Given Board Policy Nos. 6.2.0.3.0 and 6.2.0.4.0 instruct that

“The District establishes, through the annual budget process, a Recreation…(as well as) a Beach Facility Fee assessed on eligible parcels and/or dwelling units within the District…to (financially) support the Beaches (and)…Community Services facilities, venues, services, and programs,”

and as we’ve explained elsewhere, “each year…the Board…approve(s) a resolution¹ (“the Resolution”) which at ¶6 adopts a “Report² For Collection on The County Tax Roll of Recreation Standby And Service Charges” (“the Report”) which outlines the billing and collection process set forth in…Nevada Revised Statutes 318.197” and 318.201, respectively³. ¶4(b) of the Resolution expressly finds that

“Each parcel assessed pursuant to this Resolution and…Report…is specially benefited (by)…the availability of the use⁴ of IVGID’s beaches; boat launch ramp; Championship golf course; Mountain golf course; tennis facilities; the Chateau and Aspen Grove; Diamond Peak Ski Resort, and Recreation Center (i.e., recreation facilities), including reduced rates for season passes and reduced daily rates.”

¶I of the Report instructs that

“The (aforesaid) annual…RECREATION STANDBY AND SERVICE CHARGES [ALSO KNOWN AS THE RECREATION FACILITY FEE (“RFF”) AND BEACH FACILITY FEE (“BFF”)]…are for the availability of use of the recreational facilities above described.”

Given ¶3 of the Resolution instructs that the RFF/BFF represent

“Charge(s) for the costs of the acquisition, administration, operation, maintenance and improvement of the recreational facilities, including the improvements thereon, and of the servicing of bonds issued or to be issued therefor,”

¶V of the Report represents that

“The amount of moneys required for the (forthcoming) fiscal year…has been determined by th(e) Board to…(be necessary to financially) support debt, capital expenditures, and operations for the District’s various (public) recreation and beach facilities…(Which when) combined with (actual operational) service charges (also known as user fees) collected…for facility use and program activities…serve to (financially) support…operations of the District funded by (its) Community Services…and Beach Fund(s), respectively,”⁵

¶¶3 and 4 of the Resolution represent that

“Each parcel assessed⁶ pursuant to this Resolution and…Report…is specially benefited…in a fair and reasonable way for the sums which they are charged,” and

It’s pretty clear the RFF/BFF are intended to represent fees “based on the rights of (a governmental) entity as proprietor of the instrumentalities used.”⁷

From all of the foregoing the District is telling us the RFF/BFF represent:

1. “Recreation standby and service charges;”

2. Levied and collected against real property;

3. “For the (mere) availability of the use of IVGID’s beaches” and various public recreation facilities;

4. At “reduced rates for season passes and…daily rates” at those facilities;

5. Based on the rights of (a governmental) entity as proprietor of the instrumentalities used.”

6. Which when “combined with (actual operational) service charges collected…for facility use and program activities…serve to (financially) support…operations of the District funded by (its) Community Services…and Beach Fund(s).”

But the District doesn’t want to call the RFF/BFF what it has told us they are. So instead, it calls them “facility fees.” This labeling is intentionally deceitful because the District wants us to believe the fee is something sanguine. And staff know that’s exactly what you will think inasmuch as after all, the “rates, tolls or charges” a general improvement district (“GID”) Board is authorized to “fix, and from time to time increase or decrease,”⁸ expressly extends to those “for…recreational…facilities furnished by the district.” Even though it knows the RFF/BFF are not “facility fees.”⁹

Regardless, staff and past/current Boards’ justification for charging these fees is founded upon at least the following five (5) arguments:

1. Because NRS 318.197(1) allows GID Boards to fix “rates, tolls and charges,” this is presumably what they have done¹⁰;

2. Because these are the “labels” artfully affixed to these monetary exactions¹¹. Is there any doubt the RFF/BFF were “drafted with [NRS 318.197(1)‘s “standby and service charge” language] firmly in mind?”¹²

3. Exactly who are we to take issue with staff’s and current/past IVGID Boards’ labeling?

4. Although NRS 318.225 and 318.230 allow GID Boards to levy and collect ad valorem taxes, NRS 361.445¹³ does not allow for other types of “tax(es).”¹⁴ So why would staff intentionally label the RFF/BFF “taxes,”¹⁵ when they know there’s no statutory authority for this type of monetary exaction?

5. Finally, because the ends justify the means¹⁶. After all, staff and past/current Boards are trying to run a GID here. So if the District cannot levy and collect the type of RFF/BFF it wants, and staff refuse to reduce their intentional overspending, from what other revenue source(s) can the District tap to generate the sums required to make the District’s public recreation facilities “available” for the primary use of the “inhabitants…of (Incline Village, Crystal Bay) and of the State of Nevada?”¹⁷

So there you have it! Now you know why according to staff and current/past IVGID Boards, the RFF/BFF represent permissible NRS 318.197(1) “facility fees.”

---

1. An example of that resolution is the one adopted for FY 2025-26; Resolution No. 1917. Which can be viewed at pages 142-145 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s May 30, 2025 meeting (“the 5/30/2025 Board packet“).
2. An example of the Report adopted for FY 2025-26 appears at pages 146-151 of the 5/30/2025 Board packet.
3. See page 225 of the packet of materials prepared by staff in anticipation of the Board’s May 26, 2022 meeting (“the 5/26/2022 Board packet“).
4. As opposed to the actual use.
5. See ¶V at page 149 of the 5/30/2025 Board packet.
6. See ¶IV of the Report which states that “the lots and parcels of real property so charged have been described by their parcel numbers used by the County Assessor in the County Tax Roll…which are by reference to maps prepared by and on file in the office of the County Assessor for said County.”
7. See Emerson College v. City of Boston, 391 Mass. 415, 424, 462 N.E.2d 1098 (1984).
8. See NRS 318.197(1).
9. If you’d like to learn what facility fees really are, you’re invited to examine our What Are Facility Fees And Are They Charged by The District discussion.
10. This was exactly Trustee Homan’s argument at the Board’s May 30, 2025 meeting” [see 2:05:27-1:56:47 of the livestream of the Board’s May 30, 2025 meeting (“the 5/30/2025 livestream“)].
11. In other words, “do as I say, not as I do” (go to https://www.pvbc.com/blog/2015/11/17/do-as-i-say-not-as-i-do-proverbs-47).
12. See Rider v. County of San Diego, 1 Cal.4th 1, 15, 820 P.2d 10 (1991).
13. Which instructs that “assessment(s) made by the county assessor and…the Department (of Taxation), as equalized according to law, shall be the only basis for property taxation by any…district in that county.” Putting aside the question of whether the RFF/BFF are “taxes,” there is no question they are not ad valorem because they are uniform in amount, and not based upon an assessed property’s valuation.
14. Such as special or use restricted ones.
15. Even though that may be exactly what they are.
16. Rather than the District’s mantra of “one district, one team” (go to https://www.yourtahoeplace.com/ivgid/about-ivgid/mission-vision), its real mantra should be as we’ve observed. Because as the reader will see, this is what guides the District regardless of what the law instructs.
17. See NRS 318.015(1).