Is Eddie Lorton Running to Win — or Just to Be Seen and get Attention?

Is Eddie running a campaign designed to win… or a campaign designed to get attention?

Michael Leonard

Jan 16, 2026

Reno voters deserve competitive campaigns. Not just people on a ballot, but candidates who are actually trying win and to govern.

That may sound obvious, but it matters — because when someone repeatedly runs for office without building anything that resembles a real campaign, voters are left with a legitimate question:

Is this a campaign designed to win… or a campaign designed to get attention?

Eddie Lorton is now on his fifth run for Reno mayor. After four attempts, patterns matter. And the pattern here is not one of a campaign evolving, improving, or professionalizing. It is one of stasis.

Let’s look at what a serious modern campaign requires — and how Lorton’s operation compares.

What a Serious Campaign Looks Like in 2026

A credible mayoral campaign today is not mysterious. The basics are well-known:

• A voter database (to identify and target supporters)

• An email list (for message control and mobilization)

• A text program (now one of the most effective GOTV tools)

• A current policy platform (so voters know what you would do)

• A professional staff or consultants (for compliance, messaging, field, and strategy)

• Fundraising infrastructure

• A field operation (canvassing, phone banking, turnout)

• A coalition strategy (building relationships across groups and constituencies)

These are not luxuries. They are table stakes.

Without them, a campaign is not competitive — it is performative.

Eddie Lorton’s Facebook Problem: Patterns, Pressure, and Public Misrepresentation

What Lorton Has Done

Eddie Lorton has not done much. In his last run, he:

• Put up yard signs — many of them personally.

• Ran some Facebook video advertising.

• Appeared at public events and spoke when given the chance.

Those are actions. They are visible. They signal that someone is “in the race.” But they are also the lightest-weight elements of campaigning. They generate awareness, not organization. Visibility, not votes. Presence, not turnout. They are the frosting — without the cake.

What Eddie’s Contributions and Expense Report Tells Us

Candidates have filed their 2025 Contributions and Expense Reports, and we can learn a lot from them. Eddie’s campaign is self-funded. Of the $163,329 he has on hand, $150,000 is his own, much of which he could take back after the race. Only $15,5126 is from donors. This is despite having had several fund-raising events.

The donors are 109 friends of Eddie’s, not organizations, prominent people, corporations, or PACs. They contributed an average of $140 and a mean of $50. Washoe GOP has not contributed to Eddie’s campaign. The Washoe GOP Chairman, Bruce Parks, personally gave $60, which is not a game-changer.

See, Contributions and Expense Report - Eddie Lorton

How His Campaign Falls Short

Eddie’s campaign is static. It does not have the look of an aggressive campaign that is in it to win. Despite putting up $150,000, Eddie isn’t spending it.

What remains notably absent:

No voter outreach infrastructure.

Eddie has only spent $1,695 on advertising. There is no ongoing email program, no text messaging, and no evidence of voter targeting or data-driven outreach.

No current platform.

There is no detailed, updated policy platform explaining what he would do as mayor or how he would do it. He just posts unintelligible gripes on Facebook.

No professional campaign operation. There is no evidence of paid staff, consultants, or a formal campaign structure.

No meaningful fundraising effort. There is no sign of sustained fundraising or donor network building, only a few events at friends’ houses that bring a few regulars.

An outdated web presence. His website is stale and does not reflect a current or organized campaign.

No coalition building. Over time, he has publicly clashed with multiple civic and political figures, limiting the partnerships necessary to govern — or even to win.

No implementation plans. When he proposes “reforms,” they are typically framed as grievances or aspirations rather than as policy proposals with pathways, timelines, or institutional mechanics.

This is not what a campaign that intends to win looks like.

When Accusations Aren’t Anchored: A Problem for Mayoral Candidate Eddie Lorton

Why the “Four Runs” Matter

If this were Lorton’s first run, some of this could be chalked up to inexperience. If it were his second run, maybe it would be fair to call it a learning curve. But this is his fifth run.

By now, a candidate who intends to win would have built:

• An expanding supporter base

• A refined message

• A professional team

• A donor network

• Institutional knowledge

Instead, we see the same pattern repeated: appearances, signs, videos, and symbolic presence — but not the infrastructure required to convert attention into votes. At a certain point, the lack of structure stops being a startup problem and becomes a strategic choice.

Eddie Lorton: The Businessman Who Keeps Challenging Reno’s Political Machine

A Campaign of Expression, Not Execution

Viewed this way, Lorton’s campaign begins to resemble something else:

Not a machine designed to win an election and govern a city, but a vehicle for personal expression, protest, and visibility.

This is different from asking voters to entrust you with a $1+ billion municipal organization, thousands of employees, and the future of a city.

Governing is operational. It requires building systems, managing complexity, negotiating coalitions, and executing policy — not just identifying problems or expressing dissatisfaction.

Campaigns should reflect that reality. This one does not.

🔥 Eddie Lorton Slams City Hall Over Hot August Nights – and the Public Sounds Off

Why This Matters for Reno

Non-competitive campaigns are not harmless. They:

• Crowd the ballot

• Dilute serious challengers

• Create noise without governance

• Absorb attention without building solutions

• Confuse voters about what is actually on offer

In a city facing real issues — housing, infrastructure, public safety, fiscal sustainability, redevelopment — Reno does not need symbolic campaigns. It requires candidates who are structurally capable of winning and governing.

Reno’s 2026 Mayoral Race: Who is in the Lineup? What are their Chances?

The Bottom Line

A serious campaign leaves a trail of infrastructure. A symbolic campaign leaves a trail of appearances. After four attempts, Eddie Lorton’s campaign is still looking like performance theater. And that is a fair — and necessary — thing to say out loud.

Did Reno Mayor Schieve Get PPP Loans That Were Forgiven? New Records Say Yes.

Mayor Hillary Schieve’s used-clothing stores landed four PPP loans that were forgiven — raising serious questions about fairness, transparency, and the meaning of “essential."

Michael Leonard

Jan 14, 2026

When the pandemic struck, many Reno residents and small businesses faced sudden shutdowns, layoffs, and economic collapse. The federal Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) was billed as a lifeline — meant to keep businesses afloat and save jobs. But public records recently brought to my attention suggest that while many local entrepreneurs struggled or went out of business, Mayor Hillary Schieve’s own used-clothing stores landed not one but four PPP loans that were ultimately forgiven — raising questions about fairness, transparency, and the meaning of “essential” during a crisis. Although this happened some time ago, records were recently sent to me.

PPP and the Promise of Relief

The PPP was created under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act to offer forgivable loans to small businesses that kept workers on payroll during COVID-19 disruptions.

If businesses followed PPP rules — maintain payroll, keep or reinstate staff, spend on eligible costs — the loans could be forgiven entirely, meaning no repayment.

The program was sold to the public as a way to preserve livelihoods, prevent mass layoffs, and give struggling businesses a chance to survive. But as widespread PPP forgiveness hit the headlines, critics warned of abuse, inequity, and the moral hazard of public funds going to businesses that may not have needed them.

An entry from the PPP database showing that Resale Girl got a PPP loan forgiven. Click the image to see the entry in the database.

Schieve’s Businesses: What They Are and When They Got Help

Mayor Schieve is more than a public official — she’s also a business owner. Public records show she owns two used-clothing retail companies:

• Resale Partners, LLC (operating as “Clothes Mentor”) and

• Resale Girl, LLC (operating as “Plato’s Closet”).

According to the public data referenced by local sources, Schieve’s first business, Clothes Mentor (Resale Partners, LLC), received a $24,260 PPP loan on May 1, 2020, with a claim of retaining seven jobs, and a second loan in the same amount on February 12, 2021, claiming eight retained jobs. Both loans were reportedly forgiven. Her second business, Plato’s Closet (Resale Girl, LLC), received a $59,350 loan on May 1, 2020, claiming 21 retained jobs, and another for $59,347 on February 12, 2021, claiming 15 retained jobs—again, both listed as forgiven. If these numbers are accurate, Schieve’s businesses benefited from approximately $167,217 in taxpayer-backed aid that did not require repayment.

