Security, signage, staffing, and budgets take center stage at Reno City Council on December 4
by Alicia Barber
Welcome to December. Time to snap out of that leftover turkey/Cyber Monday-induced stupor with a bracing dose of civic engagement, something that’s always sure to get your blood pumping and doesn’t cost a thing. Ready? Let’s go.
You can view agendas and supplementary materials for all four of this week’s City meetings on the Current and Upcoming Meetings page:
- Tuesday, Dec. 3 – Ward 3 Neighborhood Advisory Board, 5:30pm
- Wednesday, Dec. 4 – Reno City Council, 10am (HTML agenda)
- Thursday, Dec. 5 – Financial Advisory Board, 3:30pm
- Thursday, Dec. 5 – Reno Planning Commission, 6pm (HTML agenda)
If you missed it, I highlighted the troubling City budget news to be discussed at Thursday’s Financial Advisory Board meeting at the top of last week’s Brief. Apparently salaries and benefits for City staff increased much more significantly than anticipated, putting City finances in a bind. Keep budget and staffing issues in mind as you continue to read today’s Brief, as you’ll note something of a running theme.
Another one is how the City is choosing to approach the challenge of making the area in and around the old downtown casino core safe and active again. A lot of you had thoughts on that after reading my last Brief, which I thank you for sharing. Some of you rightfully asked why we are still talking about revitalizing that small central area, and honestly, I don’t blame you. Reno has been trying to redevelop its formerly bustling casino core for more than forty years. You’d think we would have succeeded by now. So I fully understand why some are sick of hearing about it.
Those who think it needs to remain a chief topic of discussion and a budgeting priority have varied reasons for feeling that way. To some it’s because it’s the most iconic part of the City and serves as a regular destination for many visitors whether or not they’re staying there. To others (like the Mayor) it simply is Reno’s downtown (as opposed to, say, the thriving cultural, commercial, residential, and governmental blocks just south of the river), and needs our focused attention because “Great cities have great downtowns.” To still others, it is a blighted area whose inactivity and desolation make it desperately in need of continuous programming and financial interventions purely to keep our citizens safe. And to yet others, it requires prioritization as Reno’s original townsite and commercial center, boasting some of our most historic and yet long-neglected structures, from the Southern Pacific Railroad Depot and Freight House to the Reno National Bank. It may be one, several, or none of those things to you.
And even if you don’t find the old casino core relevant to your life at all, I think all residents should definitely care about the amount of time, energy, and financial resources being directed toward it, and ponder whether the City’s current approaches are likely to permanently move the needle in a positive direction or constitute an endless drain on public resources with no apparent end. During this week’s meetings, we’re hearing about the City’s budgetary woes and staffing shortages, and potentially dedicating several additional hundreds of thousands of the final remaining ARPA dollars to this same small, central area.
But what’s the plan for the future, and how will all those plans funded by ARPA money now be implemented, once that funding is gone? And will even they make a difference? When will event-based “activation” and “beautification” of the old casino core be accompanied by permanent occupation and dense urban infill? Do the first two necessarily least to the second? And are these the boldest actions we could be taking to address the ongoing crisis in this much beleaguered part of town? Is the City being realistic about precisely how this area is, can, and will continue to change?
These are the conversations we need to be having, and perhaps we can use some of the items being discussed this week to kick them off.
Preview: The December 4, 2024 Reno City Council meeting
City Council will be considering a wide range of decisions in Wednesday’s meeting, and I find myself wishing that our local press could pick up on more of these, so residents can be more aware of them in advance. I’m doing my best, but I’m just highlighting items with direct or indirect relevance to urban development. Be sure to skim through the entire agenda for other items that might interest you.
B.6 – Beefing up security at City Plaza
As the Staff Report for this item indicates, Council will consider augmenting its existing contract with Allied Universal Security Services to allocate ARPA funds toward hiring more private security officers for a pilot program at the City Plaza, in front of City Hall (I’m not aware that the plaza’s name has been formally changed to “Believe Plaza,” although that’s the phrasing used here).
The contract would extend through September 30, 2025. Reference is made to “addressing recent incidents and enhancing safety in critical areas,” which obliquely refers to the tragic fatal stabbing of an individual on the plaza on November 14.
D.1 – Potential revisions to the Sign Code
I’ve written multiple times about the ongoing plan to revise the City’s sign code, so feel free to review my prior posts about it. I watched the most recent staff presentations, and would just like to add one point about how this topic is being presented by City staff and how it might be unduly shaping the narrative.
In the face of claims by Scenic Nevada that staff’s proposed revisions would grant non-gaming properties in the entire Entertainment District a right to unlimited signage that they did not have before, City staff has asserted that the entire Entertainment District has enjoyed unlimited signage since 2005. I’m not going to delve into that disagreement—it’s highly technical, it may be unresolvable, and in my mind, it really doesn’t matter as much as what we would like to see from this point forward.
However, I am concerned that as a central part of their argument, City staff has repeatedly asserted that the proposed new revisions to this sign code would actually REDUCE the areas entitled to unlimited signage, not increase them.
That may technically be true, but it’s a bit disingenuous. Yes, the areas entitled to unlimited signage would be decreased via these revisions—and not insignificantly—from almost 2,000 acres to approximately 136 acres. But that’s only because, as staff acknowledges, the expansion of unlimited signage to almost 2,000 acres throughout the city via the 2021 Development Code update was unintentional.
As the Staff Report explains, in 2021 “the larger Gaming Overlay sign standards were applied to all parcels within the overlay, unintentionally [emphasis mine] allowing much more area than before.” So yes, the areas where unlimited signage would be allowed would decrease via these revisions, but only because staff is fixing its own error.
What Scenic Nevada and others are arguing is that what makes sense from this point forward is to make the regulations governing the so-called “Entertainment District” match the rest of the City, with only casinos being allowed unlimited signage by right (I would imagine anyone can apply for a special permit if they want a larger sign than code allows). So let’s focus on that question and not whether these proposed changes would result in a net gain or loss of parcels allowed unlimited signage. There’s no quota here; it’s the areas themselves we need to focus on, not a tally of overall acreage.
As I reported last week, no owners of non-casino parcels within the Entertainment District boundaries commented publicly during the City’s recent stakeholder meetings. But that doesn’t mean they haven’t given input behind the scenes. If you’d like to contribute your own thoughts, refer to Item D.1.
Read the rest at The Barber Brief.
The Barber Brief is an independent e-newsletter and blog written by Dr. Alicia Barber on the Substack platform. It is reposted by This Is Reno with her permission.
