As demonstrated elsewhere, the purpose of general improvement districts (“GIDs”) is to

“Provide various urban type services (to real property¹ in)…areas where such services (a)re not available and (cannot) be provided by general purpose government(s).”² In other words, counties, cities and unincorporated towns³.

And given GIDs are authorized to

“Furnish services pertaining to any such basic power which the district may exercise,”⁴

And they supposedly exist to primarily

“Serve…the inhabitants thereof and of the State of Nevada”⁵ rather than their employees and special interests,

These are the underlying justifications for those facilities as well as those programs and services offered thereat to exist.

Yet as stated elsewhere, for decades unelected staff and “rubber stamp” Board trustees have taken the position that because IVGID “is a legally separate government…fiscally independent of any other governmental entity…(it is) not financially accountable (to) any other entity.”⁶ And it is “empowered to determine what facilities and services it should offer.”⁷ Even though GIDs “often do not have the adequate size or tax base to (financially) support th(os)e (facilities and) services,”⁸ and here specifically, IVGID does not.

So the question: may the District operate the public’s recreation facilities and the programs and services offered thereat as if they were private, commercial, business enterprises⁹, with all that entails?

Staff’s justification for operating the public’s recreation facilities and the programs and services offered thereat as described, goes something like this:

Because the District’s public recreational facilities are too expansive for the small, mostly non-owner-occupied mountain communities of Incline Village and Crystal Bay, and the fees to use those facilities are too high for many local residents¹⁰, those facilities are under utilized. And because Lake Tahoe is a world class tourist destination, staff can market and sell access to and use of those facilities as well as the programs and services offered thereat to the world’s tourists. Using the revenues derived therefrom to reduce the user fees charged to local residents and parcel/dwelling unit owners to access and use those same facilities¹¹.

Possibly a prudent plan in a vacuum assuming those facilities produced positive cash flow so that the user fees charged to local residents and parcel/dwelling unit owners were actually lower than they otherwise would be. But because staff have demonstrated they’re unable to operate these facilities “economically feasibly,”¹² they’re forced to either drastically reduce intentional overspending, or involuntarily assess local parcel/dwelling unit owners over a whopping $12½ million or more annually in financial subsidies¹³, just to be able to pass a balanced budget! And because the Board has opted for the latter, we’re having this discussion. And therefore we’re asking,

Where in NRS 318 are GIDs expressly or by implication authorized to engage in this type of behavior?

And what evidence exists to demonstrate that Washoe County is unable to provide or outsource the public recreational facilities, programs and services IVGID provides, at least insofar as “the inhabitants…of (Incline Village, Crystal Bay) and of the State of Nevada” are concerned?

And harking back to Dillon’s Rule¹⁴, should there be “any fair or reasonable doubt concerning the existence of (this) power, (why) that doubt is(n’t) resolved against the (the District’s governing) board…and the power…denied?”¹⁵

At the very least then, we submit that we’ve demonstrated more than substantial doubt as to whether it’s permissible for staff to operate the public’s recreation facilities and the programs and services offered thereat as if they were private, commercial, business enterprises, with all that entails. And following Dillon’s Rule¹⁴, it is our position the District has no such power.

And now you know!

