[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6251602,"mediaKeyId","3193909-dd70925dcafffc926e513eb5151326f2","parentId",3193909,"title","Reno council directs staff to advance FY26 tentative budget, freezes about 20 positions","audioSeconds",11577,"startMs",458000,"endMs",12035000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193909-dd70925dcafffc926e513eb5151326f2&start=458&end=12035","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193909-dd70925dcafffc926e513eb5151326f2/thumbnail_458000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6251602/Nevada/Reno-council-directs-staff-to-advance-FY26-tentative-budget-freezes-about-20-positions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6251602-8c2274ceff4a804d4a18ade2ccbba411/orig.mp4?Expires=1770904530&Signature=dLFCSE1a5mK60L49iWF7cdePTXsJ974uySmbiTwlu68oWxwcWs9P9zi~x0asGe5Qc6ZiksbcMjvo1PLS5uM6Zbsm1wYT5KQFLPNNvbU3D9U3VlYlNFqEgPOK4V1Utq1pdlRCYUTfdVyKA3C6cgSmVg8KjNVImiK46NTeO5TCr1eVjjl8m0GlJKNbaYoRlRJ-oDoDDFItsXEClKEaWcNAZd9YKQbWGXW6rTUmxbeMKpziHlR-iZrLHvgz6-xUNZ109EXHmFspEy7irYibuqVfkSJhnzIO9HNEX2SqbsQzRQLJ9wHxq8l23Nb6hfUj1EMxHTxFQPgWWJkh4o0ULT~Pyw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-05-06T04:52:52.467Z","article","The Reno City Council on May 5 directed staff to advance the city’s tentative fiscal year 2026 budget and fee schedule, approving a plan that balances roughly $321,000,000 of appropriations using about $9,500,000 in one‑time funds and a package of $16,000,000 in reductions.

City Finance Director Vicki Van Buren told the council the tentative budget uses the strategic plan to guide spending and relies on the “best information that we have at the time” while acknowledging volatile revenues such as sales tax and higher construction costs. She said, “This is where you determine where that money is funded to make the strategic priorities implemented.”

The plan directed by the council includes no new citywide positions for FY26, but retains two positions in the redevelopment agency; it preserves the city’s overall head count on the organizational charts while marking about 19.75 positions as frozen or unfunded. Van Buren estimated the city employs a little over 1,500 positions total and that about 80% of them are in the general fund.

Nut graf: The workshop emphasized matching limited revenues to core services. Leaders cited flattening revenue growth and sustained inflation as drivers of cuts; the council prioritized public safety and infrastructure while agreeing to use a mix of one‑time funds, fund balance and departmental reductions to balance the coming year.

Most significant choices: the proposed budget uses $5,000,000 of previously approved ARPA funds that were carried into the general fund, $1,500,000 from a SAD fund, $3,000,000 from capital projects that are complete or deferred, and about $2,600,000 of fund balance. The adopted tentative plan reduces contingency and annual capital maintenance allocations and tightens service and supply budgets, with departments asked to cut five percent for FY26 after an initial two percent reduction in the current year.

Council and staff debated several operational and policy impacts of the cuts. City Manager Bryant said the 90‑day pause on some boards and commissions is meant to buy staff time and evaluate whether the current engagement structure matches community needs; she said outreach will begin soon and “we’ll ascertain what the priorities are with a report.” Council members asked for additional detail on which positions are frozen and which services will be delayed.

Public safety, particularly fire and police staffing and fleet and facility maintenance, figured prominently. Van Buren told the council the general fund is heavily weighted toward police, fire and dispatch — roughly 65% of the general fund — and that salary and benefits now comprise about 81% of general fund spending. Fire apparatus replacement remains funded at roughly $8,000,000 over the coming years to keep the fleet near recommended ages; parks, buildings and other maintenance needs were identified as areas that will see deferred work.

Several council members pressed staff for greater detail on debt and deferred maintenance. Van Buren said the city will present deeper debt analysis at the next workshop and that some maintenance funding will be carried forward from unspent FY25 allocations to address emergent needs in FY26, but that year‑to‑year service delivery will be delayed.

The council approved the motion to advance the budget and fee schedule unanimously. Council also approved a related set of tentative policy moves: a temporary freeze on hiring for select vacancies, targeted reductions in discretionary member funds, and proposed eliminations of some organizational memberships (for example the Nevada League of Cities and the National League of Cities were proposed to be unfunded for FY26, while the Conference of Mayors remained funded).

