from the Historical Resources Commission, so this vote is extremely welcome news and worth a big HOORAY and THANK YOU!

So what happens next? Well, the City of Reno and Redevelopment Agency budgets are scheduled to be adopted and finalized on May 20th (you can view those tentative meeting agendas here). Once that $2 million allocation is final, then the City can make all the required preparations to move that stabilization and security work forward, along with commissioning a feasibility study, to get it all underway on July 1st.

Of course, this now must all be coordinated with the RDA Board’s April 8th vote to issue a Request for Proposals for the Lear, something that came up last week when City staff sent a memo to City Council with a proposed timeline for that RFP.

• Lear Theater request for proposals timeline criticized for lacking public input (updated) (This is Reno 5/6/26)

In their May 5th memo to Council, City staff proposed issuing that RFP by June 1st, but it seems quite clear, especially after the May 6th budget vote, that issuing an RFP can’t possibly happen that soon, for a couple of reasons.

First of all, as I stated for This is Reno, any Request for Proposals (or Concepts, or Information) for the Lear absolutely needs to be discussed and reviewed by the Historical Resources Commission first, since it’s on the City’s historic register. Secondly, we need to have some logistical discussions about proper sequencing. Since the budget allocation includes funding a feasibility study, too, there’s no point in issuing an RFP until we have the results of that study. Its goals—as the HRC discussed—are to help better define what uses, management & ownership arrangements, etc. would not only meet the property’s requirements but also community needs & more.

This is all highly doable, and I have no doubt we can untangle all of it very quickly to ensure that a future RFP will directly proceed from what that study concludes, and that any work conducted with redevelopment funds will be critical work that would be appropriate regardless of any future allowable use of the building. It’s security and stabilization work, after all, not renovations to facilitate a specific use or function.

Upcoming Reno Mayoral Candidate Forums

Be sure to take advantage of opportunities to hear directly from Reno’s Mayoral candidates and ask them questions. Here are two happening this week and next.

Reno Mayoral Candidate Forum 2026 - Wednesday, May 13th

A Mayoral Candidate Forum will take place this Wednesday, May 13th at 5:30pm at the Wilbur D. May Museum in Rancho San Rafael Regional Park, sponsored by the Reno Gazette-Journal, KUNR, and the League of Women Voters and moderated by Bert Johnson of KUNR. You know you have questions you want to ask them, so show up and ask them! More info here.

Youth + Community-Focused Reno Mayoral Candidate Forum - Tuesday, May 19th

A Mayoral Candidate Forum sponsored by the Radical Cat, Holland Project, and KWNK 97.7 FM and moderated by Vanessa Vancour will be held at Reno Little Theater next Tuesday, May 19th at 6:30pm. The hosts describe it this way:

Join us to learn more about Reno’s mayoral race and where the candidates stand on issues important to YOU! Moderated discussion, Q&A, meet and greet. Free for community members of all ages to join at Reno Little Theater, located at 147 E. Pueblo Street in Reno, Nevada. RSVP encouraged to receive a questionnaire about your questions and priority issues.

That’s it for today. Have a good week.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

First off, an update about tonight’s Ward 3 NAB meeting agenda:

I wrote on Sunday that The Boulevard pro soccer/casino/entertainment project was scheduled to be formally presented for the first time at the Ward 3 NAB meeting this evening (Tuesday, May 5th). According to the meeting agenda, the two items related to The Boulevard have been now been POSTPONED.

Reno City Councilmember Miguel Martinez says he supports preserving the Lear. His actions say otherwise.

Speaking of Ward 3, This is Reno just published an opinion piece about the Lear from Ward 3 Reno City Councilmember Miguel Martinez that I couldn’t quite believe I was reading. It seems timed and intended to defend his April 8th vote to issue an RFP for the Lear Theater, but instead only sows more confusion and misinformation.

Read it for yourself. As you might expect, I have some thoughts.

• OPINION: Reno’s identity, history, and the future of the Lear Theater (This is Reno 5/4/26)

After writing about the importance of Reno’s historic architecture in general, and claiming that the Lear was “transformed into a theater” (it was not), he writes this:

“Two weeks ago, there was confusion after the Reno City Council (RCC) vote. The body decided not to demolish the Lear, but to go out to the community to seek a Request For Proposals to identify a viable partner that will work collaboratively to reactivate it.”

