City staff walked the committee through the midyear financial snapshot and the legal constraints that limit reallocation of many balances. Members asked whether contingency lines could be tapped for public safety and how restricted revenues (SDCs, gas tax, grant funds) differ from general contingency or unappropriated fund balances.

Mister Newton explained that funds such as SDCs and capital reimbursement pools are governed by state statute and by the purpose for which they were collected. "We don't have access to those," he said of SDC funds, and he underscored that borrowing from special‑revenue pools would require repayment or voter approval.

A committee member asked about a recent midyear property purchase charged against the Parks Improvement Fund; staff said the council approved borrowing from that fund and that repayment is roughly $150,000 per year plus interest over a 10‑year schedule, with the stated justification that owning a building will eliminate future rent and consolidate staff under one roof.

Staff also outlined contingency mechanics: contingency lines are appropriated sums that the council can reallocate during the year but which are not freely fungible across statutorily restricted funds. The staff quantified contingency across funds and reported about $1.175M of general‑fund contingency had been utilized in the most recent close and that about $485,000 of contingency expired unused at year end.

Why it matters: committee members asked whether restricted contingencies could be reclassified or whether the city should pursue statutory changes at the state level; staff said some transfers are feasible as interfund transfers but many funds are legally ring‑fenced.

Ending: staff agreed to include clearer worksheets showing the composition of fees and recent household impacts ahead of the April meetings so the committee can better weigh options that could affect taxpayers.