This topic is about the giveaway of the public’s facilities, programming and other assets to a staff determined favored third party “collaborator” at local parcel owners’ expense. And here it just so happens to be the Recreation Center, and the Boy’s and Girl’s Club of North Lake Tahoe¹ (“the BGC”). Let us preface this discussion by assuring the reader we are not anti-children. And we have no criticism of the goals and programs of the BGC. So to our detractors, please don’t play “the children card” against us. And to GM Winquest in particular, how dare you label our criticisms “disrespectful to Mr. Duffield, the District…the community…the boys and girls club and everything they are about.” Fact based criticism is not disrespect. It’s the truth!

As we’ve elsewhere discussed, the limited powers a general improvement district (“GID”) may legitimately exercise do not extend to the giveaway of public monies, facilities or other public assets (aka philanthropy) under any circumstances whatsoever. Thus here we discuss an example of staff’s collusion with a favored collaborator to accomplish this prohibited conduct. However, using a different creative label. And on real property subject to restrictions, no less, which limit use to “recreation consistent with NRS 278.497, et seq.” So with that said,

A Home For David Duffield’s Beloved BGC: David Duffield is one of Incline Village’s several billionaires². He is reported to have ten (10) children³ and seven (7) grandchildren⁴. Although not directly germane, Mr. Duffield is a lover of pets⁵. In recent years he has entered the philanthropy business through his David and Cheryl (his wife) Foundation (“the Foundation”). Unsurprisingly, Mr. Duffield is a major financial supporter of Incline Village’s Pet Network⁶ as well as the BGC. He wants to build a structure dedicated to housing the BGC’s many pre-/post school programs (the overwhelming majority of which have nothing to do with traditional “recreation”). He is also a financial supporter of a budding girl’s gymnastics club to which he previously donated $20,076 worth of high end gymnasium equipment⁷. Therefore, Mr. Duffield wants a dedicated space to house this bulky equipment, exclusive 24/7 access for girls gymnastics club members, as well as essentially free exclusive access to and use of this dedicated space.

But for some reason he won’t just finance the purchase of such a structure. Nor will he build one from the ground up (it’s not like he can’t afford to do either). So instead, he uses our GM as his point person. And Mr. Winquest is all too happy to be Mr. “Duffield’s lackey.” Make no mistake, that’s exactly what’s at play here. And who are the ones who will ultimately end up paying for Mr. Duffield’s philanthropic initiatives? As you will see, Incline Village’s/Crystal Bay’s local parcel owners who are involuntarily assessed the District’s Recreation Facility Fee (“RFF”).

The Foundation’s Letter of Interest: Now that you understand the landscape, and unsurprisingly after “significant discussions” with the District⁸ (i.e., those between Mssrs. Duffield and Winquest), on January 1, 2022 the Foundation “issued IVGID a letter of interest⁹ (proposing) to enter into a partnership…to expand and enhance the Rec Center.”¹⁰ That proposed expansion would “include construction of: ‘an area (exclusively) dedicated for local youth and teen programming’¹¹ (where)…the focus (would) be on…programs that offer physical, social, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral health;”¹² as well as expanded new “facilities…(which would) include…ancillary programming space…an additional multi use gymnasium with an emphasis on youth programming and activities including gymnastics¹³…multi-use classroom programming space…social and emotional learning gathering space; administrational space including…front desk and check in services, office and meeting space; (and,) supporting infrastructure.”⁸ According to point person Winquest, “while the vision for the expansion primarily would be to serve youth and teens, there (allegedly) w(ill) be (the) opportunity to utilize the(se) facilities for personal training and other types of commission based recreation services¹⁴ that would provide net revenue¹⁵ to the District.”⁸