If these numbers are accurate, that’s roughly $167,217 in forgiven taxpayer-backed aid going to her businesses.

The Complication: Public Statement vs. Public Record

Here’s where things get tangled. In May 2020, a local news article quoted Schieve saying she had “missed out on PPP funding” for Clothes Mentor and Plato’s Closet — suggesting she did not receive any PPP funds at the time.

Yet, PPP loan databases now list four approved and forgiven loans for her companies. That raises a stark inconsistency: Did she really “miss out,” or did funds come later? Was the earlier statement inaccurate or misunderstood?

This discrepancy alone warrants deeper scrutiny. For a public official, transparency about financial benefit — especially from taxpayer-backed relief — is fundamental.

Reno mayor misses out on PPP funding for Clothes Mentor, Plato’s Closet

Were Used-Clothing Stores “Essential”?

One significant piece of context: during the pandemic, Steve Sisolak (then Governor of Nevada) issued emergency orders mandating closure for “non-essential” businesses.

The official definition of “essential business” as of April 2020 included some retail categories—primarily those dealing in food, groceries, home supplies, and other necessities.

Crucially, standard retail — especially resale stores and second-hand clothing shops — was not explicitly listed as an essential service. Under the state’s guidance, “Retail facilities not defined as essential” were supposed to close, unless they pivoted to delivery or curbside models.

That calls into question whether Plato’s Closet or Clothes Mentor legitimately qualified as essential to remain open — and whether their PPP funding is consistent with the spirit of the program (designed in part for businesses forced to shut or severely curtailed).

If they remained open for regular retail during lockdown, the need for “payroll assistance” via PPP becomes less persuasive; if they were closed or limited, the job-retention numbers claimed should be scrutinized.

According to sources, Mayor Schieve’s stores stayed open, while she was said to be sending out people to check other businesses and report back to city officials.

An entry from the PPP database showing that Resale Girl got a PPP loan forgiven. Click the image to see the entry in the database.

Job Retention: Plausible — or Inflated?

PPP forgiveness hinges on maintaining or restoring payroll.

In Schieve’s case, the loan applications claimed retention of 7, 8, 15, and 21 jobs across her two stores. On paper, that seems plausible — but:

• There’s no publicly available audit verifying those staffing levels, nor are there any actual payroll records.

• Neighbors and small business owners have reported widespread closures and layoffs across Reno during the same period, which raises the question: how widespread was the aid, and how equitably distributed?

• Without independent verification, “loan forgiven = no repayment” becomes a murky proxy for “help saved jobs.”

In other words, forgiveness doesn’t guarantee legitimacy or moral justification. The original aim of PPP was to assist struggling businesses, but second-hand stores that may have stayed open blur that justification.

The Wild and Crazy Legacy of Reno Mayor Hillary Schieve

The Ethical Problem: Public Office + Public Aid + Private Gain

The optics of this situation are uneasy. A sitting mayor — one tasked with guiding Reno through a public-health and economic crisis — was simultaneously the beneficiary of substantial taxpayer-backed aid via her private businesses.

Consider: while many Reno families, entrepreneurs, and employees struggled or lost their livelihoods, Schieve’s stores avoided that fate.

That raises issues of fairness, equity, and public trust. If PPP was meant to help those in distress, why did some of the most stable or politically connected benefit so much?

This is not a partisan critique. It is a matter of accountability. When public officials accept public relief for private enterprises, they should be held to higher standards of transparency.

Understanding this situation is especially important in light of Schieve’s other controversies and the possibility that she might run for higher office in the future.

🧴 Mayor Schieve and Doctor Hovenic: Spooge, and Scrutiny

What We Know — and What We Don’t

✅ Known / Documented

• Schieve owns two used-clothing retail businesses.

• Public-facing data shows four PPP loans to those businesses, with amounts and job-retention claims.

• The loans were reportedly forgiven.

⚠️ Not (Publicly) Verified

• Whether the stores truly met the “essential business” criteria under state COVID-19 shutdown orders.

• Actual payroll records or documentation to back up claimed retained jobs.

• Whether the businesses would have failed absent PPP, or whether they were merely sheltering cash flow.

• Whether public-interest scrutiny ever examined their eligibility or compliance.

Mayor Schieve: Promises, Claims, but Missing Facts

Why This Matters for Reno — and All of Us

Public trust in government depends not only on good intentions but on transparency, fairness, and accountability. When elected officials take advantage of relief programs meant to aid struggling people and businesses, it erodes that trust.

In a time when thousands of Reno residents faced eviction, job loss, and uncertainty, a relatively small number of businesses (including those owned by political insiders) appear to have navigated the crisis with outsized benefit.

If nothing else, this situation deserves public disclosure and straightforward answers. Reno’s citizens should know whether its mayor — their public servant — also benefited from relief funds in a way others did not.

Closing Thought

I’m not claiming that Mayor Schieve did anything wrong. I’m saying that when public money goes to private businesses, especially those tied to public officials, the public deserves clear, honest answers.

After all, PPP wasn’t supposed to be a bailout for the well-connected. It was supposed to be help for the vulnerable, the struggling, those trying to survive.

If Schieve’s businesses were eligible — and appropriately qualified — then that’s one thing. But as long as there are contradictions between public statements, loan records, and the state’s shutdown rules, that eligibility remains questionable.

Reno deserves the truth. Its citizens deserve accountability. And more than that, we deserve a level playing field.

Washoe County Should Adopt the Truckee River Park Access Partnership with Reno River Inn

With Washoe County constrained by a lack of budget, the proposal from the Historic Reno River Inn represents a practical way to make river access possible for everyone. Why isn't it happening?

Michael Leonard

Jan 12, 2026

The owners of the Historic Reno River Inn have proposed making their land available for public recreational access. I read the proposal, and I met with Larry McNutt, the owner of the property, to hear about the Plan.

Larry proposes to turn the River Inn into a visitor’s center and turn some of the motel rooms into shops. He says he has talked with Washoe County officials and has been met with indifference. How could that be?

Is Commissioner Alexis Hill too busy running for governor to do her job of helping residents get a new park? Perhaps we could ask her. Phone: 775‑447‑3017 Email: ahill@washoecounty.gov

Governmental agencies have spent years talking about better river access, trail connectivity, and expanding outdoor recreation in a fiscally responsible way. Those goals are repeated across multiple master plans, public surveys, and policy documents. What the County has struggled with is not vision — it is execution.

That is why the proposed public-private partnership, the Truckee River Access Park, deserves serious attention and formal adoption. It offers something rare in public policy: a solution that aligns with existing plans, is faster to implement, cheaper to deliver, and supported by public demand.

In a time when budgets and rising construction costs constrain governments, this proposal represents a practical way to move from planning to progress.

The County Has a Vision, But It Is Stuck

The Carcione and Canepa Ranch plans, the Regional Parks & Open Space Master Plan, and the Tahoe to Pyramid Trail vision all point in the same direction: connect open spaces, improve river access, and expand trail networks so people can recreate.

But the County’s own planning documents also acknowledge the barriers:

• New infrastructure is expensive.

• Environmental permitting is slow and complex.

• Rail crossings, sewer connections, and road access are significant cost drivers.

• Capital budgets are limited and increasingly strained.

As a result, projects intended to improve quality of life often languish in planning purgatory for a decade or more before the public sees a benefit, if ever.

The Truckee River Access Park proposal exists to break that logjam and provide access to 24 acres of recreational property with 1 mile of river access on both sides.

Reno's Historic River Inn Heads to Trial: Harassment, or Free Speech, a Historic Property in Limbo Due to a Karen

A Ready-Made Asset Sitting in the Right Place

The property proposed for the Truckee River Access Park is uniquely positioned.