What on earth is Councilmember Martinez talking about? Demolishing the Lear wasn’t even remotely a topic of discussion on April 8th, or ever. I haven’t heard anyone reporting that City Council voted to demolish the Lear, if that’s what he’s suggesting. And writing that Council “decided not to” demolish it implies that its demolition was proposed and that City Council decided against it. If he’s trying to clear up any confusion about what happened, this does just the opposite.

Secondly, his motion to issue an RFP made no mention of identifying a “viable partner that will work collaboratively to reactivate” the Lear. That sounds like he wanted to issue an RFP to enter into a public-private partnership. That would be better than what he said, but it’s not what he said. He also did not vote to “go out to the community to seek a Request for Proposals.” He, along with Councilmembers Brandi Anderson, Meghan Ebert, and Kathleen Taylor, directed staff to issue one.

Next, he writes this:

“I am a proud supporter of the preservation and activation of the Lear Theatre. Through the decision, RCC is supporting the process of moving the space towards its restored glory. While we all wish to see the Lear restored, the estimated $17 to $24 million cost simply exceeds our current fiscal capacity as a city and through the Redevelopment Agency.”

NOT THIS AGAIN! The fact that Martinez and Councilmembers Anderson, Ebert, and Taylor all continue to spout some version of this straw man argument in an attempt to tout their own fiscal responsibility is seriously making my head explode.

Let me be crystal clear:

NO ONE is asking the City of Reno to fund the restoration of the Lear. No one is asking the City to spend $24 million on it. Or $17 million. Or even $2 million. So stop using that false claim as an excuse to hand the property off to someone else.

I genuinely do not know how much clearer we can be about this: We know that the City of Reno can’t afford to completely restore the Lear. We are not asking it to.

The SOLE City expenditure recommended by the Historical Resources Commission for the Lear is an estimated $1 million to $1.7 million (depending on which recommendations City Council follows), to be allocated from the Redevelopment Agency’s revenues, which can only be used to address blight in the redevelopment areas, to fund the building’s basic stabilization and security, and possibly a feasibility study to evaluate options for its use and management. That’s it. Are we clear now?

Councilmember Martinez goes on to write this:

“We know that nonprofits and philanthropists are eager to step up. Our aim is to preserve the Lear’s spirit by ensuring it finds new stewards who can honor its legacy.”

What nonprofits is he talking about here? Because the local nonprofits that have been stepping up for the Lear for years including the Reno-Sparks NAACP, Our Story, Inc., the Black Community Collective, the Historic Reno Preservation Society, and Preserve Nevada are, across the board, asking the City to HOLD THE BUILDING IN TRUST so they can work with it—and with each other—on a viable plan for it.

They are not asking the City to issue an RFP for the Lear. They—along with Mayor Schieve and Councilmembers Naomi Duerr and Devon Reese—are asking City Council to approve funding the necessary repairs to buy the building more time. And yes, these nonprofits want to continue to step up to help generate community support and funding for the Lear, which is why they asked the City to establish a committee and a fund to receive money. That is not at all the same as saying that they are ready and waiting to submit a proposal to preserve the property themselves.

They stood directly in front of you on April 8th and told you all of this, Councilmember Martinez. Were you even listening?

An RFP privileges developers with money on hand, not local nonprofits and individuals who have pledged to contribute their time and expertise to collaborative efforts to put together a realistic preservation plan for a building that is of incredible significance to us.

The fact that collaborative planning takes time is precisely why we have all asked the City of Reno to remain the building’s sole steward for a short period longer while a focused committee works together to assemble a plan for it that will actually work. That may involve issuing a Request for Proposals at a later date, but doing that now would be skipping the critical steps required to ensure it will be successful.

The only way to responsibly issue an RFP for the Lear would be to directly involve the community in the writing of it, to hold meetings with community members, interested nonprofits and other stakeholders, under the auspices of the Historical Resources Commission (HRC), to help determine what it would even say—in other words, to form the exact type of committee that the HRC recommended be formed, and let them hold inclusive public discussions about it. Otherwise we won’t even know who’s writing this RFP or what it would be seeking proposals to do, because City Council gave staff no direction whatsoever about that.

Martinez continues:

“Our aim is to preserve the Lear’s spirit by ensuring it finds new stewards who can honor its legacy. In doing so, we ensure the past is not lost, but evolves into a future that respects both heritage and fiscal responsibility.”