The public comment period included a statement from Bill Shrimp, who urged the council to treat the budget as an expression of priorities: “Today, you’re talking about your budget. At the end of the day, a budget is about priorities,” he said.

Ending: Staff will bring a final budget and fee schedule back for adoption at the council meeting scheduled for May 21; the City must submit the adopted budget to the Nevada Department of Taxation by June 1. Council members directed staff to return with more granular debt and deferred maintenance analysis and with the results of the boards-and‑commissions outreach now scheduled to kick off within 90 days.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Reno City Council & Redevelopment Agency Board Budget Workshop | Captions Available | May 5, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Reno City Council on May 5 directed staff to advance the city’s tentative fiscal year 2026 budget and fee schedule, approving a plan that balances roughly $321,000,000 of appropriations using about $9,500,000 in one‑time funds and a package of $16,000,000 in reductions.","taxTitle","City Council Meetings , Reno, Washoe County, Nevada","taxId",69270,"location","Nevada","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6251593,"Reno Redevelopment Agency outlines $7.6 million in near‑term projects, seeks Fourth Street plan and property acquisitions",2411,13498000,15909000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193909-dd70925dcafffc926e513eb5151326f2&start=13498&end=15909","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193909-dd70925dcafffc926e513eb5151326f2/thumbnail_13498000.jpg","/articles/6251593/Nevada/Reno-Redevelopment-Agency-outlines-76-million-in-nearterm-projects-seeks-Fourth-Street-plan-and-property-acquisitions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6251593-bc6fae2a76c1742ec8b65d8e60921efc/orig.mp4?Expires=1770904530&Signature=XKdmVZQoMrthYqlfcygdltAzbP19H7lXTLrj7vm6yGE8B9ZLUW8FCxsn7gigSdpiRsmZEHcrNEYPpTOdGKYkQbDVxl8~pyyLUoX3cQQwf7nTWyTSu8m-JVhoPEurEfkya66i1wHaaZ59kijFvq2QbGEjPwkBjzLKwUVScJB9FOrzEodNvQLMgZlsq~0G3mBL8EaT563rgzANgGapXiXG0sGIwdeLgLYQ8v2STjcusSYQ0meuq77b2JXyf7CQS3w3M3BlqSF7zXHfP-qEnnCLZ9IcTAmyk7k9G7X10FLjAu-uTFNrX6Y2tHeBRN4tIgLsJXFeLCSqNBViXVu3Gy5iWw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Reno Redevelopment Agency presented its FY26 operating plan to the Reno City Council on May 5 and won council direction to advance the budget. Revitalization Manager Brian McCarter told the council that Redevelopment Area 1 (downtown) and Redevelopment Area 2 (non‑contiguous districts including the Baseball District and parts of Fourth Street) together produce increment that now allows the agency to fund near‑term capital work.

McCarter said RDA 1 is beginning to produce increment above longstanding debt obligations and expects about $4,600,000 of new increment next year; RDA 2 is producing roughly $10,200,000 annually. He outlined proposed FY26 capital and operating uses totaling about $7,600,000 across both districts, including a restore grant program, tactical vandalism‑response grants, public‑art wall funding, downtown banners and a $350,000 starter investment for the historic rail depot to advance reactivation and tenanting. McCarter said the agency would split a proposed $1,000,000 restore program evenly between the two RDAs.

Nut graf: The RDA presentation shifts the agency from planning to execution in the near term, asking council approval to purchase selected city‑owned properties for future redevelopment, to fund area master planning (notably a Fourth Street revitalization), and to buy equipment for event downtown safety and activation.

RDA staff proposed buying several city properties adjacent to the trench and retrack corridor for $4,500,000 to create development sites and pushed for a Fourth Street revitalization plan to guide investments in the 10‑year window remaining for RDA 2. The agency also proposed purchasing modular event barricades to support safer street closures for special events and activation activities.

McCarter noted statutory limits and obligations: an 18 percent allocation to the Washoe County School District applies to RDA 1 increment when funds are available above debt service, and redevelopment law constrains where increment may be used. He said the agency will pursue a five‑year capital improvement plan as part of the FY26 professional services budget and bring more detailed project lists and funding sources to the council over the next year.