Due to staff’s, the Foundation’s, and the BGC’s joint “vision” that “proposed expansion w(ill) primarily consist of dedicated space for youth and teens,” is it any wonder that “operations and programmatic planning…(will) include…collaboration¹⁶ with”…Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?¹⁷ Surprise! “The BGC?”¹⁸ Or that “the youth center will house out-of-school programs for children in elementary through high school?”¹⁸ Or that “the building will…house Boys & Girls Club enrichment…activities for youth?”¹⁹ Or that “members of the youth center will participate in five (5) core program areas which (will) include: Education and Career Development, Health and Life Skills, Sports, Fitness and Recreation, The Arts and Character and Leadership Development?”¹⁷ So is it of any surprise that at the Board’s April 27, 2022 meeting approval was sought and obtained to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with the Foundation²⁰? And that the MOU, in part, “include(d) potential collaboration with the (BGC insofar as the)…types of programs and activities, staffing needs and levels, fee structure, and similar related activities?”²¹

A Club of Their Own: Other than being a third party domestic nonprofit corporation¹ and a “favored collaborator”²² of IVGID staff, what exactly is the BGC? The BGC has published a Parent Handbook which “give(s interested readers) some basic information about the Club, its policies…procedures, and important program information.” There we are told that the BGC “is a youth development organization dedicated to promoting the health, social, educational, vocational, cultural, character, and leadership development of…youth.” In other words, it “satisf(ies) the age old desire of young people to have a ‘Club of their own.'” And essentially nothing insofar as recreation per se is concerned.

By-And-Large the BGCs Programs Represent “Youth Development” Rather Than “Recreation Consistent With NRS 278.497, et seq:“²⁵ The Parent Handbook goes on to instruct that “through (the BGC’s) ‘Youth Development Strategies,’²³ (it) hope(s) to contribute to the growth, socialization, education and daily fun of (its member) child(ren) by providing a safe, positive place for all.” Lofty and noble goals indeed. But have you read anything yet which even remotely addresses “recreation?”

Continuing, the Parent Handbook instructs that the BGC “offers a variety of activities that meet the interests of all youth. (Therefore its before and after school) programs are designed to meet the physical, emotional, cultural, and social needs and interests of (Club)…members.” In other words, interests addressing a series of “core program areas:” Character and Leadership, Education and Career Development, Health and Life Skills, Arts, and Sports, Fitness and Recreation.

“Programs in th(e)…CHARACTER AND LEADERSHIP…Core Program Area (are intended to) empower youth to: support and influence their Club and community, sustain meaningful relationships with others, develop a positive self-image, participate in the democratic process, and respect their own and others’ cultural identities.” Okay, anything yet which even remotely encompasses “recreation?”

Continuing, the Parent Handbook instructs that “programs in th(e)…EDUCATION AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT…Core Program Area (are intended to) enable youth to: become proficient in basic educational disciplines(,) apply learning to everyday situations(,) and embrace technology to achieve success in a career.” Again, have you read anything yet which even remotely encompasses “recreation?”

Continuing, the Parent Handbook instructs that “programs in th(e)…HEALTH AND LIFE SKILLS…Core Program Area (are intended to) develop young people’s capacity to engage in positive behaviors that nurture their own well-being, set personal goals, and live successfully as self-sufficient adults.” Again, have you read anything yet which even remotely encompasses “recreation?”

Continuing, the Parent Handbook instructs that “programs in th(e)…THE ARTS…Core Program Area (are intended to) enable youth to develop their creativity and cultural awareness through knowledge and appreciation of the visual arts, crafts, performing arts, and creative writing.” Again, have you read anything yet which even remotely encompasses “recreation?” How about “neighborhood parks and facilities²⁴ for parks…required by the residents of (adjacent) apartment houses, mobile homes and residences?”²⁵

But wait! There’s more. “Typically — in normal times — (the BGC) do(es)…dinner…five days a week for (its) members and in the summer, (it) provide(s) breakfast, lunch and a snack…Now thanks to the pandemic, the Boys & Girls Club has shifted from providing meals to just kids to opening up dinner to entire families, ‘and ultimately anyone in the community who shows up,’ Boys & Girls Club CEO Mindy Carbajal says.”²⁶ In fact the B&GC boasts that last summer it “serve(d) over 30,000 meals to local families (and)…the children of essential workers…whatever it takes to meet the basic needs of…Club Members, including addressing food security, and continuing to provide youth with a safe, supportive environment to increase access to opportunities and experiences.”²⁷ Again, have you read anything yet which even remotely addresses “recreation?”