Respectfully, Councilmember Martinez, that may be your aim, but shirking the City’s obligation to the Lear at this critical moment is neither respectful nor responsible.

Delaying critical repairs that are already long overdue, thereby threatening to precipitate the further deterioration or even the loss of the building, is not responsible.

Misleading the public about how much the City of Reno would be obligated to pay toward the Lear simply by retaining ownership of it is not responsible.

Ignoring the recommendations of the board whose role is to advise you on issues about which City Council has no experience or expertise is not responsible.

Issuing an RFP with the assurance that some mystery philanthropist or nonprofit with buckets of money will magically appear out of thin air is not responsible.

What WOULD actually be responsible is for the Reno City Council to vote on May 6th to allocate some redevelopment funds (which are continually being replenished and do not require a massive reserve) to perform some basic stabilization and security measures that this building so desperately requires, and delay issuing an RFP until we have TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY decided what type of proposals the community even wants to solicit for this building, a cultural and architectural treasure that belongs not to the members of the Reno City Council, but to we the people.

Want to chat with Councilmember Martinez about this? Attend the Ward 3 NAB meeting tonight or email him at martinezmi@reno.gov.

PREVIEW: May 6, 2026 Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency Board meetings

I previewed some of the items on these agendas in my May 3rd Brief, but now This is Reno has published their own preview of the May 6, 2026 Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency Board meetings, so be sure to give it a read:

• Reno City Council to consider fee hikes, sewer rate increase adoption, annexation and road fee update (This is Reno 5/4/26)

RENO’S LOCAL ELECTIONS

The Nevada Independent recently ran a story on how Reno’s top mayoral candidates propose to address the City of Reno’s budget woes. Since two of those candidates are currently sitting on the Reno City Council and they’ll be talking about the budget in their May 6th meeting, it seems like a good idea to read this article first:

• ELECTION PREVIEW: Reno’s budget is in trouble. Here’s how top mayoral candidates say they’ll fix it. (Nevada Independent 4/30/26)

This opinion piece about some local and state races is worth your time, as well:

• OPINION: We elected you to represent us, not climb a career ladder (Jason Guinasso, Nevada Independent 5/4/26)

DATA CENTERS

Here are more stories and opinion pieces on this important local and national issue:

• Why a Northern Nevada data center wants to build its own temporary natural gas power plant (Nevada Independent 4/29/26) With NV Energy unable to service the center for at least two years, the developer wants to go “behind-the-meter,” raising concerns from environmentalists.

• Have data center tax breaks helped Nevada’s economy? Here’s what we found. (Nevada Independent 3/29/26) They bring a lot of construction, but few permanent jobs. There’s disagreement — and limited information — over whether the output is worth the incentives.

• OPINION: Data centers will not destroy Reno (David Colborne, Nevada Independent, 5/6/26) Data centers? Within city limits? If you live in Reno, they’re less likely than you might think.

BUILDING A SHARED VISION FOR DOWNTOWN RENO

Warren Lerude is an absolute treasure, and his new op/ed about downtown Reno states what I have been saying for years: creating a vision for downtown Reno needs to start by building on the culture and spaces that already draw people there:

• OPINION: A new hometown for downtown Reno (Warren Lerude, RGJ 4/29/26)

And it needs to start with us, not with study after study after study. As he writes:

“It is time now time for creation of a daring and imaginative task force of citizens, including politicians, hotels and casinos, banking, real estate and general business executives, professionals and educators, service clubs organizations and churches as well as, importantly, representatives of the city’s youth, to define the vision and create a new here here.”

Who is championing the community-based vision that we deserve?

THE RENO POLICE DEPARTMENT

• ‘Bizarre’ training records tied to Reno police leadership under scrutiny (This is Reno 5/1/26)

• EDITORIAL: Police training in Nevada is a big mess (This is Reno 5/3/26)

SPOTLIGHT: WASHOE COUNTY GOVERNMENT

• Washoe County seeks input on heat mitigation plan as temperatures rise (This is Reno 5/2/26)

• Washoe County 2026 homeless count shows increase in homelessness again (This is Reno 5/5/26)

• Washoe County shifts focus to prevention as costs rise, deficit looms (This is Reno 4/23/26)

• EDITORIAL: County officials condemn leak of report on homeless services mismanagement while being mum on problems found (Bob Conrad and Kristen Hackbarth, This is Reno 4/26/26)

Plus, here’s a thoughtful piece considering the consolidation of fire services and more.