The Plan offers:

• Nearly a mile of Truckee River frontage on both sides of the river.

• Direct adjacency to County, City, and federal open space lands.

• An existing guarded railroad crossing for safe public access.

• Existing restrooms are already connected to the city sewer system.

• Existing road access and paved areas suitable for parking and staging.

These are not minor conveniences. They are the pieces of infrastructure that drive costs, delays, and environmental impacts when the County tries to build them.

This site already has what the County would otherwise need years and millions of dollars to create. So, what are they waiting for?

This Is Exactly What County Policy Calls For

The County’s own planning language repeatedly emphasizes:

• Connecting existing parks instead of acquiring new land.

• Seeking partnerships with private landowners.

• Prioritizing trails, river access, and open space over extensive built facilities.

• Leveraging existing infrastructure where possible.

The Truckee River Access Park is not a deviation from County strategy — it is a partnership with it. Rejecting or sidelining this proposal would not preserve County policy. It would contradict it and deny people a recreational facility that they want.

It Is the Fiscally Responsible Option

From a financial perspective, the comparison is straightforward.

This proposal saves the County from having to build:

• A railroad crossing.

• Restrooms.

• A Sewer system.

• Parking areas.

With this partnership, that translates into:

• Lower capital costs.

• Shorter timelines.

• Reduced regulatory risk.

• Fewer unknowns and fewer opportunities for cost overruns.

At a time when every department is being asked to do more with less, choosing the lower-cost, lower-risk path is not just prudent, it is responsible governance.

It Completes a Critical Missing Link in the Tahoe to Pyramid Trail

One of the most compelling aspects of the proposal is that it solves a real, tangible problem: the missing safe river-adjacent trail segment between Mayberry Park and the County lands upstream.

Right now, trail users are forced onto 4th Street — a busy road — because the trail disappears.

The proposal adds nearly a mile of continuous trail along the riverbank, connecting existing public lands and making the regional trail system safer, more attractive, and more usable.

That is not symbolic progress. That is a physical, measurable improvement.

Public Demand Is Already Established

The County has already conducted the surveys, workshops, and outreach. Residents consistently rank trails, river access, and natural open space as their most valued recreational assets.

The demand for this type of project is not speculative. It is documented.

What has been missing is an efficient way to deliver it.

Is Commissioner Alexis Hill too busy running for governor to do her job of helping residents get a new park? Perhaps we could ask her. Phone: 775‑447‑3017 Email: ahill@washoecounty.gov

A Smarter Funding Model for an Uncertain Future

The proposal’s blended funding model — combining County participation, private investment, event revenues, and flexible contributions depending on economic conditions — reflects fiscal realism.

It avoids placing the entire burden on taxpayers while still ensuring public benefit and public access.

This is not privatization. It is a partnership.

And it is increasingly how complex infrastructure gets built when governments cannot — and should not — shoulder the full cost alone.

The Larger Opportunity

Beyond the immediate project, the Truckee River Access Park serves as a test case for a more flexible, cooperative approach to expanding public amenities.

If Washoe County cannot partner successfully when:

• The land is ideally located,

• The infrastructure already exists,

• The public demand is apparent,

• The policy alignment is strong,

• And the fiscal case is favorable,

Then the question becomes: when will it ever make sense to partner?

What Adoption Should Mean

Adopting this proposal does not mean writing a blank check or surrendering public oversight.

Adopting the proposal means:

• Conducting a formal evaluation under the County’s unsolicited proposal framework.

• Negotiating clear terms for public access, maintenance, and liability.

• Requiring transparency on costs, savings, and timelines.

• Structuring the agreement to protect the public interest.

This is about moving deliberately instead of standing still.

Conclusion: This Is the Rare Easy Yes

Public policy is usually about choosing between competing priorities, conflicting interests, and imperfect options.

This is one of the rare cases where the benefits align:

• Faster delivery,

• Lower cost,

• Strong policy alignment,

• Demonstrated public demand,

• Reduced risk.

Washoe County does not need another study to know that this project makes sense. It requires the institutional will to say yes to a good idea when one finally appears. The Truckee River Access Park partnership is that idea. It should be adopted without delay. If you like this Plan, then take action to help make it happen.

What the “Small Business Child Care Investment Act” Does and What the Problem Really Is.

Congresswoman Susie Lee’s “Small Business Child Care Investment Act” is being promoted as a way to make childcare more affordable, but it doesn't solve the problem.

Michael Leonard

Jan 06, 2026

With elections coming up later this year, politicians are ramping up on the issues. Both Susie Lee at the Federal level and Alexis Hill at the State level are highlighting childcare as a campaign platform.

Congresswoman Susie Lee’s “Small Business Child Care Investment Act” is being promoted as a way to make child care more affordable.

What it actually does is much narrower: it allows nonprofit child care providers to access Small Business Administration (SBA) loan programs that are currently reserved for for-profit businesses.

In other words, the bill does not directly lower child care costs. It does not help parents pay for care. It does not reduce regulation. It does not increase household income.

It simply allows child care providers — mainly nonprofit and community-based centers — to borrow federally backed money to expand, renovate, or survive.

That raises a much more important question:

Why does child care now require government-backed debt to exist at all?

Congresswoman Susie Lee posted this on her Facebook on Monday, January 5th. If you’d like to read the many comments flaming Susie Lee, click the image to go to Facebook.

Why Do Childcare Providers Need SBA Loans?

Child care providers need SBA loans today because the business of caring for children has been transformed from a small, local, informal service into a highly regulated, capital-intensive institutional enterprise.

Running even a modest child care operation now requires:

• Commercial real estate or heavily modified residential space

• Compliance with zoning, fire, health, ADA, and safety codes

• Professional credentials and background checks

• Insurance and legal coverage

• Administrative staff and reporting systems

All of that costs money — up front — before a single child ever walks through the door. So providers need loans.

Not because child care is inherently expensive, but because government policy has made it costly to offer.

Alexis Hill, who is running for Nevada Governor, also wants to get in on the childcare issue, saying that “I can ensure that childcare is accessible and affordable”, but she doesn’t say how. You can click the image to see her reel on Facebook.

Childcare Didn’t Get Expensive by Accident

In the 1970s, my mother ran a small preschool in the basement of our house. She had about ten children. Parents trusted her because they knew her. She charged a modest fee that ordinary families could afford. The children learned their letters and numbers, developed social skills, and entered school well prepared.

She didn’t need a license.

She didn’t need a grant.

She didn’t need a subsidy.

She didn’t need a compliance officer.

She didn’t need a federal program.

She needed trust, stable economics, and the freedom to operate at a human scale.

That system worked. Today, it no longer exists.

And not because families suddenly changed — but because the economic and regulatory environment did.

What Actually Changed

We are told childcare is expensive because “the market failed.” That is not true. Childcare is costly because three things happened over the last fifty years:

1. Inflation destroyed the single-income family

In the post-war era, a single middle-class income could support a household. Today, two incomes are often barely enough.

Housing, healthcare, education, insurance, and taxes have all grown far faster than wages. That wasn’t an accident — it was the predictable result of monetary expansion, fiscal deficits, and policies that quietly devalued household purchasing power.

Families didn’t choose to need childcare. They were forced into it.

2. Regulation eliminated small-scale childcare

What my mother did would now be illegal in most places.

Today, to run even a tiny daycare, you need:

• State licensing

• Zoning approval

• Fire and health inspections

• Background checks

• Insurance policies

• ADA compliance

• Credential requirements

• Ongoing reporting and audits

Together, they make it economically impossible for small providers.

So the natural supply of neighborhood childcare disappeared.

What replaced it were institutional centers with overhead, compliance costs, administrators, and legal exposure — all of which get passed on to parents.

Cost rises because supply was crushed.

Not because childcare is inherently expensive.

