HomeOTHER TOPICSDoes a City of Incline Village make sense?

Comments

Does a City of Incline Village make sense? — 13 Comments

  1. Thank you for publishing this article, most informative! From a dollars and cents point of view, very doubtful that a ‘City’ structure is possible without at least including (merging?) IVGID into the City structure – the ‘Beaches’ apparently would remain an IVGID sole responsibility due to the deed restriction. All other services (water, sewer, parks and services to include recreation, etc.) should move out of the IVGID domain into the City structure and under the City’s management and fiscal responsibility.

  2. The transition to a city will be large. Office space, all types of equipment, software systems, and the tough one would be employees. It would be good to know the number of employees which would be needed. If the buzz around town is there is no housing then keeping employees for long periods becomes difficult. The formation advocates should provide citizens with a reasonable plan for intended capital projects to enhance the new city. Lots of work here.

  3. I agree with this assessment, only because it matches with my gut feel and exposure to small city management as an observer. It’s very expensive AND expansive. That’s just the nature of the beast. Needless to say, I am opposed.
    The League did yeoman’s work on tax refunds and i supported them financially, but this is a bridge too far and a bad idea.

    • The web site for the initiative is cityofinclinevillage dot com
      There is a FAQ page.
      But if you read it, you will see the level of detail in this article is greater than the FAQ.
      When might their financial estimates regarding revenue and expenses be available?
      Todd L. mentioned December in the Sept 27th meeting – with multiple scenarios said to be likely.

  4. All the above AND who will govern? Our Board of Trustees? Aargh…right now they can’t seem to handle what is on their plate let alone run a city.

  5. Yeah, the ‘big $’ is in being a County.

    Imagine “Lake County” to unify all basin communities who share common ground and concerns unique to being in the basin vs. the rest of the county district that is not lakeside.

    Congress created the TRPA to uphold 9 Thresholds designed to protect Lake clarity and National Treasure enjoyment.
    What if we go back to Congress and exchange the ‘Fed Compact’ for a ‘County Compact’ where we govern as one Lake County whose highest purpose is actually aligned with the Lake that our common; ecology, wildlife, personal and collective economy is dependent on?
    …with more funding to solve problems in our front and backyard, vs. being governed by those who don’t always live here and have to accommodate a much larger region with competing needs that prevent the very compliance required to protect the unique aspects of the Lake and land surrounding it?

    I can hear your ‘that’ll never happen’ response.

    I wonder if the Bi-State Compact idea was considered crazy impossible too.

    Reality emerges from the stories we create and when reality isn’t working…its time for a new Story.
    (a ‘National Treasure’ on a world stage that exports inspiration…has a lot of fans)

    As the anonymous Incline Villager quote says, “Only those who see the invisible can do the impossible”
    (it was on a poster in the old Bonanza museum when it was housed in the Starbucks building).

    just sayin

    • Current Nevada law divides Consolidated tax revenue (sales tax, real estate sales tax, etc) among the 17 counties. An 18th county is not feasible
      unless this law is changed, because no one would want to give up part of their revenue to a new county.

      In 2021, Blockchains LLC in Storey County withdrew its controversial request to effectively create a new county (Innovations Zones) in Northern Nevada. Although billionaire CEO Jeffrey Berns made political donations, he could not get traction.

      • I understand and that is why I brought up exchanging the bi-state compact.

        I don’t know other place in our country where a national treasure in the form of a lake motivated the creation of a special entity to manage the land around the water

        The proposed county (which would actually be called Tahoe County not Lake county that one’s already taken in California)…would be a very unique situation and maybe counties the wrong word
        Maybe there is a way to reorg the Compact to override county state city regulations?
        As a Fed sanctioned entity it should but we in Incline know it doesn’t and this can inhibit protecting our national treasure

        the advantage ( as you pointed out) county structure is the TOT money !! Probably over $100M annual from around lake

        More than enough money generated from hospitality to serve transit, education, workforce and needs of the visitors and National Treasure

        maybe I don’t have the exact words but a structure to move us forward in order to protect our National Treasure is best

  6. From article, Fernley population is ~23,000, has 71 employees.
    IV+CB population is less than 10,000 has 830 employees.

    To what specific responsibilities are the 830 IVGID employees allocated?

    • “Specific Responsibilities” would be in the job description. For the 830 employees, there were 202 job descriptions. IVGID has these records.

      A simpler approach would be to look at JOB TITLES. You can see the IVGID annual payroll using this link.
      Select the button “2021” which will display BEACHES, GOLF, Community Services etc. You can CLICK to drill down and see individual employees and their job title.
      https://projectauditors.com/Private/iv-app/public/find-fund-emp.php

  7. Thank you! Finally some real facts and the truth. Proponents don’t want to hear this, but our real problem is IVGID. As long as it continues, a new city will never realize any portion of the ad valorem or consolidated taxes IVGID currently receives. Just like the City of Fernley, a new city will receive no consolidated taxes. And given the maximum statewide tax rate, there is essentially nothing left over for a new city to levy as an ad valorem tax (moreover, can you imagine three different ad valorem taxes plus two Recreation/Beach Facility Fees? That’s right! The county, IVGID and the new city). Nor will a new city ever realize any portion of the 10% trash franchise W-M currently passes through to IVGID. Therefore in order to free up possible revenue sources for a new city, IVGID must be dissolved. Plus dissolution gives us the opportunity to fix something which has been broken since creation. But the proponents of incorporation adamantly refuse to touch IVGID. This is because they are working in kahoots with IVGID staff, and they fear our beaches will become public (how can the beaches be owned by a public agency, and yet access be denied to its residents/taxpayers?). Thus incorporation with IVGID remaining is nothing more than a pipedream, and a very stupid idea.