Devon Reese, Data Centers, the Moratorium and the Regional Planning Situation
Reese published an article about the moratorium. Here's what was true, what was political framing, and what was missing as Reese spins his story and flip flops.
In his opinion piece in This is Reno, “On housing, data centers, dreams, and dialogue”, Devon Reese argued that Reno lacks a coherent regional strategy for handling data center development.
He used this argument to justify his vote for a moratorium on data centers, but that is a flip flop:
“I certainly am not in favor of a moratorium, as one of my colleagues suggested; I think that’s better left to the state,” Reese said at a January 2025 council meeting.
Reese now voted for the moratorium after he approved applications for 3 data centers, approved conditional use permits, and voted to table the discussion on data center rules in February of 2026.
The fact is that the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency is operating a formal regional “Data Center Engagement” initiative, complete with research, public outreach, surveys, presentations, stakeholder coordination, and policy analysis.
So was Reese wrong to say that no regional rules exist? Not exactly. The rules don’t exist now, but the process has been underway for over a year, and Reese is spinning his narrative as the truth while vying to become Reno's mayor.
The Reno area is full of data centers. Click on the image to see an interactive map. Reese voted for three of them: Webb, Oppidan, and Keystone, granting conditional use permits.
What Counts as a “Regional Plan?”
In his article, Reese wrote: “I believed a regional framework would be better than a patchwork of rules city by city. I still believe that. But regional action hasn’t yet materialized.”
That statement creates the impression that Reno and the region have largely failed to organize around the issue and that Reese and the city council can fix the problem, starting with a 30-day moratorium, which is nothing more than a political stunt. This process takes more than 30 days.
The record shows that TMRPA has been studying data centers for over a year. The agency has a dedicated “Energy and Data Centers“ portal, extensive research materials, community outreach, and an ongoing 2026 Data Center Engagement process.
TMRPA describes the effort this way: “We want to stay vigilant and build a collective understanding of the impacts and opportunities data centers may bring to our region.”
The agency’s materials discuss:
electrical demand,
water consumption,
transmission infrastructure,
land use,
cooling systems,
regional growth impacts,
and long-term planning considerations.
That is not “nothing,” but Reese ignores this effort and acts like he knows more than the experts and can fix the problem in a month. By the way, there are no pending data center applications, so the moratorium is even more of a political stunt.
TMRPA Is Influential — But Limited
TMRPA coordinates regional planning. It reviews conformity. It develops regional plans and policy guidance.
But it does not function as a regionwide zoning authority capable of imposing regulations across Reno, Sparks, and Washoe County. That authority belongs with the local governments.
That distinction matters because Reese’s argument relies on the idea that binding regional regulation does not exist.
TMRPA is the Regional organization for this process
The existence of TMRPA’s extensive public-facing engagement efforts makes it difficult to claim that the region failed to engage with the issue seriously.
In fact, TMRPA is the primary regional hub for:
technical analysis,
stakeholder coordination,
and public education around data center expansion.
Its role has grown because Northern Nevada is experiencing explosive data center growth tied to:
AI infrastructure,
cloud computing,
tax incentives,
available industrial land,
and proximity to California tech markets.
TMRPA Executive Director Jeremy Smith has publicly acknowledged that planners are effectively trying to build policy while the industry expands in real time.
That creates an awkward political reality:
Local governments have approved major projects,
The industry accelerated faster than regulators expected,
Infrastructure concerns escalated,
Public opposition intensified.
That broader context is absent from Reese’s article. What is most absent is that the regional governments need to approve rules in accordance with the TMRPA guidelines.
Reno’s Political Problem: The Projects Were Approved Before the Rules Existed
Reese approved data centers, then tabled the discussion about local rules, then said we need a regional framework while acting as if it doesn’t exist, then supported a 30-day moratorium while acting like Reno can make the rules.
By the time officials began discussing moratoriums and stricter rules:
major data center projects were already moving forward,
zoning changes had already occurred through conditional use permits,
infrastructure assumptions were already embedded into planning decisions,
and utility demand forecasts had dramatically expanded.
Reno approved projects under old frameworks and only afterward began debating whether those frameworks were adequate. That is why the current debate is politically opportunistic as the mayor’s race approaches.
The Deeper Institutional Problem
There is also a structural issue here. Nevada’s planning system is fragmented.
Authority is split among:
Reno,
Sparks,
Washoe County,
TMRPA,
utility regulators,
water authorities,
state agencies,
and private infrastructure providers.
TMRPA can coordinate and recommend policy, but implementation still depends on local governments adopting their own regulations. That creates the “patchwork” Reese criticized. And he is a part of it and is obscuring the reality.
Reese’s Statement Was Politically Incomplete
The real issue is that the Reno government approved the data center expansion faster than the regulatory system could adapt.
And politically, it shifts responsibility from “regional inaction” to the elected officials, including Reese.
Take the Poll
Support independent journalism. Click to donate to Mike’s Reno Report.
Another great one Mike. Reese is just blowing smoke to look like he is concerned to try to get elected. Smoke and mirrors applies here.
I have seen in more than one context an almost pathological deference to state and regional bodies as the regulators responsible for this kind of thing. 'We [Reno City Council] can't do anything about this because we don't have the authority' seems a too frequent refrain. So, as a result, whether regulation happens at the regional or state levels or not, no local electorati is seemingly responsible. My question remains the same: if the local government has no authority, why is it approving a few projects, then issuing a moratorium, and then asking questions about approving these centers after they have already done so? If they had no role before the appropvals, conditional or otherwise, how did they make those approvals and how do they have any role now? Either they have some authority and role (yes, they do) or they don't (no responsibility taken but a lot of pearl-clutching after the fact). This is a twice-told tale that seldom results in any kind of satisfying outcome for the citizens of Reno.