Staff explain pooled‑investment error and turf account interest during May–June financial review

At the meeting, staff reviewed the May and June 2025 financial statements and explained an accounting error that produced a negative pooled‑cash figure and required adjustments.

Staff member Sadie told the committee the May financials showed a negative pooled‑cash item of about $2.75 million or a reported negative balance in the investments/cash investment balances section; she attributed the discrepancy to an erroneous double transfer made by staff (identified in the transcript as an error made by Crawford). According to the account presented, a payout had been double‑transferred: the cash moved into a pooled investment account twice and the payout was paid the previous year. Staff said adjusting journal entries were expected to correct the negative display during the fiscal‑year‑end adjustments and the audit process that had begun.

The rostered pooled investment account at issue was identified as ICS number 602122. Staff explained that ICS 602122 is a pooled investment account that holds project funds until they are expended and that interest for each subaccount is now being shown separately rather than combined. For the turf subaccount, staff reported a May 31 balance of roughly $40,000 and a June 1 balance showing about $63,054; meeting discussion attributed the increase to interest credited to the account, with the interest amount cited in the record as about $23,002.46 (presented as an aggregate for the turf and related lines). Staff said interest and offsets are being posted to distinct lines to show how much each project earned rather than a single lump‑sum interest line as in prior statements.

Committee members asked whether any engineering fees or other payments had been charged to project accounts; staff said no payments for certain engineering fees had cleared the books at the time of the conversation. The record also notes discussion of a BOK loan taken for the pool (described in the transcript as a $1.6 million loan) with an approximate monthly payment discussed as roughly $10,000; staff said they would verify exact payoff numbers.

The committee ended the financial discussion by requesting further clarification from accounting staff and follow‑up during the audit and year‑end adjusting entries.

No formal action was recorded on the financial statements in the excerpt provided; staff indicated they would continue to work with auditors and prepare correcting entries.