3. The state replaced the community

Childcare shifted from:

• Informal → formal

• Local → institutional

• Personal trust → bureaucratic credentialing

• Neighbors → contractors and nonprofits

Once that shift happens, politicians step in to “fix” the rising costs — with subsidies, grants, tax credits, and programs.

Which require taxes.

Which further reduces household income.

Which increases dependence on childcare.

Which increases demand for more subsidies.

This is the cycle we’re in.

The government created the problem, then taxes families again to cover the consequences of its own policies.

The Political Shell Game

When politicians talk about “affordable childcare,” they are addressing a downstream symptom, not the upstream cause.

The cause is:

• Families can no longer survive on one income

• Informal economic activity has been regulated out of existence

• Community trust has been replaced by institutional control

• Purchasing power has been steadily eroded

So the solution offered is not to restore family viability or local autonomy, but to expand state or federal involvement and taxation.

Which means:

The same system that broke the model is now demanding more money to fix it. That is not reform. That is dependency management.

This Was Not Inevitable

We did not always live this way.

We did not need massive childcare bureaucracies.

We did not need federal subsidies.

We did not need tax credits and grant programs.

We did not need NGOs and compliance frameworks.

We needed:

• Stable money

• Modest regulation

• Family-supporting wages

• Trust within communities

• Freedom for small enterprises

We traded those for inflation, bureaucracy, institutionalization, and centralized control — and then we wonder why families feel trapped, angry, and economically fragile.

The Hard Truth

Childcare didn’t become expensive because parents failed.

It became expensive because:

• Government monetary policy reduced family purchasing power

• Government regulation destroyed small local providers

• Government taxation reduced household flexibility

• Government then offered partial refunds in the form of programs — with strings attached

And now families are told to be grateful for help managing a problem they didn’t create. That’s not compassion. That’s misdirection.

The Real Question

The real question is not:

“How do we subsidize childcare?”

The real question is:

“Why did the government make it impossible for families and communities to handle this themselves?”

Until we’re willing to answer that and fix it, we’ll keep taxing people to solve problems caused by the very system asking for more power.

And families will keep getting poorer — and more dependent on government.

A Year of Taking a Deeper Dive into Reno News

Here's a look back at 2025 and the growth of Mike's Reno Report from May till Dec 2025.

Michael Leonard

Jan 05, 2026

When I started in late May, Mike’s Reno Report was an experiment. By the end of the year, I had published 150 articles with a ~70% open rate, and it had become a running record of how Reno works, who makes decisions, who benefits, who gets ignored, and who gets billed.

How This Reporting Works

I write investigative journalism. I don’t publish rumors or anonymous accusations. Everything that appears here is either verified directly through documents, public records, on-the-record statements, or corroborated by multiple sources.

I spend hours reading city agendas, staff reports, legal filings, budgets, development applications, campaign finance disclosures, audit documents, and court records, along with local and state news coverage.

Articles are written over several days. I usually have 3 or 4 in the works at any time. If I can’t confirm something, it doesn’t run, no matter how much someone might insist.

People send tips and ask questions. I get some interesting stories sent to me. Some turn into articles and some don’t, either because they can’t be verified, aren't accurate, or aren’t in the public interest.

I am intentionally non-partisan. I write about candidates, campaigns, and elected officials across the political spectrum, but I don’t endorse parties, platforms, or factions.

My interest is in how power is being exercised, how public money is being spent, and whether institutions are doing what they say they are doing.

I regularly talk with candidates and officeholders to understand their perspective and to give them a chance to explain or respond — not to promote them, but to get the record right.

The goal of this newsletter is to make information visible, legible, and grounded in evidence so that readers can form their own conclusions. This takes time. It means fewer stories but better ones.

What Was Covered

Looking back at this year’s articles, a few themes emerge. None of them was planned. They were written because I kept seeing gaps between official narratives and lived reality. I kept seeing a deeper story than what the news was reporting.

Reno’s finances are not abstract.

I wrote articles about the city’s structural deficit, tax deals, subsidies, and budget priorities because those aren’t accounting problems; they’re political choices. “$24 million in the hole” isn’t just a number. It’s deferred maintenance, rising fees, shrinking services, and future taxes.

Reno’s Structural Deficit and the Culture That Created It: $24 Million in the Hole.

Revitalization is a story — and stories can be false.

Reno is full of words: transformation, renaissance, activation. I followed what happened instead: demolitions, stalled projects, broken promises, and communities affected by deals they never agreed to. From the Neon Line to Harrah’s to Stonegate and Lakeside, the pattern was consistent.

Harrah’s Sold Us Boise. Then Ahlquist Walked Away. Why Did That Happen?

Power in Reno is often exercised quietly and indirectly.

We have Airport authorities that no one voted for. Land sales that are routed through intermediaries. Boards and commissions with influence and almost no scrutiny. Much of this year was spent identifying where power really sits and how far removed it is from public accountability.

Who Runs the Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority — and Why You Never Voted for Them

Local politics is less about ideology and more about behavior.

The mayor’s race revealed that the dividing line isn’t left vs. right. It’s transparency vs. spin, accountability vs. insulation, listening vs. pressure. Personalities mattered as they revealed patterns, who bullies, who deflects, and who engages.

Reno’s 2026 Mayoral Race: Who is in the Lineup? What are their Chances?

People care most when policy affects their daily lives.

You engaged hardest when topics were tangible: traffic and commuter rail, license plate tracking, crime and courts, speech on campus, homelessness programs, and neighborhood change. Not abstractions. Not slogans.

What If Reno Had a Real Commuter Train to USA Parkway? Not a Trolly.

What surprised me most this year wasn’t what got the most views; it was what got shared, discussed, and argued over. That tells me something important: people here are hungry for information. For someone willing to say, “That doesn’t add up — and here’s why.”

Subscriber Growth: From Start to Scale

Six months ago, this publication was small. At the start of July, Mike’s Reno Report had about 900 subscribers. Today, it has just under 5,000. Articles regularly get 5000 to 6000 views. This put my report in the top 5% of Substacks, with more views per article than some local newspapers.

What matters more than the number is how it happened. It happened through reporting that reached an audience. The people who subscribed are the ones who read, share, comment, and care. It’s an audience built around attention and interest.

More important than the numbers is how those subscribers behave:

• 87% of subscribers were active in the past month

• The average email open rate is about 70%

• The number of times emails were opened is over 409,000

• Articles got comments, Shares, and links clicked

By industry standards, those numbers are exceptional. Many newsletters consider 30–40% “active” a success. This audience is more than twice that, which tells me people aren’t just subscribed—they’re paying attention.

Of those who share location data, Nevada is the largest group by far, followed by California, and a smaller number of readers across the country who track Reno because they’ve lived here, own property here, or care about what happens here.

Traffic: Occasional Reach to Sustained Visibility

Over the last 180 days, the publication generated approximately 485,000 views. The shape of that traffic tells a more important story than the total.

There were surges in attention that corresponded to stories that appealed to the audience. Traffic settled into a sustained range rather than boom-and-bust cycles. That’s the difference between virality and relevance.

What the Publication Became

This year was about building trust. The growth you see reflects that approach. This isn’t a drive-by readership. It’s a community that reads, thinks, and shows up.

The publication became visible. That visibility is now durable. It’s the result of consistent, specific, document-driven reporting that readers recognize as valuable and trustworthy enough to return to, and to share.

This new year, the work doesn’t change. I’ll continue to follow the money, follow the incentives, name the decision-makers, document the consequences, and keep building a public record that can’t be waved away with talking points. Reno deserves that.

Can Church and Cinema Coexist? A Bold Proposal for Reno’s Riverwalk Theater

With the sale to Living Stones Church confirmed and remodeling starting, a pivotal downtown site faces a turning point. Will it be exclusive—or expansive?

