Reno staff seek input on voluntary nonprofit registry amid zoning and safety concerns

City of Reno licensing officials held a public outreach webinar to solicit feedback on a possible nonprofit registration or registry, saying City Council requested staff examine the issue and that the goal is to gather community input before drafting any ordinance.

Lance Ferrato, director of licensing and code enforcement, opened the session by describing Council’s charge and by framing the primary concerns as planning review, zoning restrictions and public safety. "We're here today to talk about nonprofit organizations and possible registration regulation," Ferrato said, noting the city has a voluntary registration and that any future policy would be returned to council for direction.

Why it matters: Ferrato said council is chiefly concerned with how the city plans and enforces distancing or zoning requirements — for example, a past approval placed a cannabis business near a rehabilitation facility — and with whether the city can ensure safety through inspections when nonprofit locations are treated as exempt from business licensing.

What the city currently has: Ferrato estimated there are about 2,000 nonprofits in the Reno area and said the city’s voluntary registry includes roughly 317 entries, a list he cautioned may be out of date. Staff described the current voluntary registration as available through the city’s business licensing portal (1nv.us) and on reno.gov/businesslicensing.

Fee, enforcement and scope: In response to chat questions, Ferrato stated the current voluntary registration fee is $25 and said enforcement in other jurisdictions is generally light and often handled on a volunteer or minimal‑effort basis. He said any registration policy the city might propose would likely include a grandfathering period and would apply broadly to existing and new organizations unless council directed otherwise.

Public concerns heard: Small and volunteer organizations raised several recurring issues. Amy, who identified herself as founder and executive director of the Neighbor Network of Northern Nevada, urged that registration forms not require a designated "owner," because 501(c)(3) governance does not allow a single owner; she favored a reduced fee structure. Multiple speakers, including Erstan (co‑founder of Soulful Seeds) and Johnny (a representative of a scholarship nonprofit), described operations without brick‑and‑mortar addresses and asked whether the registry would require street addresses, board meeting access or other sensitive details.

Confidentiality and coordination: Several participants flagged confidentiality concerns; Kristen in the chat asked the city to consider exemptions for organizations whose locations should not be public. Staff said they have consulted the secretary of state's office and are aware that nonprofits take many legal forms beyond 501(c)(3), which may affect state‑level charitable registration requirements.

Next steps: Ferrato urged attendees to complete and share the survey posted in the chat; staff said they will keep the survey open for additional responses, compile the results into a staff report, post the report and recordings on the city website, and return to council with recommended options. "We'll be doing this again Thursday, at 9AM," Ferrato said, closing the session.

What remains unresolved: No draft code language, fee schedule, inspection protocol or enforcement policy was proposed at the webinar. Staff emphasized this meeting was information‑gathering and that future council direction would determine whether the city moves from voluntary registration to any mandatory regime.