• INDY ENVIRONMENT: Is one fire service better than many? The feds think so, but what about Nevadans? (Nevada Independent 4/30/26)

RENO DEVELOPMENT NEWS

• What large development is being built off Mount Rose Highway in south Reno? (RGJ 5/1/26)

That’s it for today—have a good week, everyone.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

Be sure to check out the City’s meetings webpage for all of this week’s public meetings, which include the Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board, the Reno City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board, the Planning Commission, and more.

I’ll preview some items on a few of these agendas, and then get to some important upcoming meetings and forums on data centers and Reno’s mayoral election.

The Redevelopment Agency Advisory Board (RAAB) will discuss its role, the RED retail buildout, ideas to activate vacant storefronts & more on Monday, May 4.

Meeting at 11am on Monday, May 4th is the RAAB, the citizen advisory board to the Redevelopment Agency Board (agenda here). Under Item B.2 (Staff Report here), they’ll be reviewing how other cities’ redevelopment agencies involve advisory boards, if at all (here’s the comparison table provided). Topics planned for discussion include:

• The current structure and composition of the RAAB

• The scope of advisory authority and responsibilities

• Opportunities for expanded or refined roles, including potential authority related to review, spending, or hiring

• The level of independence of the RAAB relative to the Agency Board

• The overall relationship between the RAAB and the Agency Board, including communication and decision-making processes

It sounds to me like the RAAB (which is comprised of mayoral appointees) is seeking greater autonomy to make decisions about redevelopment, such as reviewing applications for redevelopment financing, staffing, spending, and more (at this point, all such authority resides in the Redevelopment Agency Board, which consists of the Mayor and City Council).

Under Item B.3 (Staff Report here) the RAAB will be discussing a request from Lyon Living for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) for their RED Retail Buildout Project, even though an analysis concluded that the project “does not demonstrate a financial gap and appears capable of achieving market-level returns without public assistance.” In other words, it did not pass the “but for” test (meaning a project could not be built “but for” redevelopment financing). Staff is recommending denial.

Item B.5 (Staff Report here) is a discussion with possible recommendations regarding a new Vacant Storefront Activation Program that would focus on the downtown stretch of Virginia Street. The presentation (view slides here) includes examples from Seattle, Dallas, San Francisco, and Grand Rapids.

Don’t neglect this committee if you’re interested in decisions about redevelopment.

“The Boulevard Reno” pro soccer/gaming/entertainment project heads to the Ward 3 NAB on Tuesday, May 5.

Residents can hear the first formal presentation of “The Boulevard Reno” project when it heads to the Ward 3 Neighborhood Advisory Board at Reno City Hall on Tuesday, May 5th at 5:30pm (agenda here).

As I reported last week, this 28-acre project hopes to combine a professional soccer stadium with a mixed-use entertainment project including a hotel and casino.

They’ve submitted their permit applications, and here’s what they want from the City:

1. Master Plan and Zoning Map Amendments to allow the Convention Center area Gaming Overlay to be expanded to include their 28-acre site on the east side of Kietzke Lane, just north of East Peckham Lane (the Atlantis is just to the west).

2. A Conditional Use Permit to allow for a soccer stadium with public plaza; a hotel with nonrestricted gaming; and nonresidential development within 300 feet of residentially zoned property.

This project is tentatively scheduled to be considered by the Reno Planning Commission on June 17th. This also qualifies as a Project of Regional Significance, which makes it subject to review by the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency.

The Reno City Council will have a detailed BUDGET DISCUSSION on Wednesday, May 6.

There’s a lot on Wednesday’s City Council agenda (view here), but residents may be especially interested in Item C.1 (Staff Report here), a budget discussion and possible direction. This follows their March 4th budget workshop and includes the following:

• Proposed Fee Schedule

• Proposed Department Summaries (this is a detailed list of all City staff positions)

• Proposed Capital Improvement Plan

There are also a bunch of ordinances lined up for adoption, involving the Trego Grid Annexation, Ridge Park, Clear Acre Commons, and sewer rates.

I want to just take a moment to draw your attention to that Trego Grid annexation, which would annex land into the City of Reno for a 200-megawatt lithium-ion battery energy storage system to be located on about 25 acres off South Meadows Parkway, just east of the Talus Valley housing development. City Council’s first reading of the annexation ordinance was covered by an RGJ article that provides more details:

• South Reno battery storage project advances at Reno council (RGJ 4/24/26)

As reported in that article:

The project’s use as a battery facility or a “major utility” was previously approved by the planning commission in March. With the planning commission’s approval, the developer already has the conditional use-permit to use the land for a battery energy storage facility.