Michael Leonard

Dec 30, 2025

What was once speculation has now become a shift in ownership of one of the City’s most notable —but underutilized—riverfront spaces.

With the sale to Living Stones Church confirmed and remodeling starting, a pivotal downtown site faces a turning point. Will it be exclusive—or expansive?

The reaction has been skeptical. People worry that a prime downtown entertainment venue could be lost to a limited-use religious facility.

This controversy isn’t about religion; it’s about land use, downtown vitality, and whether Reno has the tools and processes to protect scarce, high-value civic space from being quietly converted into a low-activation, tax-exempt, single-use property without public process or policy review.

As Living Stones Church now owns the downtown movie theater, a vision emerges: what if Reno didn’t have to choose between faith and film? Craig Parish, a pastor with Living Stones, had previously shared that the church was exploring a mixed-use opportunity.

“We’re imagining an activated riverfront project alongside the church with possible things like a coffee shop, quick bites, retail, art gallery/workshop, preschool, anchor restaurant…” —Craig Parish, July 2025

Their goal, according to Parish, is to create something more than a sanctuary, something “in the city, for the city.” Now that the property is theirs, there’s a unique window to shape what this space becomes and whether it serves the entire community.

A Shared Vision: Church + Arts + Coffee + Gallery

With its riverfront walkable location and screening infrastructure, the Riverside Theater is one of the City’s most promising cultural properties. Now, it could be headed in a new direction.

Instead of an either/or scenario, Living Stones has the opportunity to create a hybrid project —one that recognizes the building’s entertainment value while embracing the church’s spiritual mission.

Dedicate a worship space for Living Stones’ services and events, and then dedicate one or two of the screening rooms as an art theater.

This could include independent film screenings, classic film nights, educational programming, youth media workshops, and film festivals. It would provide Reno with its first dedicated art house cinema, something the City has long lacked.

The remaining parts of the building could then house:

• A coffee shop or café open to the public daily

• A gallery or maker space showcasing local artists

• Possibly classrooms or flexible retail uses

• An anchor restaurant or community kitchen

This model of shared space, featuring a mix of cultural, spiritual, and commercial functions, is gaining popularity in revitalized downtowns across the country.

In places like Austin, Portland, and Santa Fe, churches and art organizations have successfully collaborated under one roof to serve broader communities.

Financial and Cultural Benefits

For Living Stones, incorporating an art theater would serve not only the public but also ensure greater activation of the building and attract grant opportunities, arts funding, and community partnerships. It would also deepen the church’s mission of contributing to Reno’s cultural life.

For Reno residents, it would mean the return of downtown cinema, not as a corporate megaplex, but as a curated, community-run venue for creativity, dialogue, and discovery. It would also ensure that a key riverfront property stays alive seven days a week, not just on Sundays.

Could Reno Sell the Bowling Stadium and Its Downtown Venues?

How Can the City of Reno Influence the Outcome?

A Councilmember has framed the controversy as a question of private property rights. They say that the City of Reno does not control private real estate transactions. The sale of the building was a private deal between a buyer and a seller, and the City cannot block a purchaser based on their identity.

What that framing leaves out is what happens after the sale. While the City cannot control ownership, it does regulate land use. Zoning, design review, and redevelopment standards continue to apply — especially for a riverfront property inside the Downtown Redevelopment Area.

Those rules exist to ensure that high-value downtown sites contribute to pedestrian activity, street-level activation, and economic spillover. This is why concerns about inactive frontage and the loss of existing retail space are legitimate policy questions, not emotional reactions.

Downtown redevelopment guidelines aim to prevent blank walls and inward-facing uses along key pedestrian corridors, such as First Street and the Riverwalk.

The conversion of the Riverside Century theaters into tax-exempt religious property has a direct, measurable fiscal cost that has not been part of the public discussion. While the building was privately owned, it generated $114,326 per year in property taxes, including $36,843 for the Reno Redevelopment Agency, $16,490 for the City of Reno’s general fund, nearly $20,000 for the Washoe County School District, and $19,475 for the Reno Business Improvement District, which funds downtown maintenance and activation.

Once the property becomes church-owned, that entire revenue stream drops to zero permanently. Over ten years, that is more than $1.1 million removed from public budgets, and over a generation, it exceeds $3 million.

The costs are shifted onto other property owners and taxpayers. So this is not just a question of religious use or cultural fit; it is a long-term fiscal decision that weakens downtown’s financial base and directly contradicts the city’s stated redevelopment and activation goals.

This is especially serious given the large number of vacancies on Virginia Street and the fact that the city-owned properties, the Ballroom, Event Center, and Bowling Stadium, don’t pay property taxes. The Lear Theater has sat empty for decades, and the former Harrah’s project is in trouble again.

What the Exit of Developer Ahlquist Means for the Harrah’s Revival Project

We Need a Place that Serves the Community

Adaptive reuse is generally preferable to long-term vacancy, but it is not a blank check. The City’s responsibility does not end at the closing table. When a high-value riverfront site changes use, the public interest is not in who occupies the space, but in whether that use supports the broader goals the City itself has articulated for downtown revitalization: active streets, economic spillover, and a built environment that encourages people to linger, walk, and spend time in the core.

Whether a building is occupied is not the only issue; how it engages the street matters. By reducing the problem to “private sale versus vacancy,” the City avoids grappling with the broader responsibility it still holds.

The real question is not who bought the building, but whether the resulting use aligns with the City’s own stated goals for downtown revitalization.

Concerns about “dead frontage” on First Street are not aesthetic nitpicking but central to downtown policy. Blank walls, closed facades, and non-retail ground floors break pedestrian flow and undermine adjacent businesses.

Preventing those outcomes is precisely why redevelopment guidelines exist and why downtown properties are treated differently from buildings in industrial parks or suburban commercial zones.

The City of Reno should work with Livingstone Church to ensure the property serves not only the church but also the community.

What If Reno Had a Real Commuter Train to USA Parkway? Not a Trolly.

Reno has a transportation problem. I-80 is backed up from Reno to US-Parkway, and people are complaining. Politicians talk about solutions, but do they understand the situation?

Michael Leonard

Dec 29, 2025

Every weekday morning and evening, thousands of people drive from Reno, Sparks, and the North Valleys out to the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center (TRIC). That commute runs through a single fragile corridor — I-80 and Truckee Canyon — that regularly becomes a bottleneck due to accidents, snow, wind, construction, or simple volume. When it breaks, it doesn’t just slow down; it stops.

So what do politicians do? Some propose more highway lanes on I-80. Some suggest a light rail. Both of these ideas are $1 billion-plus in cost and would take a decade to implement, if at all. Light rail is not feasible because it requires new track, and there is nowhere to build it between Reno and USA Parkway, and it is designed for in-town use, not regional commuting.

But there is another model — one that already exists, works, and happens to match Reno’s situation almost perfectly. It’s called commuter rail.

This is the ACE Train. It is a commuter train. It is designed for 25-mile nonstop commuter routes, such as Reno to the USA Parkway. I rode it for years from Pleasanton to North San Jose. Its entire route is Stockton to San Jose.

The ACE Train: A Working Example

In the Bay Area and Central Valley, there is a commuter train called the Altamont Corridor Express, or ACE. It runs from Stockton to downtown San Jose — about 86 miles — serving people who live in one region and work in another.

It’s not light rail. It’s not high-speed rail. It’s not a downtown streetcar. It’s a commuter train that can run on the existing Union Pacific tracks.

When I rode it, ACE ran three trains in the morning and three in the afternoon. Each train was four to six cars long, using Bombardier bi-level commuter coaches, pulled by a standard diesel locomotive. The trip from Pleasanton, where I lived, to North San Jose, where I worked, was 25 miles and took about 45 minutes. That is the same distance as Reno to the USA Parkway.

