Commission considers using accrued interest, phased admin rates and one-time RDA recapture

Commissioners debated whether to rely solely on accrued interest or to apply fund-specific administrative percentages informed by an internal study of wages and benefits.

Finance staff and commissioners noted that interest income has varied over time and that a multi-year average is preferable for budgeting. Brianne cautioned that some PTIFs (notably those tied to bonds in fund 28) may be restricted from reallocation and require legal review. A commissioner summarized the fiscal trade-offs and said the commission could "transfer those one-time amounts" identified in the study and then budget a recurring percentage for the next fiscal year.

Commissioners floated sample percentages by fund — for example, a 7% admin charge on certain funds, 8% on the RDA, and 10–12% on fund 28 depending on workload — while stressing the goal of not "crippling" funds. One commissioner said he would "take that and I would probably recall the 1 at the same time and just a 1 time retroactive, get it right in," urging a retroactive adjustment for the RDA so future budgets reflect accurate administrative costs.

Staff recommended compiling per-fund totals that show both the one-time reconciliation amounts and the proposed ongoing percentages so the commission can decide whether to implement a phased approach, a retroactive recapture, or a statutory flat rate. The commission did not adopt a final structure at the meeting and asked staff to return with precise figures and legal guidance on bond-related restrictions.