Yes they are! This one is going to be a bit difficult to follow. But hang in there and let’s go step-by-step.

“The Nevada Constitution is The ‘Supreme Law of The State: which `control[s] over any conflicting statutory provisions.'”¹ “It is fundamental to our federal, constitutional system of government(isn’t it,) that a state legislature ‘has not the power to enact any law conflicting with the federal constitution, the laws of Congress, or the constitution of its particular State.'”² Therefore,

Article 4, Sections 20 and 21 of the Nevada Constitution: Article 4, Section 20 holds that “the legislature shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following enumerated cases…for the assessment and collection of taxes for state, county, and township purposes. Article 4, Section 21 holds that “in all cases enumerated in the preceding section (i.e., Article 4, Section 20), and in all other cases where a general law can be made applicable, all laws shall be general and of uniform operation throughout the State.” So the question: are the RFF/BFF the product of local laws violative of either provision?

What is a General Law? “A general law is one that is applied uniformly.”³ “It applies equally to all persons embraced in a class founded upon some natural, intrinsic, or constitutional distinction.”⁴ “A general law should always be construed…to be applicable in all cases where the subject is one in which from its very nature the entire people of the State have an interest”⁵

What is a Local Law? “A law is local if it operates over ‘a particular locality instead of over the whole territory of the State.’”⁶ Our Supreme Court has explained the prohibition against local and special laws under Article 4, Section 20 as follows: “[I]f a statute be either a special or local law, or both, and (it) comes within any one or more of the cases enumerated in section 20, then its constitutionality depends upon whether a general law can be made applicable.”⁷ “If the statute be special or local, or both, but (it) does not come within any of the cases enumerated in section 20,” it is “not ipso facto unconstitutional⁸. A local or special law may be upheld so long as: (1) it does not come within any of the cases enumerated in Nevada Constitution Article 4, Section 20; and, (2) a general law could not have been made applicable.”⁹

What is a Special Law? “A law is special if it ‘pertain[s] to a part of a class as opposed to all of a class.'”⁶ It is “one that ‘imposes special burdens, or confers peculiar privileges upon one or more persons in no wise distinguished [way] from others of the same category.’”¹⁰

The Resolution The District Adopts Each Year Pursuant to NRS 318.201(9)¹¹ Which Fixes Annual “Standby and Service Charges¹² For…The Availability of The Use of IVGID’s“ Beaches And Enumerated Recreation Facilities For The (Forthcoming) Fiscal Year¹³ And Orders Their Collection on The County Tax Roll¹⁴, is The Equivalent of a “Law“ For Purposes of Article 4, Sections 20 and 21 of The Nevada Constitution: As elsewhere stated, general improvement districts (“GIDs”) are limited purpose special districts¹⁵ granted those basic powers recited in their initiating ordinances “for which the(y were)…created [for instance, (and) by way of illustration, ‘for paving, curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drainage and sanitary sewer improvements within the district’]”¹⁶ with the proviso they “be one or more of those (powers expressly) authorized in NRS 318.116¹⁷, as supplemented by the sections of this chapter¹⁸ (NRS 318) designated therein.”⁷ Unlike true municipalities like counties or cities, GIDs have no power to adopt laws or pass legislation or exercise municipal police¹⁹ powers to provide for the health, safety and general welfare of their citizenry²⁰. Nevertheless, resolutions such as Resolution No. 1893 are the equivalent of “laws” given NRS 318.015(1) instructs GIDs “having the purposes, powers, rights, privileges and immunities provided in this chapter…serve a public use and…promote the health, safety, prosperity, security and general welfare of the inhabitants…of the State of Nevada,” and represent “principles and regulations established in a community by some authority…applicable to its people…recognized and enforced by judicial decision”²¹ for the benefit of others²².

The RFF/BFF Are Taxes: “The Hawaii Supreme Court in (State of Hawaii v.) Medeiros[, 89 Haw. 361, 973 P.2d 736 (1999)] adopted a modified version of the test articulated by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Emerson College [v. City of Boston, 39 Mass. 415, 462 N.E.2d 1098, 1105 (1984)], which analyzes whether a monetary charge: (1) applies to the direct beneficiary of a particular service, (2) is allocated directly to defraying the costs of providing the service, and (3) is reasonably proportionate to the benefit received.” Where “those criteria fit the charge, it is a fee.”²³ Where they don’t, it’s a tax²⁴. We have elsewhere demonstrated that the RFF/BFF are not legitimate government “fees.” Additionally, we have demonstrated that in particular, the RFF/BFF are not the “standby and service charges (for)…the availability of the use of IVGID’s” enumerated beach and recreation facilities staff and the Board represent. Therefore, they’re taxes.

