ONE RENO • ALL VOICES
I am, and always will be YOUR voice...
Look past the noise. Look at the work. That’s where the truth is.
I am not concerned about being evaluated based on the work I have done, the decisions I have made, or the positions I have taken.
What is concerning is when the conversation shifts away from facts and toward information that is misleading, incomplete, or selectively presented.
When that happens, it does not just affect one person. It affects how our community understands the challenges facing Reno, and it influences the decisions that will shape our city’s future.
Over the past year, it has become clear that many of the issues facing Reno are far more complex than they may appear from the outside. That understanding does not come from assumptions, summaries, or campaign talking points. It comes from working through the details, identifying problems firsthand, and being directly involved in the process of addressing them.
When information is presented without that level of understanding, it can lead to conclusions that do not reflect how the city actually operates.
That is not simply a difference of opinion. It is a difference in exposure to the full scope of the issues.
And that matters.
Because when decisions are influenced by inaccurate or incomplete information, it risks repeating the same cycle, delaying meaningful progress, and holding Reno back at a time when it needs to move forward.
This is not about personalities.
It is about whether Reno moves forward based on clear, accurate, and complete information, or whether it is shaped by narratives that simplify complex issues and assign responsibility without context.
Reno’s challenges did not appear overnight. They developed over time. And addressing them requires continuity, accountability, and a clear understanding of how the system works.
My focus has been on doing the work.
Often, that work happens behind the scenes. It means identifying problems, asking difficult questions, correcting errors, and helping position Reno for long-term success. That includes ongoing efforts with Public Works and the pursuit of grant opportunities that can meaningfully improve infrastructure and strengthen our city’s future.
If you take the time to look beyond the headlines, beyond the opinions, and instead look at the work, the details, and the direction, a clearer picture begins to emerge.
Because moving Reno forward is not about who speaks the loudest.
It is about:
Who is willing to do the work
Who is willing to understand the issues
Who is willing to stay committed long enough to get it right
And that is exactly what I have been focused on from the start.
The Reality of Governance
From the outside, it is easy to assume that being on council comes with broad authority to act quickly and solve problems as they arise.
In reality, it can feel more like being “a genie in a bottle.” There is responsibility and expectation, but also rules, process constraints, and limited access to information that significantly restrict how and when action can occur.
This becomes clear in day-to-day operations, where delays, inefficiencies, and gaps in information directly impact the pace at which issues can be addressed.
Many of the challenges Reno faces today are not new, and resolving them requires more than decisions. It requires the right systems, qualified support, and access to accurate information to operate effectively.
Understanding this is important, because it explains why progress is not always as immediate as it should be. The issue is not a lack of effort. It is the reality of working within a system that does not always provide the tools, structure, or responsiveness needed to move efficiently.
Progress comes from improving those systems, increasing access to information, and creating processes that allow council to operate as intended.
Until that happens, the pace of progress will continue to reflect those limitations.
Response, Accountability, and Urgency
After identifying these issues, a request was made for an additional budget workshop to fully review and clarify the concerns in a structured setting.
Given the scope and nature of the discrepancies identified, this is not a minor issue. Ensuring that the city’s financial foundation is accurate, transparent, and fully understood is essential to every decision that follows.
The effort to reorganize the budget was not intended to criticize, but to provide clarity and create a foundation for informed discussion. It was designed to help identify issues early, so they could be addressed before they impact operations, planning, or public perception.
My hope is that this information helps shed light on what is slowing progress in Reno, and why addressing these underlying issues is necessary.
Despite this, there has been no meaningful response, either from within city operations or from external support.
The budget begins with internal staff, and there should be a clear ability to explain how these entries were developed, what they represent, and who directed their inclusion. That includes items that appear undefined, unsupported, or inconsistent with standard practices.
Without that level of explanation, it becomes difficult to determine whether these issues are errors, assumptions, or systemic problems.
When concerns of this scale are raised and not addressed in a timely and transparent manner, it reinforces a larger issue.
Progress is not being limited by a lack of effort, but by a lack of clear answers, responsiveness, and accountability within the process.
Budget Review and Key Findings
To obtain a clear and accurate understanding of the city’s financial position, I conducted an independent review and analysis of the budget.