“Programs in the(se) Core Program Areas empower youth to support and influence their Club and community, sustain meaningful relationships with others, develop a positive self-image, participate in the democratic process and respect their own and others’ cultural identities.”²⁸

Now to be completely honest, “recreation” does appear to be remotely involved in one of the BGC’s publicized Core Program Areas. The Parent Handbook instructs that “programs in th(e)…SPORTS, FITNESS, AND RECREATION (area are entitled to)…develop fitness, positive use of leisure time, skills for stress management, appreciation for the environment and social skills.” Although we don’t know exactly how “recreation” will be incorporated insofar as this Core Area is concerned, it seems pretty certain it won’t involve “neighborhood parks and facilities for parks which are required by the residents of (adjacent) apartment houses, mobile homes and residences.”²⁵

Therefore any way the cookie crumbles, the Club’s programs really represent a type of social engineering (a good type) rather than “neighborhood parks and facilities for parks…required by the residents of (adjacent) apartment houses, mobile homes and residences.”²⁵ Examining the express language of the deed from the county²⁹, “if Grantee fails, at any time, to use the property for recreation consistent with NRS 278.497, et seq²⁵...title…will revert to Grantor or its successors.”

The Club Proposes Membership in its Exclusive, Dedicated, Youth and Teen Center Not Be Available to All Members of the General Public: Given exclusive means exclusive, the Parent Handbook instructs: “Boys & Girls Club membership entitles members (to) access…at any time during hours of operation.” But to become a member, one must not be older than a 12th grader (see discussion below). This means that the proposed center will really not be available to all members of the general public. And returning to the express language of the deed from the county²⁹, “if Grantee fails, at any time, to…maintain the property, and all facilities and services provided therein, open to the general public…title…will revert to Grantor or its successors.”

The Club Proposes Membership in its Exclusive, Dedicated, Youth and Teen Center Will in Fact Be Restricted Based Upon Age: The Parent Handbook asks and answers the question: “Who Can Join the Boys & Girls Club?” And the answer is “any youth grades kindergarten through 12th grade.” Therefore returning to the express language of the deed from the county²⁹, “if Grantee fails, at any time, to…maintain the property, and all facilities and services provided therein, open to the general public, without regard to…age…title…will revert to Grantor or its successors.”

Notwithstanding the Foundation’s “Interest” and BGC’s Intended Use of the Recreation Center, Staff Admit Local Parcel Owners Will Be Responsible For Funding Up to Several Million Dollars of “Expansion” Costs: The Foundation’s proposed expansion consists of approximately 33,000 square feet²⁸. “In addition (staff’s)…30% Schematic Design also considers 7,700 SF of Tenant Improvements to the existing Rec Center. These…improvements include…relocating existing offices into the new expansion; Renovation of the existing office space into new recreation space…renovation of…existing child-care space; renovation of the existing pro-shop area; renovation of the existing massage room; renovation of (unidentified)…lighting in areas of the existing building; (and, the) addition of a 4-sided elevated walking track to the existing gymnasium, much like the elevated track in the natatorium”³⁰ (i.e., swimming pool). Initially it should be noted that these improvements are far different than merely “the addition of flexible meeting, and programming facilities for the existing Rec Center (to)…include increased storage space and an updated and relocated lobby. The existing lobby would be redesigned and the reception area would be used for needed recreational space”³¹ which staff represented to the Board on April 27, 2022. Nevertheless, according to staff “these improvement costs w(ill) be paid for by the District.“³² Okay. How much are we talking about?

At the Board’s April 27, 2022 meeting staff represented that “the recommended contract to prepare 30% schematic design…would be in the amount of $72,000, with $65,000 to be funded through the Foundation grant, and $7,000 (to be) funded by the District. An additional $29,000 in staff costs (would also be) funded by the District.”³¹ At the Board’s June 29, 2022 meeting when the Board approved a final design contract with H+K Architects, staff represented that the District’s portion of the recommended contract “for 100% Construction Documents through permitting and bidding”³³ would total an “estimated…$110,000 would (be) funded by IVGID for Tenant Improvements.”³¹ Insofar as “the total estimated construction cost of the Tenant Improvements to be funded by the District,” staff have refused to come up with a number. Rather, they represent that that estimate “will be brought to the Board for consideration once the (full) scope (of the project) has been finalized.”³² Nevertheless, how much per square foot do you think it’s going to cost to construct 7,700 square feet of renovations? $100 (which translates into $770,000 of construction costs)? $200 (which translates into $1,540,000 of construction costs)? $X.00?