Whether or Not You Agree That The RFF/BFF Are Taxes, “Fees” Are Transformed Into “Taxes” For Purposes of Article 4, Sections 20 And 21 of The Nevada Constitution Where as Here Their Proceeds Are Impermissibly Expended: In Clean Water, supra, at 127 Nev. 318, our Supreme Court found that a “fee” collected for capital improvement projects and sewer services²⁵ was an impermissible tax because it was the product of a local or special law. It came to the same conclusion²⁶ where a local or special law fails to “best subserve the interests of the people of the state, or such class or portion as the particular legislation is intended to affect…and a general law c(an)not be made applicable.”

Can the RFF/BFF Be “Taxes” For Purposes of Article 4, Section 20 of the Constitution? Yes. Given Article 4, Section 20 of the Constitution instructs that “The legislature shall not pass local or special laws in any of the following enumerated cases…For the assessment and collection of taxes for state, county, and township purposes,” and here the RFF/BFF are the product of “local or special laws (which) address particular concerns that pertain only to the locality or to the part of the class affected by the laws, and not to statewide concerns,”²⁷ they have been “transformed into a local and special tax (and become)…a basis for determining unconstitutionality under Article 4, Section 20 as an “assessment and collection of taxes for state, county, and township purposes.”

Can the RFF/BFF Be “Taxes” For Purposes of Article 4, Section 21 of the Constitution? Yes for at least two reasons. First, because it is a “case…enumerated in the preceding section” (i.e., Article 4, Section 20). And second, because it is a “case…where a general law can be made applicable, yet the resolution the Board adopts pursuant to NRS 318.201(9)³ is neither general nor of uniform operation throughout the State. Example:

NRS 318.197(1) is a general law given it defines the types of rates, tolls and charges all GIDs can fix. It can be made applicable to all GIDs throughout the State. But rather than “fix(ing)…service charges and standby service charges, for…the availability of (recreation) service” which is what NRS 318.197(1) expressly permits, the resolution the Board adopts³ fixes “charges⁴ (for)…the availability of the use of” enumerated beach and recreation and facilities⁵. This makes the District’s resolution the equivalent of a special law, and one of non-uniform operation throughout the State.

Moreover, ¶I(D) of the report which is incorporated into the resolution²⁸ the Board adopts³ grants a series of RFF/BFF exceptions and exclusions to “parcels and areas of land…or the portions thereof used, or intended to be used, for religious…or educational purposes; common areas without occupied structures appurtenant to a condominium or townhouse cluster; and, publicly owned lands, are excepted and excluded from the charges imposed…In addition, any parcel which is: (1) undeveloped, and (2) subject to a deed restriction, acceptable to IVGID staff, preventing any and all development of the parcel in perpetuity, which deed restriction is recorded in the Washoe County Recorder’s Office, and (3) whose owner agrees to waive in perpetuity on his own behalf as well as on behalf of his successors and assigns any right to demand in the future any recreation privileges arising from or associated with said parcel is also excepted and excluded from the charges imposed.”

There is nothing in NRS 318.197(1) which permits GIDs to except and exclude any person or property from a rate, toll or charge which would otherwise apply. Nor is there anything in the Nevada Constitution. Although Article 10, section 8 of the Constitution allows the governing board of a political subdivision to “exempt by law property used for municipal, educational, literary, scientific or other charitable purposes” from property taxation, there is no similar exception and exclusion for rates, tolls, charges or fees. So here we have another example of a resolution the equivalent of a general law that can be made applicable to all GIDs throughout the State, which is a special law, and one of non-uniform operation throughout the State.

Conclusion: So there you go. Whether or not you the reader agree the RFF/BFF are legitimate “fees,” or they are standby service charges, given the RFF/BFF are the product of local or special laws for the assessment and collection of taxes for state, county, and township purposes, which are special and of non-uniform operation throughout the State, they are invalid²⁹ and unconstitutional “taxes” rather than “fees.”

