Council committee outlines process to move 2% lapse contingency back into department budgets

Council Member Ron Salem, chair of the City Council's DOGE special committee, told members on Oct. 21 that departments interested in accessing the city's 2% lapse contingency must submit a standard form and obtain auditor review before the committee will consider introducing legislation.

The committee discussion focused on a procedural path for moving roughly $6,000,000 that was held “below the line” as a 2% contingency during the budget process. Salem said, “If you'll look in your little stack, you've got a form that can be completed by the various divisions departments. If they wish to move those dollars above the line...it will go to the auditors to be evaluated and such, and they'll come back to us with everything is okay. And then we'll make a decision whether to introduce legislation.”

Why it matters: the contingency represents funds set aside from controllable expenses to allow flexibility during the fiscal year. Salem said the contingency includes a little more than $200,000 tied to the City Council’s own accounts and larger sums across other departments.

How the process will work: committee members and auditors described these steps during the meeting. - A division chief or department head fills out the provided form and signs off; auditors expect a departmental signoff as a matter of course. - The form and supporting financial information are submitted to the auditors, who will “scrub” the request, ask follow-up questions and prepare background (budget histories, actuals) for the committee. - The DOGE special committee will schedule the request, discuss it, and—if it approves—introduce a one‑cycle emergency ordinance. The one‑cycle route reduces the standard three-reading legislative cycle to two readings but will still follow committee assignments, typically to finance, before final council action.

Council Member Arias asked for clarity on who may submit requests and whether council members could initiate them on behalf of departments. Arias said, “Do they need to come here to DOGE first and present? Or what does it look like?” Bridal Parks of the Council Auditor’s Office said she expects the requests to originate from at least a division head and recommended the auditors proactively distribute the forms to departments so they can initiate the process. Parks said departments should be prepared to “help defend why they think they need it, whether or not it's all or partial request.”

Multiple members emphasized oversight. Council Member Diamond said he would “ask a lot of tough questions” and that the committee would not be a “rubber stamp.” Staff said they do not expect a large number of these requests in the first months of the fiscal year, but that submissions may increase after January.

Next steps: the auditors will finalize the form and distribute it to departments, the committee will accept completed forms for review, and any approved requests would be advanced as one‑cycle legislation and routed through the standard committee assignments (finance, then full council).

Clarifying details recorded at the meeting included the approximate $6,000,000 contingency total and that the City Council’s share is roughly $200,000. The committee’s intent is to require a department head signoff and auditor review before any lapse funds move above the line.