ACE uses existing Union Pacific freight rail corridors. The public agencies didn’t build a brand-new rail line, which is not possible from Reno to the USA Parkway. They negotiated access, paid for sidings and signaling, bought trains, built modest stations, and ran a service that targeted one particular problem: long-distance regional commuting.

Reno’s Commute Is Structurally the same.

Reno’s situation has the same ingredients that ACE had:

• A concentrated employment center (TRIC).

• A long, linear commute corridor.

• A fragile highway route prone to disruption.

• Existing freight rail infrastructure.

• Peak-direction demand.

What Reno does not have is a governance structure willing to treat transportation as a regional system instead of a collection of disconnected projects. We have politicians who like to trot out vague ideas that have not been thought out.

Rail already runs here. Freight trains run through Reno and Sparks, past USA Parkway, and on to Fernley and beyond every day. The physical infrastructure exists.

The corridor exists. The demand exists. What doesn’t exist is the institutional will or understanding of what can work.

Why Commuter Rail Is Not Light Rail

A lot of people talk about “light rail” when they mean “a train that carries people.” Alexis Hill likes to talk about building a light rail. That’s a category mistake.

Light rail is designed for short urban trips with many stops — downtown to Midtown, campus to stadium, neighborhood to neighborhood. It is slow by design and expensive to build in new corridors.

The Reno–TRIC problem is not an urban circulation problem. It’s a regional commute problem.

The correct tool is commuter rail — exactly like ACE, Metrolink, Sounder, or Caltrain — running on existing freight corridors, with limited stops and schedules tuned to work shifts.

Trying to solve a regional commute with urban transit tools is how you end up with billion-dollar projects that don’t move the people who need moving.

This is theVTA light rail. I used to get off the ACE train and ride VTA the rest of the way to work. It works well in San Jose and the surrounding area. It is not designed for high-speed commuting on a 25-mile non-stop route like Reno to TRIC.

What It Would Take

An ACE-style Reno–TRIC commuter service would not require:

• New rail corridors

• Tunneling through the canyon

• Massive land acquisition

• Or futuristic technology

It would require:

• Negotiating track rights with Union Pacific

• Adding passing sidings where needed

• Building two or three simple stations

• Buying a small fleet of standard commuter trains

• Setting up a regional authority to operate it

That’s not trivial. But it is possible.

The estimated capital cost for something like this is likely in the low hundreds of millions of dollars — not billions — and annual operating costs are low compared to alternatives.

If Reno wanted an ACE-style ‘3 trains in / 3 trains out’ Reno-to-USA Parkway service using UP track, a plausible cost range is $175M–$350M in startup capital and $8M–$15M/year to operate, with Union Pacific’s required capacity upgrades and access terms being the most significant swing factor.

The Real Obstacle Is Political, Not Technical

Union Pacific controls the corridor. That means that local government has to either pay, negotiate, or legislate to gain access. It requires coordination between Washoe County, Storey County, Lyon County, RTC, NDOT, and the state.

Why This Matters

Every additional lane of I-80 induces more driving, more sprawl, more fragility, and more dependence on a single corridor that keeps failing. Widening the freeway could cost $1 billion and take a decade.

A commuter rail line would give the region what it currently lacks —an alternative way to move people that is less expensive and faster to get done.

It would make commuting more predictable, not just faster. It would reduce the region’s dependence on an endlessly widening highway that will never be wide enough.

The Question Is Not “Can We Do This?”

We know we can. Other regions with the same density, the same politics, and the same freight rail constraints have done it.

The question is whether Reno is willing to try a model that fits the problem it has. The ACE train exists. It runs every day. It carries thousands of people who would otherwise be on clogged highways.

Reno doesn’t need to invent anything. It just needs to decide to build what already works and stop chasing trolley dreams. Next time that your favorite politician suggests some great idea to fix the transportation problem, ask them for details.

Eddie Lorton’s Facebook Problem: Patterns, Pressure, and Public Misrepresentation

For months, Eddie Lorton’s Facebook page has functioned less like a serious mayoral platform and more like a running feed of grievance posts, partial narratives, and recycled “memories” that misstate how the Reno city government actually works.

Michael Leonard

Dec 24, 2025

On their own, each post might be dismissed as sloppy or uninformed. Taken together — and combined with Eddie’s private conduct — they reveal a troubling pattern.

This article documents that pattern and why this behavior is problematic for anyone seeking to be Reno’s mayor.

Eddie Lorton: The Businessman Who Keeps Challenging Reno’s Political Machine

Facebook “Memories” and the Defense

One recurring tactic Eddie uses is reposting old Facebook “memories” to revive prior accusations, which are often incorrect. When I wrote about one such post, Eddie claimed publicly that I “didn’t know what a Facebook memory is.”

In my article, I acknowledged that the post might be a memory — and explained that this did not change the substance of the issue. The problem was not the date. The problem was that Eddie was misrepresenting city processes and offering an incomplete account of events.

When Accusations Aren’t Anchored: A Problem for Mayoral Candidate Eddie Lorton

Stonegate: Taking Credit from Others

Eddie repeatedly told me he raised the issue of the Regional Planning Commission’s required approval for the Stonegate project at an August 12 planning meeting. He pushed me to name him in an article as the person who “flagged” the issue.

Multiple people who were present at that meeting told me Eddie did not speak. They said that those who did raise the issue were Councilmember Meghan Ebert and former Councilmember Toni Harsh.

This matters because Eddie’s pattern is to take credit for actions he did not take, then to pressure others to publicly validate that version.

How the Community Stopped StoneGate’s Zoning Change — And Why It Matters for Lakeridge

Smearing the Press When They Don’t Cooperate

After Bruce Parks, Chair of Washoe GOP, publicly said Picon Press “lacks credibility,” Eddie followed up in the comments by claiming the “same with Mike’s Reno Report.”

This is a familiar tactic: when factual reporting contradicts a preferred narrative, discredit the messenger. It is especially notable given Eddie’s prior attempts to influence my coverage privately.

You cannot both demand favorable coverage and then attack the outlet when you don’t get it. Apparently, Eddie Lorton does not believe in freedom of the press.

Link, Eddie Lorton throws a fundraiser

A Case Study in Governance Illiteracy

On December 15, 2025, Eddie reposted a 2024 “memory” criticizing City Manager Jackie Bryant’s salary. This exposes a misunderstanding of city government.

The city manager executes policies passed by the city council. The mayor is not the city manager’s boss and has no unilateral authority over staff operations.

Publicly attacking the city manager while running for mayor is not “transparency.” It is how you guarantee that, if elected, city staff could choose not to cooperate with you.

City government runs on trust, competence, and working relationships. Eddie’s posting behavior actively destroys all three.

The Tracker Claim and the Beadles Connection

Eddie reposted a December 15, 2022, memory claiming he had nothing to do with the tracker placed on Mayor Hillary Schieve’s car.

Yet Eddie received a campaign donation of $4,799 in 2020 and another $4,799 in 2022 from Robert Beadles, who later admitted he had hired the private investigator who placed the tracker.

Robert Beadles confirms he hired private investigator who tracked Reno mayor

Eddie is aligned with Bruce Parks, Chair of the Washoe GOP, and Beadles is an executive team member of that same organization, approved by Parks.

Eddie continues to deflect from a political network that engaged in conduct widely viewed as unethical and alarming, while benefiting financially from that network.

Open Meeting Act Claims That Don’t Hold Up

Eddie has repeatedly alleged Open Meeting Law violations where none exist:

• Meadowood Mall (2016): Eddie reposted a memory alleging an open-meeting violation. The allegation has been examined and found to be false. See the Dec. 12 “Accusations” article linked above.

• Indian community event: Eddie claimed a quorum violation when council members appeared on stage to show support. Merely attending an event does not constitute a meeting or quorum violation under Nevada law.

These claims reflect either ignorance of the Open Meeting Act or a willingness to weaponize it rhetorically. Someone running for Reno Mayor should know better.