Mayor Schieve and Councilmember Ebert expressed concerns about the project during the first reading but only the mayor voted against annexation, which requires a second reading this week in order to be approved and adopted.

To comment on any item on the Council agenda, attend the meeting in person or via Zoom (register here) or submit comments in advance at Publiccomment@reno.gov (I always cc: the Mayor and Councilmembers) or submit via Reno.Gov/PublicComment.

Reno’s Redevelopment Agency Board (City Council) will discuss the RDA BUDGET on Wednesday, May 6.

Like City Council, the Redevelopment Agency Board (which is also City Council) will be discussing the coming year’s budget on Wednesday (agenda here). You can access a bunch of reports and presentations under Item B.1 (primary Staff Report here).

If you’re interested in what programs the Redevelopment Agency staff are recommending to fund, there’s information galore here, related to recommended capital improvement projects (there are scored lists for RDA1 and RDA2); a proposed District Activation Pilot Program to activate vacant and underused spaces beyond downtown through temporary programming; a proposed ReSecure Pilot program focused on “Crime Prevention through Environmental Design,” or CPTED; a “Small Walls” facade art and mural program; and those Vacant Storefront Activation ideas being discussed by the RAAB on Monday.

They could also fund securing and stabilizing the Lear Theater, of course, and I dearly hope they will. It’s the right thing to do.

If you want to weigh in on the Redevelopment Agency Board budget, you can attend the meeting in person or via Zoom (see above) and refer to Item B.1. Or, as I mentioned above, send your comments in advance and make sure you clarify that they’re intended for the Redevelopment Agency Board.

The Live Entertainment Ordinance heads to the Reno Planning Commission on Thursday, May 7.

The big ticket item on Thursday’s Reno Planning Commission agenda (view here) is Item C.2, which would establish a “temporary pilot program related to live entertainment uses” in several areas in central Reno. As the Staff Report explains:

“ The proposed amendment would remove the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for new businesses seeking to operate indoor live entertainment after 11 p.m. This temporary exception would apply only within the defined entertainment core, including specific areas in Downtown, Midtown, and the East 4th Street corridor. Participating businesses will be required to meet additional safety standards, including preparation and implementation of an approved security plan. The pilot program will run for approximately 18 months. During this period, staff will monitor operational impacts, ensure compliance with the program standards, and report findings back to City Council. The results will help determine whether permanent zoning code changes should be considered.”

There’s more background, discussion, and analysis in the Staff Report, which states that the idea here is “to encourage additional indoor live entertainment activities within the Downtown, Midtown, and 4th Street corridors.”

Attachments include the Draft Ordinance, a map of the Permitted Temporary Live Entertainment Zoning Areas, and Public Comments already received.

If you want to add your own comments, you can attend in person or via Zoom (register here), send an email to PCPublicComment@reno.gov, or submit the online public comment form at http://www.reno.gov/PCPublicComment.

The City of Reno will hold a special meeting on DATA CENTERS on May 14.

As I reported last time, the Reno City Council voted on April 22nd to begin the process of possibly formulating new regulations related to data centers. John L. Smith wrote a commentary about that for the Nevada Independent:

• OPINION: Reno finally considers actually doing something about data centers (John L. Smith, Nevada Independent 4/26/26)

The City has now scheduled the first step in the process: a Special Meeting to be held at City Hall on May 14th. The agenda has not yet been posted, but it’s on the official calendar, so you’ll be available to find that on this page by at least May 11th.

In the meantime, the Desert Research Institute has issued a report on data centers in Nevada that you all need to check out. They’ve created a fantastic visual summary of it (with a link to the full report) here, and the Reno Gazette-Journal covered it here.

Be an informed voter!!!

Our local media are starting to issue their Election Guides and interviews, so be sure to take advantage of them! Here are a few recent features and guides:

• This is Reno’s Election Guide

• Reno Gazette-Journal: These are the 9 candidates running for Reno mayor

Do not miss the Reno Mayoral Candidate Forum on May 13th at 5:30pm at the Wilbur D. May Museum in Rancho San Rafael Regional Park, sponsored by the Reno Gazette-Journal, KUNR, and the League of Women Voters. You know you have questions you want to ask them, so show up and ask them! More info here.