---

1. See City of Fernley v. State, Dep’t of Taxation, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 4, 366 P.3d 699, 706 (2016), quoting Thomas v. Nev. Yellow Cab Corp., 130 Nev., Adv. Op. 52, 327 P.3d 518, 521 (2014) and Clean Water Coalition v. M Resort, 127 Nev. 301, 309, 255 P.3d 247 (2011).
2. See City of Fernley, Id.; Thomas, supra, at 327 P.3d at 520-521, quoting State ex rel. Beatty v. Rhodes, 3 Nev. 240, 250 (1867).
3. See Clean Water, Id.
4. See Colman v. Utah State Land Bd., 795 P.2d 622, 636 (Utah 1990).
5. See Evans v. Job, 8 Nev. 322, 336 (1873); Clean Water, supra, at 127 Nev. 321].
6. See Clean Water, supra, at 127 Nev. 312.
7. See Conservation District v. Beemer, 56 Nev. 104, 116, 45 P.2d 779, 782 (1935); Clean Water, supra, at 127 Nev. 310.
8. See Nev. Const. art. 4, §§20, 21; W.R. Co. v. City of Reno, 63 Nev. 330, 352-53, 172 P.2d 158, 169 (1946).
9. See Nev. Const. art. 4, § 21; Anthony v. State of Nevada, 94 Nev. 337, 580 P.2d 939 (1978); Cauble v. Beemer, 64 Nev. 77, 96, 177 P.2d 677, 686 (1947); Conservation District v. Beemer, 56 Nev. 104, 45 P.2d 779 (1935).
10. See State of Nevada v. Cal. M. Co., 15 Nev. 234, 249 (1880).
11. An example of that resolution (for fiscal year 2022-23, i.e., No. 1893) appears at pages 228-231 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s May 26, 2022 meeting (“the 5/26/2022 Board packet“).
12. See ¶4 at page 229 of the 5/26/2022 Board packet.
13. See ¶4(b) at page 230 as well as ¶I at page 234 of the 5/26/2022 Board packet.
14. See ¶8 at pages 230-231 of the 5/26/2022 Board packet.
15. Go to http://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/local_agency_powers_and_limitations.pdf.
16. See NRS 318.055(4)(b).
17. NRS 318.116 instructs that “any one, all or any combination of the following basic powers may be granted to a district in proceedings for its organization, or its reorganization pursuant to NRS 318.077, and all provisions in this chapter supplemental thereto [ i.e., “1. Furnishing electric light and power…2. Extermination and abatement of mosquitoes, flies, other insects, rats, and liver fluke or Fasciola hepatica…3. Furnishing facilities or services for public cemeteries…4. Furnishing facilities for swimming pools…5. Furnishing facilities for television…6. Furnishing facilities for FM radio…7. Furnishing streets and alleys…8. Furnishing curbs, gutters and sidewalks…9. Furnishing sidewalks…10. Furnishing facilities for storm drainage or flood control…11. Furnishing sanitary facilities for sewerage…12. Furnishing facilities for lighting streets…13. Furnishing facilities for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse…14. Furnishing recreational facilities…15. Furnishing facilities for water…16. Furnishing fencing…17. Furnishing facilities for protection from fire…18. Furnishing energy for space heating…19. Furnishing emergency medical se0rvices…20. Control of noxious weeds…(and,) 21. Establishing, controlling, managing and operating an area or zone for the preservation of one or more species or subspecies of wildlife that has been declared endangered or threatened pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C. §§1531, et seq.”], or as may be otherwise provided by statute [such as a GID’s “implied powers” (see NRS 318.210 which states that “the board shall have and exercise all rights and powers necessary or incidental to or implied from the specific powers granted in this chapter”).
18. Such as a GID’s “power of eminent domain and dominant eminent domain…to take any property necessary to the exercise of the powers granted, both within and without the district” (see NRS 318.190).
19. This “power does not specifically refer to the right of state and local governments to create police forces. (Rather, it refers to)…the authority…to states under the Tenth (10th) Amendment to the Constitution…to regulate local matters concerning health, safety, and morality of state residents…(In other words,) the basic right of governments to make laws and regulations for the benefit of their communities” (go to https://municipal.ushttps://municipal.uslegal.com/police-powers/legal.com/police-powers/).
20. In other words, those providing general governmental services (see https://www.census.gov/newsroom/cspan/govts/20120301_cspan_govts_def_3.pdf) exercising general-purpose powers (see http://www.ca-ilg.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/local_agency_powers_and_limitations.pdf).
21. Go to https://www.dictionary.com/browse/law.
22. See NRS 318.015(1) which instructs that “districts having the purposes, powers, rights, privileges and immunities provided in this chapter…promote the health, safety, prosperity, security and general welfare of the inhabitants…of the State of Nevada.”
23. See Medeiros, supra, at 973 P.2d 742-745.
24. See Clean Water, supra, at 127 Nev. 315; Douglas Co. Contractors v. Douglas Co., 112 Nev. 1452, 1457, 929 P.2d 253, 256 (1996); State ex. rel. City of Reno v. Boyd, 27 Nev. 249, 256, 74 P. 654, 655 (1903); 71 Am. Jur. 2d  §13, State and Local Taxation (2001).
25. Id., at 127 Nev. 316.
26. Id., at 127 Nev. 319-320.
27. See Clean Water, supra, at 127 Nev. 321.
28. See ¶6 at page 230 of the 5/26/2022 Board packet which declares “that said report, as revised, changed, reduced or modified, if any, is hereby adopted.”
29. See United States v. La Franca, 282 U.S. 568, 572, 51 S.Ct. 278 (1931).