Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budgeting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission reviews draft method to allocate administrative fees across special‑revenue funds
Summary
Staff presented an Excel‑based draft allocating administrative fees (2019–2025 data) and commissioners debated moving from a flat percentage allocation toward a personnel‑time or ‘true cost’ method; the board asked for more analysis and to keep the item on the agenda for further review.
The commission discussed a draft spreadsheet prepared by staff that shows multi‑year actuals (2019–2025) and proposed allocations of administrative fees across special‑revenue funds. The presenter said she had compiled averages and actuals and marked some allocations in red to indicate items already allocated directly to specific funds. Commissioners noted anomalies in funds 28, 32 and 23 and asked for clearer explanations and supporting budget sheets.
One commissioner observed that past practice had commonly used a 5% allocation applied to operating budgets but noted auditors had suggested a more defensible approach based on personnel time or true costs; another commissioner said the allowance could be up to 15% "of personal cost" under some guidance but emphasized that a blanket 15% would not be defensible without analysis. Commissioners asked staff to combine allocation worksheets with the '26 budget sheets so they can see potential impacts and asked for additional department time‑use detail and follow‑up analysis before final adoption. The board left the draft as a starting point and asked that the item remain on future agendas while staff gathers supporting documentation for a defensible, audit‑ready allocation method.
Why it matters: Changing how administrative fees are assigned can materially affect fund balances and departmental budgets; commissioners sought a method that is transparent and defensible to auditors before changing budgeted allocations.