Ending: Council approved the RDA budget direction unanimously and asked staff to return with five‑year CIP scenarios and clearer project sequencing so elected officials can weigh tradeoffs, including potential property acquisitions and the timing of the Fourth Street planning work.

","The city’s Redevelopment Agency presented an operating plan on May 5 that shows RDA 1 beginning to generate increment after debt obligations, and RDA 2 with more than $6.6 million available for projects. The agency proposed tactical grants, a restoration program, a Fourth Street revitalization plan and targeted property purchases.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6251598,"Reno council scales back proposed appeal fee hike to $200 and asks staff to add waiver option",6544,5375000,11919000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3193909-dd70925dcafffc926e513eb5151326f2&start=5375&end=11919","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3193909-dd70925dcafffc926e513eb5151326f2/thumbnail_5375000.jpg","/articles/6251598/Nevada/Reno-council-scales-back-proposed-appeal-fee-hike-to-200-and-asks-staff-to-add-waiver-option","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6251598-7e7be6fc82111fa33fa6b574bea0f550/orig.mp4?Expires=1770904530&Signature=PJ7bnzuqu0PT3oxdLIK3E4R3o16E~2OCK5TTs~wHl6lRThTzsCcHPC9jefhiOmCJmI6r1hIks8HFfNKMPEScBJerTeJLHLjH780dQnfM7P7IKYwUK~4UF9GC-UMYw2MKwLaZmCeVNnF8EGEogB05fOYQPMOoynZL72wrh7yqcKraJtZ-KlNCXgEQgEw0T-WJ-Vjt9PSU4lAKdDbP5u~4lC4vyOmxhAtLhVz5vb0tjEnJSUMR4Ve-7PpfmrAwZUnVqHKy3T-lvRVDDXhSD5999j4amcs8PYg~z8jXJKlXro1FjmKdmGPG5VDq9miVEyAqAmnCwkysVh7~TmyPdqvl5g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Reno City Council voted May 5 to raise the fee to file a land‑use or permit appeal to $200 and to direct staff to create a fee‑waiver process for applicants who can show financial hardship.

Development Services Director Chris Pingree told the council that the department’s comparison of neighboring jurisdictions showed significantly higher appeal fees elsewhere, and that the staff estimate of the city’s direct staff cost to process an appeal averages several thousand dollars. Pingree said an “average appeal is probably $7,500 in staff time alone” and that the proposed change was intended to better align fees with administrative cost and with neighboring governments.

The fee had previously been $100 after a prior increase. Staff initially proposed a $500 filing fee in the tentative fee schedule presented in March; Council members debated whether a 500% jump in a single year would reduce public access to appeals for lower‑income residents. Council member Doerr and others argued for a smaller immediate increase and for an explicit waiver or hardship path; Council Member Doerr offered an amendment to set the fee at $200 and require staff to implement a waiver process, which the council approved unanimously.

Nut graf: The council sought to balance two policy goals — reducing the administrative subsidy for appeals and preserving public access to land‑use appeals for residents with limited means — by adopting a middle path and creating a waiver pathway.

Several council members said they support raising fees to recover municipal costs but urged caution about affordability. Council Member Ebert, who represents a ward with large areas of open land and lower‑income neighborhoods, said an earlier constituent could not afford the prior $60 filing fee and stressed that the city must retain access for those most affected by development.

Manager Bryant and staff agreed to return the final fee language with an explicit waiver process and proposed administrative implementation steps. The council also discussed related noticing fees and other development‑service cost adjustments included in the FY26 fee schedule, including new recordation and certified‑mail pass‑through fees, minor increases to fire prevention special‑event permits and a two‑and‑a‑half percent CPI adjustment the ordinance requires for sewer connection fees.

Ending: The council’s final direction will be reflected in the fee schedule staff will bring forward with the FY26 budget adoption on May 21. Staff said they will circulate comparisons of neighboring jurisdiction fees and the proposed waiver language prior to final adoption.

","After a contentious debate about public access and administrative costs, the council moved to raise the planning appeal filing fee to $200 (down from a staff proposal to raise to $500), and directed staff to create a waiver process for financial hardship.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Reno council directs staff to advance FY26 tentative budget, freezes about 20 positions

Reno Redevelopment Agency outlines $7.6 million in near‑term projects, seeks Fourth Street plan and property acquisitions

Reno council scales back proposed appeal fee hike to $200 and asks staff to add waiver option