Then of course because our in-house engineering staff are incapable of professional construction management, staff have contracted with CORE West, Inc.³³ as a Construction Manager at Risk³⁴ (“CMAR”) who will charge a 4.15% surcharge to estimated construction costs³⁵ per se.

Add all of these cost centers together and the answer to the question of how much staff’s proposed renovation costs to 7,700 square feet of existing Rec Center spare are going to cost, is ALOT!

Additionally, Staff Admit Local Parcel Owners Will Be Responsible For Paying Additional Personnel, Operational and Maintenance Costs Associated With Proposed Expansion Totaling $325,000-$350,000 or More Annually: In addition to the above expansion design and construction costs, staff admit there will be increased personnel, operational and maintenance costs. Listen to staff’s discussion of this subject at the Board’s June 29, 2022 meeting: “In addition (to the above costs), the project will result in increased ongoing annual costs related to both programming and building operations and maintenance (Attachment I³⁶)…The District will be responsible for building operations and maintenance costs related to the project, with initial estimates in the range of $325,000 – $350,000 per year, stemming primarily from incremental staffing, utilities and insurance costs (Attachment I³⁵)…It should be noted that these estimates are preliminary and will be updated as the project progresses.”³² Translation: these costs will likely be in excess of $350,000 annually!

And Did We Mention Local Parcel/Dwelling Unit Owners Have Paid Nearly $5 Million of Their RFF Towards Acquisition of the Land Underneath and Construction of the Recreation Center? This is subject has been elsewhere discussed.

And Did We Mention Local Parcel/Dwelling Unit Owners Pay $1½ Million or More of Their RFF, Annually, Towards Subsidizing Staff Overspending and Waste Assigned to the Recreation Center? The District’s current budget for the Recreation Center and essentially every one of the hundred or more money losing programs that operate therefrom evidences that operational expenses ($2,951,698) are budgeted to exceed operational income ($1,476,890) by a whopping $1,474,808³⁷! And this number doesn’t even include staff overspending assigned to capital or debt service. As elsewhere explained the District has been assessing local parcel/dwelling unit owners far more in their RFFs than that necessary to pay the reasonable and necessary costs to make public recreation facilities “available” to be accessed and used by those parcels which have been assessed. And as a result, the Community Services unrestricted net position or “Fund Balance” has mushroomed to “$12.12 million or $6.70 million above the Board’s reserve policy level.”³⁸ Because current fiscal year overspending will be subsidized by a draw down from fund balance, and that fund balance was allowed to mushroom because of excess RFFs, we say that this subsidy will be financed by the RFF. In previous years when there was no fund balance draw down, overspending was directly subsidized by the RFF³⁹.

How Much Do You Think the BGC is Going to Pay the District For its Exclusive and Dedicated Use of the Youth Center Portion of the Recreation Center Expansion? Are we the only ones who think the answer is NOTHING?

So with this expectation in mind, we point to Board Practice 6.2.0. This practice was adopted by the Board on March 1, 2022 to address the manifest unfairness of the Parasol Tahoe Community Foundation’s (“Parasol’s”) use of District land underneath its nonprofit community center building located on Incline Way, and the Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitor Authority’s (“RSCVA’s”) use of District land underneath its Visitor’s Center building located on Tahoe Blvd., both for a paltry $1/year for up to ninety-nine (99) years. Practice 6.3.4.2 instructs that “access to and/or rental of District facilities and venues, and participation in programs and/or services by community-focused non-profits, as defined (Resolution 1701⁴⁰) may be provided at a discount at no less than the Direct Costs of providing venue access/rental, program or service.” Practice 6.2.2.0 defines “Direct Costs as the incremental cost of providing for access or services for a specific event or purpose. Examples would include incremental cost (staffing, supplies, etc.) of providing access to a venue during normal business hours versus outside of normal operations.”

