Board debates whether administrative fees need a separate council resolution

Board members spent significant time clarifying when and how administrative fees for the cannabis fund can be spent and whether the board needs a separate council resolution to permit use of those fees.

Ariane, county staff who advised on legislative requirements, told the board that "any spending from the fund has to be through council resolution. Right? So even before any admin fees can be spent, you need a council resolution approving the use of that money." Members discussed whether the FY27 appropriation already in the budget is sufficient and whether administrative requests could be folded into the council's spending plan or require a separate resolution.

Several members said the statutory cap is up to 15% of annual revenue but agreed the board should first estimate actual administrative needs rather than automatically claiming the full percentage. Nathaniel Tutt reiterated the statutory limit and the need to include administrative expenses in the board's spending plan that will be forwarded to the council and the Office of Social Equity.

The board directed staff to include an explanation of administrative-fee uses in a letter to the council chair and to seek a legal opinion from the county Office of Law where interpretations differ about the vehicle for approval.