The format provided to council makes meaningful analysis difficult from a financial and audit perspective, limiting the ability to identify trends, reconcile totals, isolate inconsistencies, and fully understand how funds are being allocated.
To address this, I reorganized the budget into a structured format, aligning chart of accounts across one axis and departments across the other, with both monthly expenditures and total annual costs clearly presented. This allowed for a level of visibility that is not possible in the current format.
Using this structure, I performed a detailed financial review and analysis, which was then formally provided to the mayor and shared with the council for review and discussion.
When viewed in this format, several issues become immediately apparent. The following represents a partial list of items that stood out immediately:
- Approximately $185,000 budgeted for accounting services for a city the size of Reno, without clear justification
- Over $125,000 in credit card fees and inspection-related costs being absorbed by the city instead of being passed through where appropriate
- A “Reserve Operating” line item of approximately $128,000, which lacks clear definition and its only effect is inflating the reported budget shortfall
- $31,000 budgeted for dispatch services, despite dispatch and jail services already totaling approximately $99,500
- Fire protection costs through ESD-1 that were expected to align with Briar-Reno rates, with no clear explanation for the difference
- Nearly $20,000 in postage expenses, despite the opportunity to reduce costs through digital billing, which statistics show that a majority of people typically request, when offered
- Approximately $22,000 allocated to software expenses without clear identification or breakdown
- Nearly $20,000 annually paid to Azle for a water tap that has not been utilized for at least two years
- Franchise fee revenue projected at approximately $49,000 less than the prior year, without clear justification
- Property tax (I&S) revenue projected at approximately $26,000 less than the prior year, despite expectations that these revenues should remain stable or increase
- More than $60,000 annually for legal services, while council access to the city attorney remains limited
- Removal of ticket-related revenue, while corresponding expenses of approximately $136,000 remain in the budget
These findings were presented along with a request for an additional budget workshop to review, clarify, and correct these issues.
This review is also why I believe the budget is not as bad as it is being presented. There are real issues that need to be addressed, but there are also areas where organization, clarification, and follow-up can resolve concerns that appear more severe than they actually are.
Without a clear and fully supported budget, decisions regarding finances, staffing, and infrastructure risk being based on incomplete or inaccurate information rather than verified data.
Process and Agenda
Even when issues are identified, progress depends on the ability to bring those issues forward, review them properly, and act on them in a timely manner.
Council is not consistently given the opportunity to review agendas and supporting materials in advance, limiting preparation and the ability to fully understand items before decisions are made.
There have been repeated instances where requested items do not appear on agendas, are presented incorrectly, or are moved to later meetings, often delaying discussion and action by 30 days or more.
These delays compound over time and make it difficult to address issues when they are first identified.
For a council to function effectively, members must be able to participate in the process, not just respond after the fact. This includes the ability to review, discuss, and prepare for topics in advance, and confidence that requested items will be handled accurately and timely.
It also requires direct access to contractors, attorneys, and financial professionals, so decisions are based on complete and accurate information, not filtered summaries.
At times, these process limitations have required decisions to be made simply to keep operations moving and avoid further delays, even when ideal preparation was not possible.
To address these issues, I am introducing an ordinance to establish a more structured, transparent, and consistent agenda process, improving both efficiency and accountability.
When Guidance Falls Short
Accurate decision-making also depends on the quality, accuracy, and responsiveness of the professional support provided to the city.
There have been repeated instances where guidance has been incomplete, inconsistent, or incorrect, as well as situations where direct council requests have not been addressed in a timely manner, despite ordinances that clearly establish accountability to the council.
This has not been an isolated issue. It has been a consistent pattern that impacts the flow of information, delays decision-making, and contributes to many of the challenges identified in both the budget and overall operations.
As a result, multiple council members have repeatedly directed that alternative legal support be identified, with the goal of improving responsiveness, accuracy, and alignment with the city’s needs.
However, progress on that front has been limited. There have been delays in responding to interested firms, and due in part to Reno’s history, viable alternatives are not currently in place.
This creates a situation where the city continues to rely on the same advisory structure, even as many of the same issues continue to surface over time.