Have Staff Determined Whether the BGC is Willing/Able to Reimburse the District For the Direct Costs it Will Incur Associated With its Exclusive/Dedicated Use of the Youth Center Portion of the Recreation Center Expansion? And is the annual amount the $325,000-$350,000 ($27,083-$29,167 per month) referenced above? If not, what is the amount?

And Did We Mention That Unlike the BGC, Local Parcel/Dwelling Unit Owners Who Have Financially Subsidized the Recreation Center Since Inception Must Pay Retail Plus⁴¹ to Use It?

Use Restrictions: All of the discussion above presumes the District is free to pursue this or other non-recreational endeavors of its choosing on the Recreation Center parcel. Many, including IVGID staff, are under the mistaken belief that since IVGID is the legal owner of the Rec Center, it is free to do whatever it wants with this facility. But as the reader will see, that’s not true (for a history of the District’s acquisition and construction of the Rec Center, and the limitations on its use, the reader is directed to our How and When discussion). Initially, all of the lands acquired by the District from Boise Cascade Home and Land Corporation (“Boise-Cascade”) in 1977 were subject to recorded Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (“CC&Rs”) which mandate “th(os)e propert(ies) be used only for park…recreational and related purposes and for no other purposes.” Although there is a fifty (50) year time limitation on these restrictions, and those restrictions are scheduled to expire sometime in 2027, it remains they remain in effect today.

Independently of these CC&Rs, when the District entered into that January 26, 1989 “Inter-Governmental Agreement” with Washoe County for the “ownership…construct(ion,) operation…maintenance…access to the…Incline Village Community Center…by the general public, and other matters”⁴² (“the Community Center agreement”), it bound future use of the Rec Center to additional perpetual restrictions. Those restrictions included that: “The (Community Center would)…be constructed on (specified) publicly owned land within the area of Incline Village;”⁴³ “All project facilities, and (the) services provided therein…(would) be open to the general public (and)…provided without regard to race, religion, creed, color, sex, age, national origin, place of residence, or status as a property owner or non-property owner;”⁴⁴ “IVGID (would)…hold the full and complete responsibility and authority to manage the (Community Center), before, during, and after completion of construction;”⁴⁵ “IVGID (would)…manage, operate and maintain the (Community Center) year round…(and,) th(at) level of operation and maintenance (would not) fall below the level prevailing in other recreation facilities managed by the County.”⁴⁶

And once those lands upon which the Rec Center was to be constructed were augmented by the County’s conveyance of 16.17 acres²⁹, NRS 278.497, et seq. came into play by imposing more additional perpetual restrictions. And those restrictions included that: “All residential construction taxes collected pursuant to the provisions of…section [NRS 278.4983(1)] and any ordinance enacted by (the)…board of county commissioners, and all interest accru(ing) on the money, (was required to) be placed with the…county treasurer in a special fund…th(at could) only be used for: (a) the acquisition, improvement and expansion of neighborhood parks; or, (b) the installation or improvement of facilities in existing or neighborhood parks⁴⁷…attributable to the new construction or development for which the money was collected.” “The purpose of the tax (wa)s to raise revenue to enable the…count(y)…to provide neighborhood parks and facilities for parks which (we)re required by the residents of those apartment houses, mobile homes and residences.”⁴⁸ Finally, money in the fund (had to) be expended within the park district from which it was collected and (could) not be expended for maintenance or operational expense(s)”⁴⁹.

Thus the deed from the County²⁹ memorialized these and other restrictions in the following particulars: “Grantor….conveys a determinable fee⁵⁰ and reserves (the) possibility of reverter. If Grantee fails, at any time, to use the property ‘for recreation consistent with NRS 278.497, et seq.,’²⁵ or fails to maintain the property, and all facilities and services provided therein open to the general public, without regard to race, religion, creed, color, sex, age, national origin, place of residence, or status as a property owner or non-property owner…title to the property (would) revert to Grantor or its successors.”

Conclusion: In our opinion it is a misuse of: NRS 318.197(1) (the power to fix rates, tolls and charges) to use the RFF local parcel/dwelling unit owners involuntarily pay/guaranty as if they were taxes; as well as of the use restrictions in the CC&Rs and the Community Center agreement; for the public to cover the capital, operational and maintenance costs associated with the BGC’s dedicated and exclusive use of a portion of the Recreation Center!