What’s it like to be a local developer in Reno?

Last but certainly not least, I want to draw your attention to this fantastic interview recently conducted by Downtown Makeover’s Mike Van Houten with local developer Batuhan Zadeh of Marmot Properties. Here’s how Mike describes their conversation:

“One local developer sat down for a rare on-the-record conversation and didn't hold back — downtown development, permitting friction, regulatory overreach, global challenges affecting local development, and why so many builders stay silent even when the system is working against them. If you care about Reno's growth, local business, or just want a real look behind the curtain of development in the Biggest Little City — this one's worth your time.”

I couldn’t agree more. I was riveted. Please take a listen. You’ll be glad you did.

And it’s Truckee River Month! Check out this list of activities from One Truckee River! Have a good week, everyone.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!

Upcoming public meetings

I generally focus solely on City of Reno meetings, but often include previews of meeting agendas for other jurisdictions and agencies. Here’s what’s on tap this week and just around the bend for Reno and Washoe County:

• TUES., APRIL 28: City of Reno Building Enterprise Fund Advisory Committee

• TUES., APRIL 28: Board of the Washoe County Commission. You can view the agenda here and read a preview from This is Reno here: County commissioners to review Prado Ranch extension, zoning cases.

• TUES., APRIL 28 & THURS., APRIL 30: Virtual Meetings to discuss the City of Reno’s Upcoming Live Entertainment Regulations. Details here.

Also, if you want to look ahead to the May 6th Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency Board meetings, you can read the draft agendas here. Scheduled items for City Council at this point include the City budget and ordinance adoptions for the Trego Grid Annexation, Ridge Park, Clear Acre Commons, and a sewer user rate increase.

Reno’s Redevelopment Agency Board, also meeting on May 6th, is currently scheduled to discuss and recommend budget expenditures for Capital Improvement Projects which could still include stabilizing and securing the Lear Theater (see the Historic Preservation section, below). We’ll have to wait until later next week for the final May 6th agendas to be posted.

Now, on to brief updates regarding some of our top local issues.

A NEW RENO CASINO?

I don’t know about you, but I wasn’t expecting the proposed new soccer stadium project on Kietzke Lane (just north of Peckham Lane) to include a casino. But here we are, with a submitted permit indicating just that (and much more):

• Permits submitted for massive 28-acre mixed-use entertainment project on Kietzke and Peckham (Downtown Makeover 4/14/26)

• Reno soccer stadium plans include hotel-casino, dining, retail (RGJ 4/14/26)

This past week’s demolition of the old Jones West Ford building on the site got a lot of coverage, plus a few more details including the development’s name: The Boulevard.

• Reno Pro Soccer begins demolition for new stadium project at former Jones West Ford site (2 News Nevada 4/23/26)

What comes next? As Reno Pro Soccer CEO Wendy Damonte told 2 News:

“Next steps include meeting before the planning commission and the City of Reno to get all of our approvals. Once that happens, we will come back together at this very site to do a groundbreaking for this development built by locals for locals. We hope to see everyone here in October or November of this year.”

Stay tuned for precisely what “approvals” the project will require.

A FIRST STEP TOWARD (POSSIBLY) REGULATING DATA CENTERS

Of course, the big local development story last week was about the Reno City Council’s vote to initiate a text amendment to Reno’s land development code regarding data centers, following a massive public turnout. In case you’re not sure exactly what they voted to do, here’s the wording from the official City of Reno recap:

“With this Council decision, City staff will work with regional partners including the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency (TMRPA), Washoe County, and the City of Sparks to develop a consistent set of standards. Next steps will involve a coordinated regional approach including a public review process, stakeholder outreach, NABs, Planning Commission and City Council review and final approval. Additionally, the City Manager has directed staff to coordinate a special meeting to discuss next steps related to data centers.”

In other words, there’s a long road ahead. More coverage of this latest action here:

• Video: City council votes unanimously to define standards for data centers (This is Reno 4/23/26)

• Will Reno press pause on new data centers? Council weighs regulations (RGJ 4/22/26)

• Reno council advances data center regulations, possible moratorium vote at future meeting (News4 4/22/26)

National Context: How are other communities responding?

