Given we’ve shared that a general improvement district’s (“GID’s”) Board of Trustees’ (“Board’s”) power to “fix, and from time to time increase or decrease…rates, tolls or charges” flows from NRS 318.197(1), and that this NRS fails to expressly identify “franchise fees” as a permissible rate, toll or charge, here we examine solid waste franchise fees and whether they are assessed by the District? Much the same as our discussion of standby service charges, nowhere is this monetary exaction expressly identified. Neither in NRS 318, nor otherwise. So again, how are we supposed to interpret the omission? Or is there even an omission to construe given NRS 318.197(1) instructs that the rates, tolls and charges a GID Board may fix are “not limited to” the explicit list¹ stated²? To answer this question, we submit the examination is a two part process.

First, we must define the monetary exaction “franchise fee.”³ And in coming up with that definition, we must apply the rules of statutory construction⁴. And second, once we complete the examination, we can determine whether the District assesses these charges, and against who?

Answering the latter query first, a “franchise fee” is a fee associated with

“A franchise agreement (which) is a negotiated contract between a municipality and a (utility) service provider that grants the utility the (exclusive) right to serve customers (with)in the (municipality’s) jurisdiction. The contract often specifies the period of service and a fee remitted back to the municipality. (Although) these agreements (can) include stipulations…allowing the (utility) to operate and use public rights-of-way (ROW); such as roads, sidewalks, and utility corridors…or its municipal assets to provide…essential…services to the public⁵…some (municipalities) have incorporated other…objectives…or have signed agreements in parallel—that commit the (municipality) and utility to work together to achieve joint…goals.”⁶

Now on to whether the District charges “franchise fees?” As stated elsewhere, since at least 1964, if not before, the District has outsourced solid waste disposal collection pursuant to the authority of NRS 318.142⁷. As part of its solid waste franchise, the District has always charged its waste collector a franchise fee for the exclusive privilege⁸ of providing mandatorily required⁹ solid waste disposal services to Incline Village/Crystal Bay parcel owners¹⁰, and after its 1995 merger into the Incline Village General Improvement District (“IVGID”), Crystal Bay parcel owners. Originally the fee stood at an unbelievable twenty percent (20%) of “the gross amount collected” by the waste collector¹¹. Currently it stands at “ten percent (10%) of gross receipts generated from customers for the services rendered.”¹².

And against who? Due to the manner by which Waste Management’s “return on revenue”¹³ is calculated¹⁴, this fee is in effect “passed through” to local parcel owners¹⁵.

Moreover, this fee is really the District’s rather than the collector’s because according to ¶14.5 at page 14 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management,

“If a residential customer’s account remains unpaid for more than one hundred twenty (120) days…(the) Collector may submit the unpaid charges to the District and the District shall pay said unpaid charges to Collector.”

And since

“All unpaid charges…shall constitute a debt and obligation of the owner of the real property where the service (i)s provided”¹⁶

Ultimately, the District may recover those charges directly against those owners¹⁷.

Okay. How much are we talking about?

According to the District’s FY 2025-26 budget, a whopping $400,000¹⁸ annually! Which means that since staff report there are at least 8,261 parcels/dwelling units in Incline Village/Crystal Bay¹⁹, the solid waste fees local parcel owners pay to Waste Management equate to another²⁰ roughly $48.50 annually, per parcel owner, and ten percent (10%) more than they should and could be. Expressly because of the District’s solid waste franchise fee which benefits the District to the prejudice of local parcel owners.,

And now you know!

---

1. “Service charges and standby service charges, for services or facilities furnished by the district, charges for the availability of service, annexation charges, and minimum charges.”
2. If we accept these words literally, then why the need to identify the types of exactions expressly identified? Aren’t they already included within the term “not limited to?”
3. Rather than repeating ourselves, we refer the reader to our What Are Defensible Space Services discussion.
4. Rather than repeating ourselves, we refer the reader to our How Courts Instruct We Interpret The Powers a GID May Exercise discussion.
5. Go to https://www.cityofnorthlasvegas.com/business/franchise-agreements.
6. Go to https://www.nlr.gov/solar/market-research-analysis/municipal-franchise-agreements.
7. Which authorizes GIDs “to contract (aka franchise)…for the collection and disposal of garbage and refuse from within the district.”
8. See ¶2.1 at page 5 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management which grants our collector the exclusive privilege.
9. See ¶2.2 at page 5 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management; NRS 318.170(1)(b) which instructs “the Board may…compel all owners of inhabited property in the district to use the district’s system for the collection and disposal of…garbage and other refuse;” and, ¶3.1 of Ordinance No. 1 which instructs “garbage and other rubbish collection service…shall be mandatory for all owners, occupants, or persons in possession, charge, or control of all places and premises in the District where garbage and other rubbish is created, accumulated, or produced.”
10. See Whiston v. McDonald, 85 Nev. 508, 458 P.2d 107 (1969).
11. Id. – see dissent of Chief Justice Collins.
12. See ¶12.1 at page 13 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management.
13. See ¶1.26 at page 4 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management.
14. See ¶10 at page 11 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management whereby “the ratio of net income to gross receipts” is calculated (according ¶1.23 at page 4 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management “net income is defined as gross receipts minus allowable expenses.” And ¶1.1 at page 1 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management defines “allowable expenses” as “those…incurred by the Collector in the performance of this franchise.”
15. Is not the District’s franchise fee an “expense incurred by the Collector in the performance of the solid waste franchise?
16. See ¶14.4 at page 13 of the current solid waste franchise agreement with Waste-Management.
17. See our discussion on How The District’s Various Fees Are Collected.
18. See page 59 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s May 30, 2025 meeting (“the 5/30/2025 Board packet“).
19. See page 107 of the 5/30/2025 Board packet.
20. When we say “another,” consider the roughly $48.50 annually, per parcel owner, paid to the District for defensible space.