---

1. The Boys and Girls Club of North Lake Tahoe is a domestic non-profit corporation (entity no. C13675-1997) venued in Kings Beach, CA.⁸
2. In fact, he is reported to be one of the fifty (50) richest persons in the United States, and third (3rd) richest in Nevada (see https://original.newsbreak.com/@luay-rahil-1590405/2529317475033-the-third-richest-person-in-nevada)!
3. Go to https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenaebarnes/2022/07/10/elon-musk-isnt-the-only-billionaire-with-9-plus-kids-meet-the-us-richest-people-with-the-most-children/?sh=2bc74e1e13b9.
4. Go to https://www.maddiesfund.org/dave-duffield.htm.
5. The Duffields are the founders of Maddie’s Fund which “has awarded over $255 million in grants toward increased community lifesaving, pioneering shelter medicine education and establishing foster care (for pets) as a standard across the U.S.” (go to https://www.maddiesfund.org/about-maddies-fund.htm).
6. “Pet Network Humane Society is a proud recipient of funding from The Dave & Cheryl Duffield Foundation.”
7. See pages 1-6 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s August 26, 2020 meeting (“the 8/26/2020 Board packet“).
8. See page 179 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s January 12, 2022 meeting (“the 1/12/2022 Board packet“).
9. See page 182 of the 1/12/2022 Board packet.
10. See page 165 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s April 27, 2022 meeting (“the 4/27/2022 Board packet“).
11. “The addition of a dedicated space to youth and teens at the Recreation Center would allow the Club to provide a safe, positive, and healthy place for youth of all ages in partnership with IVGID” (see page 183 of the 1/12/2022 Board packet). It “would also alleviate many of the issues that arise in the Recreation Center lobby as many of the local youth visit the Recreation Center daily to recreate and socialize…Being able to provide a (dedicated) location for local youth and teens to recreate and socialize safely in a positive environment is crucial and is extremely necessary” (see pages 179-180 of the 1/12/2022 Board packet).
12. See page 051 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s June 29, 2022 meeting (“the 6/29/2022 Board packet“).
13. See page 180 of the 1/12/2022 Board packet.
14. This is pure staff propaganda! The gymnastics portion of the proposed expansion will not be available for any other type of meaningful general public use. To suggest other uses interlaced between pieces of permanent, bulky gymnastics equipment is disingenuous at best. Nor will the youth center portion of the proposed expansion be available for any other type of general public use. This area is earmarked for exclusive use by the BGC. Nor will the administrational portion of the proposed expansion be available for any other type of meaningful general public use. So all that is left over is approximately 1,072 square feet of “activity room” space which possibly can be used by the general public when not used by the BGC. GM Winquest knows that unless essentially all of the proposed expansion is available for general public use, this project will not qualify for Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (“TRPA”) approval.
15. No not “net revenue.” But rather, gross revenue.
16. “IVGID will…work with the…BGC…to develop an operational partnership…to supervise and provide programming to the youth and teens in the community” [see page 126 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s February 9, 2022 meeting (“the 2/9/2022 Board packet“)]. Insofar as “operations and programmatic planning (which)will include…types of programs, activities, staffing needs, staffing levels, and fee structures. The youth center will house out-of-school programs for children in elementary school through high school. Members of the youth center will participate in five (5) core program areas which include: Education and Career Development, Health and Life Skills, Sports, Fitness and Recreation, The Arts and Character and Leadership Development.”¹⁸ In other words, the BGC’s standard “core program areas” (see discussion below).
17. This is one of the most infamous lines spoken by Ben Stein from the iconic 1986 movie “Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” (see https://www.shmoop.com/quotes/bueller-bueller-bueller.html).
18. See page 167 of the 4/27/2022 Board packet.
19. See page 150 of the 6/29/2022 Board packet.
20. See pages 198-202 of the 4/27/2022 Board packet.