• One Wisconsin City Beat Back a Data Center. Now Residents Are Helping Others Do the Same. (Next City 4/20/26) When a secretive $1.6 billion data center proposal landed in Menomonie with almost no warning, residents had weeks to fight back. They won — and built a toolkit so other communities can, too.

DOWNTOWN RENO REVITALIZATION

As usual, Mike of Downtown Makeover is keeping track of the latest activity:

• Permit submitted to complete facade improvement of 201 N Virginia (Downtown Makeover 4/24/26)

• Riverboat Apartments building sells (Downtown Makeover 4/16/26)

As I mentioned above, the City of Reno is holding two virtual meetings this coming Tuesday, April 28th and Thursday, April 30th, to talk about proposed Live Entertainment regulations. And it’s not just downtown Reno that would be impacted, but other neighborhoods, too. Read here for more details.

Also, the opinion pieces on downtown keep rolling in. Here’s two of the latest:

• OPINION: Downtown Reno: Time to recognize the new reality (Art Rangel, Eric Lerude, and Gary Cecil, RGJ 4/17/26)

• OPINION: Reno’s Downtown Debate Misses the Bigger Questions (Mark Curtis, RGJ 4/22/26)

HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS PART OF RESPONSIBLE URBAN PLANNING.

It’s been over two weeks and I’m still gobsmacked by the vote of four of our City Councilmembers—Brandi Anderson, Meghan Ebert, Miguel Martinez, and Kathleen Taylor—to direct staff to start putting together a Request For Proposals for the Lear Theater, completely ignoring the recommendations of their own advisory board, the Historical Resources Commission, not to mention everyone who attended the City’s packed community meeting on January 10th, offered their assistance through the online survey, pledged their support at the April 8th Council meeting, and put their faith in the City of Reno to do right by one of its most significant historic structures.

I have heard nothing so far about how staff even plans to go about putting together an RFP for the Lear, since the motion was so vague. Will there be any public meetings to discuss what exactly it should say or will that be a surprise, too?

The Historical Resources Commission handed City Council a clear plan to build upon the progress already underway, laying out realistic next steps: 1) secure and stabilize the building using $1 million to $1.6 million in redevelopment funds that specifically exist to combat blight; 2) provide for the formation of a public/private committee to centralize ongoing efforts; 3) establish a dedicated account to allow the community to begin raising money; and 4) consider commissioning a feasibility study to ensure that any future management plans or proposals are viable and not a total waste of time.

As Bob Conrad and Kristen Hackbarth of This is Reno write in their editorial below, if the property belonged to anyone other than the City, these same councilmembers would likely be criticizing its owner for not taking proper care of it.

• EDITORIAL: In government, where there’s a will, there’s a way (Bob Conrad and Kristen Hackbarth, This is Reno, 4/19/26)

Please read Conrad and Hackbarth’s entire piece. As they write:

“Not spending the money means the building will continue to be surrounded by chain link, will continue to have exterior damages, will continue to attract graffiti, will continue to have weeds and overgrown shrubs, and will continue to be vacant. Based on all of these factors, combined with the fact that the building hasn’t been safely accessible for a decade or more, it’s likely the Lear Theater falls within the city’s definition of ‘abandoned nuisance.’….

These are the same council members, and mayor, who week after week complain about the blight in downtown Reno. They are the same council members who have pushed city staff to look for ways to address the blighted and abandoned nuisance properties in the area that are dragging down the city’s image and lowering property values.

Sitting as the Redevelopment Agency Board, Reno City Council will meet on May 6th to discuss which Capital Improvement Projects to support with redevelopment funds in the next fiscal year. The Lear should be one of them. It’s the right thing to do.

RESERVE YOUR SPOT: The City of Reno Historic Preservation Awards will be held on Thursday, May 14th in the California Building in Idlewild Park. RSVP required.

ADMINISTRATIVE MISMANAGEMENT OF HOMELESS SERVICES

A disturbing report emerged this week from the investigation into Washoe County’s former homeless services director, Dana Searcy.

• INVESTIGATION: Washoe County’s former homeless services director violated codes of conduct, mismanaged resources (This is Reno 4/21/26)

As This is Reno reports:

“A 68-page confidential report dated Aug. 18, 2025, details the investigation into Searcy’s tenure. It reveals she violated the county’s code of conduct by resisting integration with the agency’s fiscal division, withholding financial data and making misleading statements to colleagues and county management.”

Be sure to give it a read, if you haven’t yet. Seriously unbelievable.