GSR Arena: Fear Without Facts

Eddie claimed that contaminated soil at the GSR Arena site posed a significant problem and framed his post as “protecting the people’s money.”

The facts:

• The contamination was remediated in two days.

• No public funds were spent up front.

• Tax Increment Financing does not activate until after the project is built and generating revenue.

This was not transparency. It was fear-posting. Where was Eddie when the GSR TIF agreement was underdiscussion?

Eddie later attended a concert at the GSR and accepted hospitality while criticizing the GSR’s project. That is not how you build relationships to get things done.

Tom Biscardi, who hosted Eddie, is described as a “Barnum and Bailey” type promoter who made movies about searching for Bigfoot and who claimed to have found a dead Bigfoot that turned out to be made from a Gorilla suit and some roadkill.

Reno’s 2026 Mayoral Race: Who is in the Lineup? What are their Chances?

Attacking the RDA While Needing the RDA

Eddie has called for the dismantling of the Reno Redevelopment Agency. As mayor, he would have to work with the RDA. Attacking an agency you would depend on is not reform. It is self-sabotage. This is especially troubling, as Eddie says he would sell the downtown properties if elected mayor, but he would need the RDA’s cooperation to get it done. How cooperative would they be with Eddie?

Code Enforcement Hypocrisy

Eddie has criticized downtown code enforcement, saying the city is “trying to regulate folks out of business.”

Eddie owns a property at 555 E 4th St. that some call blighted. The tenant is Club Underground, a rave-style nightclub.

If elected, he would need to work with the same city management and council he now demonizes.

The Pattern Is the Story

This article is not about one post, one claim, or one disagreement.

It is about a consistent pattern:

• Misstating how city government works

• Claiming credit for actions taken by others

• Recycling old accusations without context

• Pressuring coverage behind the scenes

• Attacking journalists when persuasion fails

This is not how you build trust. It is how you burn it. One wonders whether Eddie is serious about running for mayor or just likes attention.

Reno deserves leadership grounded in facts, process, and an understanding that public office requires more than indignation and Facebook memories.

What if the Mayor Ran Reno Like They Run Their Household? One Candidate Already Does.

Overspending, constrained revenues, and long-term obligations have left the City in a financially fragile position — one where judgment, restraint, and risk management matter more than rhetoric when it comes to the mayor.

Michael Leonard

Dec 23, 2025

Reno City Councilmember Devon Reese’s 1.7 Million Dollar house at 8665 Golfwood Ct. in Somerset.

Reno closed last year with an estimated $24 million structural deficit, and this year looks to be the same.

That’s why it is reasonable to examine how leaders who seek greater responsibility approach financial decisions and run their lives.

One such figure is Devon Reese, who has served on the Reno City Council since 2019 and is running for mayor in 2026.

This is about patterns of financial decision-making — and what they signal.

Reno’s Structural Deficit and the Culture That Created It: $24 Million in the Hole.

A Choice Between Stability and Prestige

Before being appointed to City Council in 2019, Reese and his husband lived in a 2,000-square-foot home at 1665 Spicewood Cir. in Somersett, which his mother gifted to him. By any measure, it was an affordable option — modest in size, manageable in cost, and aligned with long-term financial sustainability. The current Zillow estimate is $546,000, about average for Reno. He could have stayed there.

Instead, once Reese had the additional income from the City Council, he sold Spicewood. He used the equity from that home to purchase a 5,700-square-foot house at 8865 Golfwood Ct. in Somersett, which he acquired in 2020 for approximately $1.03 million and later refinanced, extracting cash and taking a home equity loan. The Golfwood house is currently estimated at $1,734,200 on Zillow.

The result was a dramatic escalation of fixed-cost financial obligations. Reese then transferred Spicewood to family members Cassidy and Wendy Reese.

Devon and Filipe enjoyed a 2-week vacation in Europe in 2025 January, 2025

The Cost Structure of Golfwood

Based on publicly available recorded deeds, estimated interest rates, and standard loan assumptions, the Golfwood property now carries:

• Approximately $1.43 million in mortgage debt

• Roughly $6,800 per month in mortgage and HELOC payments

• About $1,600 per month in taxes, HOA, insurance, and upkeep

That places the total cost to own at approximately $8,500 per month, or over $100,000 in cash outflow per year, just for a place to live.

To sustain that housing cost within standard lending ratios, roughly $330,000 in gross annual income is required, before accounting for any other personal debt.

Reese had multiple VA-backed loans over time on both properties, which he obtained because he was married to Felipe Cisneros, who had served in the US Marine Corps.

Financial analysis indicates that Reese has no built-up equity in his home, due to refinancing and taking a home equity loan. In other words, he is underwater, just like Reno under the current leadership.

This is not reasonable housing. It is high-leverage housing.

Reno’s $24 Million Deficit: What It Really Means

The HELOC as a Signal

In early 2024, during a high-interest-rate environment, Reese added a $202,000 HELOC to the property at an estimated interest rate of around 9%.

A HELOC at that rate materially increases monthly obligations, reduces equity, and introduces variable-rate risk when borrowing costs were peaking.

People typically get these home equity loans to finance lifestyle choices such as vacations and to pay off other debt, such as credit card debt that is run up from living an extravagant lifestyle.

That is not how risk-averse balance sheets are managed. This is high-risk behavior that often leads to bankruptcy. Of course, Reese knows this, as he went bankrupt in 2009, but he continues high-risk behavior.

Devon and Felipe enjoyed a 2-week vacation to South America in April, 2025.

Links to Supporting Documents

Link, 4747983-1.pdf - Grant deed with no transfer tax, for Spicewood from Virginia Reese to Devon Reese, Sept 26, 2017, indicating a gift of the property.

Link, 5064118-1.pdf - Original VA loan on Golfwood, Aug 11 2020.

Link, 5059541-1.pdf - Deed transferring Spicewood to family members Cassidy and Wendy Reese, July 27, 2020.

Link, 5201886-1.pdf - Deed refinance VA loan on Golfwood, July 8, 2021.

Link, 5435093-1.pdf - HELOC Deed for Golfwood, Feb 12, 2024.

Link, Case-09-51211-gwz - Reese Bankruptcy filing, April 24, 2009

For reference, I spent 10 years in banking doing financial analysis on real estate projects. Hence, this type of modeling is familiar to me and is typically used to assess risk for high-end borrowers. All information used is publicly available.

Devon Reese parties with Mayor Hillary Schieve. Notice the chamber orchestra.

Publicly Displayed Lifestyle

At the same time, Reese has publicly posted photographs on Facebook showing:

• A 2-week vacation to Europe in January of 2025

• A 2-week vacation to South America in April of 2025

• Large home gatherings featuring high-end food and champagne

• Attendance at black-tie events with celebrities.

The relevance is simple: they stand in visible contrast to a household balance sheet that appears highly leveraged, much like the City of Reno’s own finances.

Power, Influence, and Donations: Inside Devon Reese’s Rise in Reno Politics

A Familiar Pattern for Reno

Reno’s fiscal posture today looks uncomfortably similar:

• Ambitious commitments to big projects

• Heavy reliance on leverage and future assumptions

• Bond debt, Tax incentive financing

When revenues fall short, the City reaches for reserves, accounting maneuvers, or one-time fixes — the municipal equivalent of tapping a line of credit to make the numbers work. That parallel should give voters pause.

Devon Reese parties with Stephen Colbert while Mayor Schieve chats with then Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen.

Leadership Is About Restraint

Cities do not fail because leaders lack vision. They fail because leaders confuse aspiration with affordability.

Reno does not need champagne governance. It requires restraint, discipline, and leaders who understand that prestige choices often carry hidden costs.

Voters considering the City’s next mayor should ask a straightforward question:

When faced with a stable, affordable option versus a larger, more prestigious one that required maximum leverage, which choice did you make, and why?

Because how someone manages their own risk is often the clearest preview of how they will manage ours.

