This is the story of an IVGID employee’s sale of public land designated as open space to private buyers without Board approval or a public process and the subsequent denials of any wrongdoing by the General Manager and Legal Counsel.  Since the story has many facets and is still unfolding, we thought it best to report it in three parts.  Part I is a summary. Part II are the details.  Part III (yet to come) provides an analysis of the Denials along with our informed conclusions.  We hope you will share your insights, questions, and comments.   

 Part I  – Summary  

 How can an IVGID employee who is entrusted with the District’s Finances, Technology and Risk Management make false representations to the Board and the County, take actions that invalidate his representations, and violate Nevada law AND NOT be held accountable?

In late December of 2017, the Reno Gazette Journal disclosed that IVGID Director of Finance Eick deceived Washoe County, the IVGID Board and our Citizens. Without seeking Board approval or providing public notice, Mr. Eick in defiance of Nevada Statutes unlawfully sold three parcels of public land designated as OPEN SPACE to private buyers of his choosing.  He set the prices, signed the deeds and collected the money. These unbuildable parcels which carried Recreation and Beach privileges were not appraised nor advertised for public bid and the sales were never approved by the Board of Trustees. These parcels were part of 87 “tax delinquent” land parcels IVGID acquired from Washoe County at no cost for the public purpose of open space.  In response to these disclosures and a letter from the Washoe County District Attorney, IVGID General Manager Pinkerton and Legal Counsel Guinasso issued a series of denials in the Bonanza, the District’s website and the Reno Gazette.  We find these denials unsubstantiated by the known facts and believe that this matter warrants further investigation. Along with many of our citizens we stand with Washoe County Commissioner Berkbigler, IVGID Trustees Dent and Callicrate demanding answers!

Part II  – The Details

In the interest of finding and reporting THE FACTS, we have reviewed IVGID and Washoe County Staff Memos, Board Packets and Minutes, IVGID Resolutions and Board Policies, Nevada Statutes, IVGID Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports and Washoe County Tax Assessor Records.  Here are the details along with a few pauses for our questions and comments:

All 87 Parcels were zoned as “unbuildable.” Beginning as far back as 1986 Washoe County and other Taxes along with IVGID’s Recreation and Beach Fees were not paid. These delinquencies reached the astronomical sum of $800,000. The majority of these delinquent charges were Recreation and Beach Fees assessed by  IVGID.  The Washoe County Treasurer held these and other tax delinquent parcels in Trust and provided an opportunity for public entities to secure these parcels at no cost for public purposes as defined under NRS 361.603.

In July of 2012, the IVGID Board of Trustees approved a resolution to acquire 87 Washoe County tax delinquent unbuildable parcels for zero cost for the public purpose of Open Space as defined in NRS 361.603.  Director of Finance Eick stated in his Memo to the Board that 69 of the tax delinquent parcels were on the Recreation Fee Roll causing a distortion in the District’s Budget and could not be removed from the Roll until the County transferred the parcels. According to Mr. Eick, IVGID’s primary purpose in acquiring the parcels was to remove them from the Recreation Roll and record the ownership of the parcels in the Community Services Fund.

Along with the Board’s Resolution, Mr. Eick represented to Washoe County that the 87 tax delinquent parcels would be used for the public purpose of Open Space as defined under NRS 361.603.  In October of 2012, Washoe County under NRS 361.603(5) waived the $800,000 of delinquent back taxes and fees and transferred these parcels to IVGID for free.

SO, WHERE DID MR. EICK GO ASTRAY?

1. The more than $718,000 of delinquent Recreation and Beach Fees were never disclosed in ANY of the District’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (“CAFR”).

2. In the same year the 87 parcels were acquired, Mr. Eick played fast and loose with his prior representations to the Board and our Citizens. Although he stated that all parcels would be placed in the Community Services Fund he disclosed in Note 4 on page 39 of the 2013 CAFR that only 78 of the Parcels would be held in the Community Services Fund. The remaining 9 parcels were placed in the General Fund as they could be “restored to a form that makes them buildable at some point in the future.” Placing these potentially buildable parcels carrying a higher value into the General Fund, a Fund that has no past financial interest in the parcels, is just plain wrong!  Simply stated, Mr. Eick has enabled the General Fund to own land reclaimed for delinquent fees that it is not owed.