HOUSING - EVICTIONS, PURCHASES, CONSTRUCTION

Everyone agrees that housing is one of Reno’s #1 challenges, and each week brings more housing-related news, not all of it good. Here’s some of the latest.

• “That’s not much time”: Dozens scramble to leave Reno Community after sudden 30-day notice (News4 4/16/26) Residents of Evergreen Trailer Park are being evicted.

• Jacobs Entertainment purchases Midtown Motel/Ambassador Apts at 611/623 West 2nd Street (Downtown Makeover 4/20/26) Jacobs is reportedly saying that these two structures won’t be demolished.

• What’s being built on Mt. Rose Highway near Galena High School? (RGJ 4/23/26) The permit says it’s for a project called Valage Senior Living at Reno.

LOCAL POLITICS - WHO’S RUNNING, AND WHO’S BACKING THEM?

As a reminder, the Primary Election will be held on Tuesday, June 9th with early voting running from Saturday, May 23rd through Friday, June 5th. It’ll be here before you know it, so take the time now to get educated about who’s vying to represent you.

For the official list of candidates, visit the City of Reno’s 2026 Election webpage and scroll down to see who filed to run for City of Reno Mayor, Ward 2 City Council, Ward 4 City Council, City Attorney, and Municipal Court Judge.

Who’s financing local candidates?

Want to know who’s financing local campaigns? Head to the Secretary of State website, where you can pull up all of the Contributions & Expenses Reports and Financial Disclosure Statements here. A few outlets reported on the latest filings:

• Who has the most campaign cash in Reno, Sparks mayor 2026 primaries? (RGJ 4/21/26)

• Nevada candidates got millions in campaign donations in 2026. Who is backing them? (Nevada Independent 4/21/26)

Reno Candidate Profiles and Forums

WARD 2 RENO CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE PROFILES: Johnson, Luetkehans, Pellett, Vaupel running in Reno Ward 2 primary (RGJ 4/23/26)

MAYORAL CANDIDATE FORUM - May 13th: 2026 Reno Mayoral Candidate Forum co-sponsored by KUNR Public Radio, the League of Women Voters of Nevada, and the Reno Gazette Journal. More info here.

PLEASE HELP KEEP OUR PUBLIC SPACES & THE TRUCKEE RIVER BEAUTIFUL

Keep Truckee Meadows Beautiful is holding their next Great Community Cleanup on Saturday, May 2nd. Cleanup locations are spread out throughout our community from the Lockwood Trailhead and historic Hillside Cemetery to Rancho San Rafael to the Oxbow Nature Study Area and more, and you need to sign up in advance to volunteer at your site of choice. Visit the project’s webpage to view the options and register.

BRIEF DIGEST: Other news in local urban development

For the City of Reno’s official recap of the April 22nd Reno City Council meeting, see the April 22, 2026 Reno City Council Meeting Highlights. And here are a few more recent stories that don’t quite fit into the above categories:

• Fastest-Warming U.S. States and Cities (Climate Central 4/22/26) Reno has been named the fastest-warming city in the United States.

• South Reno battery storage project advances at Reno council (RGJ 4/24/26) Annexation into the City of Reno would allow the Trego Grid project to proceed.

• Lakeridge Resort plans receive favorable rezoning recommendation from regional commission (News4 4/23/26) The Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Commission pushed the plans forward.

• Amazon deliveries in Northern Nevada just got faster (KOLO 4/23/26) Amazon opened a new 92,000-square-foot facility at 605 Herz Boulevard.

• Merging Washoe’s fire departments flopped in the past. Here’s why they may try again. (Nevada Independent 4/26/26) ‘Divorce,’ lawsuits and Supreme Court decisions: Why consolidating Northern Nevada firefighting services could be an uphill battle.

Congratulations, you made it to the end! Have a good week, everyone.

Be sure to check out my Citizen Guide for helpful resources and links to help anyone become more informed and engaged in issues related to urban development (& more) in Reno.

You can view this and prior newsletters on my Substack site, subscribe to receive each new edition in your email inbox, and follow the Brief (and contribute to the ongoing conversation) on X, Facebook & Instagram. If you feel inspired to contribute, you may purchase a paid subscription through Substack or contribute via Venmo at @Dr-Alicia-Barber, via the Buy me a coffee platform, or via check to Alicia Barber at P.O. Box 11955, Reno, NV 89510. Thank you!