Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Youth Sports Equipment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Water polo club seeks $120,000 in equipment funding; city raises legal questions over RAP-tax eligibility
Summary
Cedar Water Polo asked the RAP-tax committee for $120,000 to replace aging equipment and enable tournaments; committee members warned that RAP-tax rules typically require publicly owned facilities and suggested the club consult the city attorney and explore partnership with Leisure Services or other public entities.
Cedar Water Polo representatives asked the RAP-tax committee for $120,000 to replace aging equipment and buy multiple sets of goals, balls, lane lines, timing systems and tournament infrastructure that they said are needed for youth teams and to host tournaments in Cedar City.
“My name is Nathan Moses. ... Cedar Water Polo Club... Our income last year was $22,000 and our expenses were about $27,000,” Nathan Moses said, describing tight club finances and stating the club currently operates at the Cedar City aquatic center and Southern Utah University pools. Moses said the equipment is old, came from an older facility and needs replacement to support multiple age groups and to allow the club to host tournaments locally.
Legal and policy concerns: Committee members raised immediate questions about RAP-tax eligibility because the tax’s parks-and-recreation allocations typically fund publicly owned recreational facilities or improvements. One committee member warned that funding a private club’s equipment could set a precedent and urged the club to consult the city attorney and explore ways to tie purchases directly to the city’s Leisure Services or the aquatic center so the benefit is retained by a public entity.
Club response and next steps: Club leaders said some equipment would also benefit the city by improving aquatic-center tournament capacity and suggested that partial funding could be tied to city ownership or to Leisure Services’ needs. Committee members recommended the club meet with the city attorney to clarify legal pathways and consider structuring requests so funds buy equipment owned and maintained by a public entity.
No formal funding decision was recorded; committee members asked the applicants to consult legal staff and to return with a structure that aligns with RAP-tax rules.