3. Playing Bait and Switch with the County, after having stated that the parcels would remain as Open Space he decided to sell them. Note 4 of the same CAFR states that the parcels “could be sold at some future point because they carry the ability to have recreation privileges while remaining unbuildable.” And there is one more EICK lie revealed in this short footnote. Although he stated to the Board and our Citizens that the purpose for acquiring these parcels was to remove them from the Recreation Rolls –opening the door to future sales, translated to putting them back on the Recreation Rolls.

4. In March and July of 2014, Mr. Eick sold two lots. In addition to his failure to consult with the County on selling the parcels designated as Open Space, he also chose to ignore NRS 318.160 which requires Board approval of the sale of public property. Instead, he decided the price and the terms. He determined who the brokers and buyers would be. He further contrived a worksheet with selective years of delinquent Recreation and Beach Fees to reflect his predetermined price. There is no correlation between the actual years and respective interest charges these parcels were delinquent and the calculations Mr. Eick came up with to justify the sales price. There was no public notice or appraisal. There was no disclosure in any of the Board Minutes citing the sale of these two parcels.

5. There is a new twist under Note 4 in the 2014 and 2015 CAFRs. First, the 87 parcels disclosed in the 2013 CAFR disappear in both years and there is no mention of the sale of any parcels. Instead, we learn in the 2014 CAFR that the District acquired 4 tax delinquent parcels which are held in the Community Services Fund. The 2015 CAFR discloses the acquisition of 1 tax delinquent parcel held in the Utility Fund.  Any one reading the 2014 and 2015 CAFRs would not have an accurate accounting of the District’s acquisition of tax delinquent parcels.

6. Following the same unilateral decisions made in 2014, Mr. Eick in 2015 sold another lot without consultation or consent of the County and without Board approval or notification. Although, we have subsequently learned that both Mr. Pinkerton and Attorney Guinasso approved this sale before placing a moratorium on selling additional lots.

7. In the 2016 and 2017 CAFRs under Note 4, Mr. Eick states that there are approximately 80 parcels. He seems to have lost count.

8. In the 2016 and 2017 CAFRs under Note 4 Mr. Eick discloses that “these lands are not held for the purpose of income or profit.” This statement would indicate that the parcels would actually be held for the public purpose of open space and no longer be available for future sales. Yet, Mr. Guinasso stated at the December Board Meeting and on the District’s website and in his newspaper opinion piece that new policies would be developed in order to sell the parcels.

Part III … updated Sept 4, 2023

1.     On June 5, 2019, a Law  was passed:    NRS 318.512, requiring appraisal and Board approval before a General Improvement District could sell land.

2.     Regarding the land sales, Washoe County Commissioner Marsha Berkbigler publicly said, “This is bullshit,” Berkbigler said. “This land belongs to the taxpayers. It does not belong to a private citizen. GIDs must be responsible for tax dollars. They must be. And if the attorney general or the district attorney or the governor or the Legislature or anyone else isn’t going to take responsibility for the GIDs, I will.” But she did nothing that resulted in any consequences.

3.     No investigation was conducted, and it is unknown whether Eick or Herron received gifts from 3 “lucky” buyers: Jonathan Sabin, James Robert Gately and Ronald Randolph-Wall.

4.     Nothing happened to either IVGID employees Gerald Eick or Susan Herron.

5.     No explanation was provided as to how the “list of potential buyers” was compiled by Eick.

6.     No proof was ever provided that IVGID received and deposited the funds paid for the land.

7.     Gately re-sold his parcel in a year for $25,000 to Ann & Robert Lyman.

8.     IVGID did not update their fixed asset list with the land parcels that were obtained from Washoe County;  a letter was sent to the IVGID Audit Committee June 29, 2023 regarding this and other errors in the list.

  9.  No wrongdoing was ever admitted by IVGID legal counsel Jason Guinasso, General Manager Steven Pinkerton, Director of Finance Gerald Eick, or Executive assistant/District Clerk Susan Herron.

 10.  Herron still works for the District, and in 2022 received a promotion and pay raise, which was not approved by the Board.