Running for Governor in Northern Nevada: A Lesson for Washoe Contenders

Can a politician from Northern Nevada win the race to become governor of Nevada? It's possible but difficult as you will see. Some candidates have little chance of winning.

Michael Leonard

Dec 22, 2025

Nevada is a state with two political realities: Clark County, where nearly three-quarters of Nevadans live, and everywhere else, including Washoe County.

Any candidate for governor who forgets this is finished before they start. Reno politicians have learned this lesson the hard way. A few broke through, but others will be buried under Clark County’s advantage.

One candidate who has little chance of becoming governor but gets favorable news coverage is Washoe County Commissioner Alexis Hill, as you will learn in this article.

Clark County is the Key to Success

The modern political power structure in Southern Nevada is inseparable from the legacy of Harry Reid, who spent decades building what became the most effective Democratic turnout machine in the western United States. Reid’s operation fused the ground strength of the Culinary Workers Union with disciplined voter data, minority outreach, and a deep bench of casino and national Democratic donors.

This machine proved its dominance repeatedly—rescuing Reid himself in his near-impossible 2010 reelection, then carrying candidates like Catherine Cortez Masto, Jacky Rosen, and Steve Sisolak to statewide victory.

Its genius was block-by-block canvassing, multilingual outreach, an early-voting strategy, and a focus on turnout in working-class and Latino neighborhoods. This apparatus remains the single most decisive force in statewide elections, and no candidate for governor can survive without either winning its backing.

The Situation in Reno and Washoe

In Reno, the blueprint for city- and county-level success runs through Jessica Sferrazza, whose political machine blended old-family credibility with the three forces that decide elections in Northern Nevada: unions, developers, and casino money.

As a three-term city council member and the daughter of former mayor and judge Pete Sferrazza, she inherited institutional trust. She fused it with relationships within the building trades, public-sector unions, and Reno’s growth-oriented development class. That network delivered early money, door-knockers, endorsements, and protection inside City Hall—an infrastructure robust enough to vault political newcomers like Hillary Schieve and Alexis Hill into office.

But for all its effectiveness in municipal and county races, the Sferrazza machine is Reno and Washoe-centric: built for zoning fights, redevelopment deals, and local campaigns, not for scaling into Clark County’s union-dominated, casino-funded, turnout-driven statewide battlefield.

Those Who Made it and Who Almost Made it to the Governor’s Mansion

Bob Cashell: One of the most influential Northern Nevada politicians

A successful hotel-casino operator with a warm retail-politics style, Cashell built a rare bipartisan reputation—serving as a Republican, later as a Democrat, and eventually returning to the GOP—earning broad goodwill as a pragmatic dealmaker rather than an ideologue.

Bob entered statewide service as Lieutenant Governor from 1983 to 1987, a combination of business success, local political credibility, and the Republican political environment of the early 1980s.

As Mayor of Reno from 2002 to 2014, he was popular and closely identified with downtown revitalization and civic boosterism. Yet Cashell’s very strength became his limitation: he was viewed as deeply Reno-centric, never cultivating the Clark County power base—unions, casino strip donors, and Las Vegas voter blocs—required to win the governship statewide.

His peak influence came during his mayoral tenure, not during a window when a credible gubernatorial run aligned with opportunity. The result was a career of outsized regional influence but no serious path to the governor’s mansion.

Brian Sandoval: The Reno Republican Who Cracked the Code

Brian Sandoval is the model for how a Washoe-based candidate can win. A Reno lawyer and legislator, he began in the Nevada Assembly in 1994, quickly building credibility as a moderate Republican from Reno. His Washoe roots gave him a secure base in Northern Nevada. He built credibility by serving as Attorney General and as chair of the Nevada Gaming Commission. His appointment to the federal judgeship by President George W. Bush gave him prestige beyond local politics.

Sandoval ran for governor in 2010, when his opponent, Jim Gibbons, was embroiled in scandal. But the key wasn’t just circumstance — it was Sandoval’s centrist appeal and his ability to compete in Clark County because of his statewide experience.

Sandoval locked down Washoe, ran up the score in rurals, and — critically — neutralized the disadvantage in Clark County by presenting himself as a pragmatic, business-friendly problem solver. Sandoval wasn’t dismissed as a “Reno candidate.” He was seen as a Nevada candidate, equally at home in Carson City and Las Vegas.

Adam Laxalt: Grandson of a Governor

Adam Laxalt entered the 2018 governor’s race with one of the most recognizable names in Nevada politics as the grandson of former Governor Paul Laxalt and the Nevada Attorney General from 2015 to 2019. Still, his candidacy ultimately exposed the modern limits of a rural- and Northern Nevada–centric Republican strategy. Laxalt dominated the rural counties and performed solidly in Washoe. Still, he was outmatched in Clark County, where Democratic turnout, driven by unions and the Las Vegas political machine, proved decisive.

Closely aligned with Donald Trump and the national MAGA movement, Laxalt energized the conservative base but struggled with moderates and independents in the Clark County suburbs—voters who now decide statewide elections. He lost to Clark County Commissioner Steve Sisolak by a narrow margin.

This result underscored a new political reality: name recognition, rural dominance, and even the attorney general’s office are not enough to overcome Clark County without a broad cross-party appeal.

The Washoe Contenders

Hillary Schieve: “Sparkle Pony” Politics

There have been rumors that Schieve wants to run for higher office, possibly governor, but no announcement has been made so far. Schieve has won Reno’s mayoral races handily, but not by building her own infrastructure. Her success was engineered by Jessica Sferrazza’s machine — a web of union endorsements, developer money, and casino ties handed down from an earlier generation of Reno Democrats.

Locals call Schieve “Sparkle Pony,” a dig at her tendency to chase attention and lean into image-driven politics rather than policy results. While she parlayed her role into a national profile, serving as President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, she has no base in Clark County. Without Culinary Union support, casino donors, or southern Latino outreach, her Reno brand can’t scale statewide. She has no chance of winning.

The Wild and Crazy Legacy of Reno Mayor Hillary Schieve

Alexis Hill: “Trolley Hill” Dreams

Alexis Hill is openly running for governor in 2026 as a Democrat. Also a beneficiary of Sferrazza, her liabilities are glaring. Many in Washoe see her as ethically slippery, goofy in presentation, and prone to improbable ideas like building light rail with no funding source — earning the behind-the-scenes nickname “Trolley Hill.”

Her most significant problem isn’t image, though — it’s exposure. She has no presence in Clark County, no relationships with the Culinary Union, and no track record with southern business or political donors outside Washoe County. She has no statewide experience in public office. She has not been in the legislature. Even if she wins in Washoe, she has no support in Clark County. She has no chance of becoming governor, but maybe she is LARPing to get name recognition for something else.

Washoe County Chaos: A Look at Dysfunctional Leadership

A Northern Nevada Wildcard

Kate Marshall: Statewide Credentials

If Kate Marshall mounted a run for governor, she would enter the race as one of Northern Nevada’s most credentialed political figures, with a résumé that includes a term in the Nevada State Assembly in 2006, two terms as State Treasurer, 2007 - 2015. She has a reputation for fiscal competence and administrative steadiness.

Marshall’s strengths lie in her background in oversight and financial management. Marshall would face fewer of the structural challenges that have humbled Washoe-based candidates since she has held a state-level office. So far, Kate is running for Reno mayor and has not mentioned any further plans. Reno has enough issues, so maybe it’s a good fit for someone who likes a challenge.

In Conclusion

Running for governor in Nevada isn’t about who runs Reno or Washoe — it’s about who can win Clark County. Without Culinary Union support, casino donors, and a Las Vegas and statewide message, Reno and Washoe’s “pretenders” will discover that Washoe is too small a hill to reach the governor’s mansion. At this time, I would advise Northern Nevada politicians to forget about challenging Governor Lombardo.