As elsewhere stated, on/about November 18, 1977 IVGID acquired approximately 57.8 acres in the heart of Incline Village for a “core recreation (facility) area.” The IVGID Board (“Board”) commissioned a “Recreation Needs Analysis and Park Master Plan” for development of these lands, and a high priority at the top of the list was a multi-use Recreation Center. However, to come up with the moneys, a third party funding source was required. Enter District 9 Funds.

District 9 Funds: Washoe County assesses a residential construction tax on the development of all parcels in the county¹. “The purpose of th(is) tax is to raise revenue to enable…cities and counties to provide neighborhood parks and facilities for parks”² such as “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 tax was collected.”³ In Incline Village the proceeds of this tax are known as “District 9 funds.”

The Recreation Center‘s Construction Monies: In addition to accessing District 9 funds as the principal funding source for construction of the Recreation Center (see discussion above), on January 26, 1989 Washoe County and the District entered into an “Inter-Governmental Agreement”⁴ for the “ownership…construct(ion,) operation…maintenance…access to the…Incline Village Community Center…by the general public, and other matters” (collectively “the Community Center agreement”⁵). In part, the Community Center agreement created:

1. An agreement whereby the “County…(would) use…the District 9 Fund(s)…to construct a…Community Center in Incline Village;”

2. An agreement for “access to the (Community Center) by the general public, and other matters;”

3. An agreement whereby the “County…(w)ould (contribute approximately 16.17 acres, more or less, of its)…land, fronting Incline Way⁶…as a site for the” Community Center;

4. An agreement whereby IVGID would contribute its “neighboring land…as a site for the” Community Center;

5. An agreement whereby “IVGID…accept(ed) the financial and administrative responsibilit(ies) of operating and maintaining the” Community Center;

6. “An arrangement whereby IVGID w(ould) serve as the lead agency for design and construction of the” Community Center; and,

7. Mutual “understandings about the ownership, operation and maintenance of the” Community Center.

Augmented by $3.6 Million The Proceeds of Additional Bonds: According to the county, as of January 1, 1989 it had “$3.2 million, more or less,” of District 9 funds⁷ available to be used for Incline Village neighborhood parks and facilities for parks. The Community Center agreement guaranteed that the “County…(would) use…District 9 Fund(s)…to construct a (substantial portion of the)…Community Center in Incline Village.” But like nearly everything else the District does, $3.2 million just wasn’t enough. So on June 26, 1980 the Board adopted Resolution No. 1375 which authorized the issuance of $3.6 million of additional general obligation bonds (“GOBs”) which were intended to fund “acquisition and construction of (the) swimming pool and community center complex” at the Rec Center, phases 1 and 2. We don’t know if there was additional funding for phases 3 and beyond, but so far, hopefully the reader can see that nearly $7 million was spent in Rec Center construction costs⁸. Which when combined with the $2 million of Recreation Revenue Bonds of 1981 issued to pay for a good portion of the land underneath the Recreation Center (see discussion above), puts the combined cost at over $9 million!

Restricted Use: Initially, all of the lands acquired by the District from Boise Cascade and the Ocheltrees were subject to recorded Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (“CC&Rs”) which mandated both “propert(ies would) be used only for park…recreational and related purposes and for no other purposes.”⁹ But once the District entered into the Community Center agreement with the County, the future Recreation Center became subjected to additional perpetual restrictions. Those restrictions included that:

“All project facilities, and 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;”¹⁰ “IVGID (would)…manage, operate and maintain the (Community Center) year round…(And,) the level of operation and maintenance (would not) fall below the level prevailing in other recreation facilities managed by the County.”¹¹

Once those lands upon which the Rec Center was to be constructed were expanded by the County’s conveyance of the 16.17 acres identified above, NRS 278.497, et seq. came into play by imposing additional perpetual restrictions. And those restrictions specified 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 accrued 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 parks¹² in the…county…attributable to the new construction or development for which the money was collected. 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” purposes¹³.

For these reasons, the October 22, 1997 deed from the County memorialized these and other restrictions as follows:

“Grantor….specifically convey(s) a determinable fee¹⁴ and reserve(s the) possibility of reverter. If Grantee fail(s), at any time, to use the property for recreation consistent with NRS 278.497, et seq., or fail(s) 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 (will) revert to Grantor or its successors.”

Incline Village Recreation Facilities Master Plan: “In January of 1999, over 150 community members and IVGID staff met to create a community-wide strategic vision of Incline Village and Crystal Bay. The result was…a list of issues…cover(ing) a wide range of areas…The primary items related to administration infrastructure needs and recommendations as to how to meet the(m)…The intent of this…master plan (wa)s…to guide the community’s capital investment decisions for recreation opportunities for the next 10 to 15 years.”¹⁵ In 2000 the District commissioned this recreation facilities master plan. The stated objective was to “enable IVGID to move forward with recreational improvements.” With this in mind, the Plan identified and prioritized a number of “capital investment decisions related to recreation.” And one of those decisions encompassed “expansion for the Recreation Center…structured around adding adequate office space for IVGID administrative needs (‘integrating the administration building into the recreation center’), as well as childcare and public facilities.”¹⁵

Estimated Financing¹⁶ to Implement These Capital Projects: The Plan made it clear that these proposed “capital expenditure projects (we)re anticipated to be funded through a…$10.5 million…bond…planned to be issued in 2001.”

The Source of Payment For These New Estimated Capital And Operational Expenses: Again according to the Plan, a “recreation fee…increase (of) $100 per (assessed) property…effective for the 1999/00 fiscal year.”¹⁷

Conclusion: So now you know how and when IVGID acquired the Recreation Center, the perpetual restrictions imposed thereon, and its future if proponents of more-and-more get their way!

---

1. The authority for this assessment is NRS 278.4983(1) which states “the city council of any city or the board of county commissioners of any county which has adopted a master plan and recreation plan, as provided in this chapter, which includes, as a part of the plan, future or present sites for neighborhood parks may, by ordinance, impose a residential construction tax pursuant to this section…If imposed, [NRS 278.4983(2) instructs that] the residential construction tax must be imposed on the privilege of constructing apartment houses and residential dwelling units, and developing mobile home lots in th(os)e respective cities and counties.”
2. See NRS 278.4983(3).
3. See NRS 278.4983(8)(a).
4. NRS 277.045(1) instructs that “any two or more political subdivisions of this State, including, without limitation, counties…and special districts, may enter into a cooperative agreement for the performance of any governmental function. Such an agreement may include the…payment of money.”
5. This agreement was filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 12, 1989.
6. See October 22, 1997 deed recorded (document no. 2147124) against APN 127-040-07.
7. See ¶1.4 of the Community Center agreement.
8. Interestingly, ¶1.3 of the Community Center agreement estimated that cost at “$3.5 million to $4.5 million”.
9. But there is a fifty (50) year limitation on those restrictions which is scheduled to toll sometime in 2027.
10. See ¶5.1 of the Community Center agreement.
11. See ¶5.8 of the Community Center agreement.
12. 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.”
13. See NRS 278.4983(5).
14. “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…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)].
15. Go to https://www.yourtahoeplace.com/uploads/pdf-ivgid/2000_IVGID_Rec_Fac_Master_Plan.pdf.
16. In 2000 dollars.
17. Although the Plan lists increased ad valorem, sales, lodging occupancy, and county real property transfer taxes, together with Washoe County community and federal grants as possible additional revenue sources, none was realistic. Demonstrating the consultant’s naivety.