---

1. Consider that: NRS 318.258(9) instructs the services a GID “provide(s are those)…required by the owners of…real property;” NRS 318.197(2) instructs that “all rates, tolls or charges (adopted shall) constitute a perpetual lien on and against the property served;” NRS 318.201(10) similarly instructs that “the amount of the charges (elected to be collected on the tax roll) shall constitute a lien against the lot or parcel of land against which the charge has been imposed;” NRS 318.203 instructs that “where a dwelling unit (on a)…parcel of real property upon which the unit referenced…exists that is not currently being charged for services provided…the board…of trustees…may adopt a resolution…to charge the owner (of that unit)…for the services pr(fovided;” NRS 318.170(1)(b) instructs that “all owners of inhabited property in the district (may be compelled) to use (and pay for) the district’s system for the collection and disposal of sewage, garbage and other refuse;” and, NRS 318.201(1) instructs that when a “board which has adopted rates pursuant to this chapter…elect(s) to have such charges for the forthcoming fiscal year collected on the tax roll…it shall cause a written report to be prepared…which shall contain a description of each parcel of real property receiving such services and facilities and the amount of the charge for each parcel for such year.” In all of these examples it is the owner of real property who is charged for the services and facilities a GID provides to real property.
2. See ¶II at page 8 of Legislative Commission of the Legislative Counsel Bureau, State of Nevada (“LCB”), Bulletin No. 77-11, Creation, Financing and Governance of General Improvement Districts, September 1976 (LCB Bulletin 77-11).
3. In Nevada counties, cities and unincorporated towns are general purpose governments because each is granted general powers to provide for the health, safety and welfare of its inhabitants. Counties are vested “with the appropriate authority to address matters of local concern” [see NRS 244.137(6)]. “The term…matters of local concern (expressly)…include(s those addressing)…public health, safety and welfare” [see NRS 244.143(2)(a)]. Cities are vested with express powers to: “provide for safeguarding public health” [see NRS 266.330(1)], “provide generally for the public safety” [see NRS 266.277(1)], and regulate and license (see NRS 266.355) which encompasses statements attesting to the welfare of the community [see NRS 425.520(2)]. Unincorporated towns are vested with express powers to: provide for “public health, safety and morals” [see NRS 269.190 et seq.], and, “protect the public health and welfare” [see NRS 269.227, 269.128, 269.171(1)]. In contrast, GIDs are not expressly permitted to exercise any of these powers.
4. See NRS 318.100(2).
5. See NRS 318.015(1).
6. See ¶1(A) at page 35 of IVGID’s 2019 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (“the 2019 CAFR”).
7. Go to https://www.yourtahoeplace.com/ivgid/about-ivgid.
8. See ¶11 at page 10 of LCB Bulletin 77-11.
9. Staff readily admit that “each (recreation) venue (i)s a unique business enterprise” [see section 3.5 of Policy No. 6.2.0 adopted at the Board’s March 1, 2022 meeting {go to page 223 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s March 1, 2022 meeting (“the 3/1/2022 Board packet“)}].
10. A large percentage of Incline Village’s/Crystal Bay’s permanent population base consists of low income hospitality or service industry workers and their families. These families cannot afford multiple sets of skis, golf clubs or tennis rackets; nor rounds of golf; nor daily ski area lift tickets; nor $15 daily recreation center memberships; etc.; especially during the work day.
11. But here those facilities and services lack the “capacity” to be available to be used by those who’s real property/dwelling units are assessed, even when they choose to pay additional user fees to actually use them (especially when they’re overrun by the world’s tourists).
12. Recall that NRS 318.055(4)(c)(2) instructs that County Boards of Commissioners (“County Boards”) must find “that…creation of the district is economically sound and feasible.
13. For FY 2026-27, “$11,441,485 for (a) Recreation Facility Fee (‘RFF”) and $1,131,290 for (a) Beach Facility Fee” (“BFF”) [see ¶II at page 109 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s May 27, 2026 meeting (“the 5/27/2026 Board packet“)]. See our RFF/BFF According to Us discussion where we demonstrate the RFF/BFF represent the financial shortfall between budgeted revenues and intentional overspending assigned to the Community Services and Beach Funds, respectively.
14. “Historically under Nevada law, the exercise of powers by a board of (local government trustees) has been governed by a common-law rule on local governmental power known as Dillon’s Rule. Which is named after former Chief Justice John F. Dillon of the Iowa Supreme Court who in a case from 1868 and in later treatises on the law governing local governments, set forth the common-law rule defining and limiting the powers of local governments [see NRS 244.137(1) and 268.001(1)].
15. See NRS 244.137(4) and 268.001(4).