21. See page 202 of the 4/27/2022 Board packet.
22. Did you realize the BGC considers IVGID to be one of its “community partners?” This fact can be confirmed at https://www.bgcnlt.org/partners.
23. Those strategies are “the way in which (BGC) staff interact…with young people and build…A Sense of Belonging – (that is,) a setting where (members) know they fit and are accepted; A Sense of Competence – (that is,) the feeling that there is something (members) can do well; A Sense of Usefulness – (that is,) opportunities to do something of value for others, to assume real responsibility and do real work; (and,) A Sense of Influence – (that is,) a chance to be heard, to lead, to take part in decision making and feel that (members) have control over their own destiny.”
24. According to NRS 278.4983(8)(a), “facilities means turf, trees, irrigation, playground apparatus, playing fields, areas to be used for organized amateur sports, play areas, picnic areas, horseshoe pits and other recreational equipment or appurtenances designed to serve the natural persons, families and small groups from the neighborhood from which the (construction) tax was collected.”
25. The definition of “recreation consistent with NRS 278.497, et seq.“
26. Go to https://www.sierrasun.com/news/buoying-boys-girls-collaborative-effort-keeps-north-lake-tahoe-kids-families-fed-during-covid-19/.
27. Go to https://bgcnlt.networkforgood.com/.
28. Go to https://www.findhelp.org/boys-%2526-girls-club-of-north-lake-tahoe—kings-beach–kings-beach-ca–out-of-school-time-programs/5071026341281792?postal=96150.
29. See that October 22, 1997 deed recorded (document no. 2147124) against APN 127-040-07.
30. See page 050 of the 6/29/2022 Board packet.
31. See page 168 of the 4/27/2022 Board packet.
32. See page 053 of the 6/29/2022 Board packet.
33. See page 052 of the 6/29/2022 Board packet.
34. A CMAR must “be licensed as a contractor pursuant to chapter 624 of NRS…qualified to bid on a public work of the State pursuant to NRS 338.1379” [see NRS 338.1691(4)-(5)] and one who typically agrees to charge “the cost of the work, plus a fee, with a guaranteed maximum price” (“GMP”), or a guaranteed “fixed price,” or “a (guaranteed) fixed price plus reimbursement for overhead and other costs and expenses related to the construction of the public work or portion thereof.”[see NRS 338.1696(1)(a)-(c)]. The operative word here is GMP!
35. See page 055 of the 6/29/2022 Board packet.
36. See pages 154-155 of the 6/29/2022 Board packet.
37. See page 155 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s May 26, 2022 meeting (“the 5/26/2022 Board packet“).
38. See page 033 of the 5/26/2022 Board packet.
39. For instance, for fiscal year 2019-20, $1,171,194 of the RFF was assigned as income to the Recreation Fund to cover staff overspending³⁷. And for fiscal year 2020-21, $1,229,835 of the RFF was assigned as income to the Recreation Fund to cover staff overspending³⁷.
40. This resolution was repealed by Resolution 1895 adopted July 27, 2022.
41. To demonstrate the arrogance of our detractors we are certain they will point to the “so called” discounts Picture Passholders (“PPHs”) are offered. But in reality, there are no discounts. Take a look at the charges the District imposes compared to other municipally owned Rec Centers which do not assess local parcel owners, and the reader will soon come to the conclusion there are no discounts!
42. This agreement was filed with the Office of the Nevada Secretary of State on May 12, 1989.
43. See ¶1.2 of the Community Center agreement.
44. See ¶5.1 of the Community Center agreement.
45. See ¶5.3 of the Community Center agreement.
46. See ¶5.8 of the Community Center agreement.
47. According to NRS 278.4983(8)(c), “site(s) not exceeding 25 acres, designed to serve the recreational and outdoor needs of natural persons, families and small groups.”
48. See NRS 278.4983(3). Thus this is what “recreation consistent with NRS 278.479, et seq.” looks like.
49. See NRS 278.4983(5).
50. “A determinable fee simple estate is one that automatically terminates upon the occurrence of a specified event or the cessation of use for a specified purpose and will revert to the grantor without any entry or other act…Upon the creation of a determinable fee simple estate the grantor retains an interest known as a ‘possibility of reverter’ which is both alienable and devisable” [see Willhite v. Masters, 965 S.W.2d 406, 409 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)].