Councilman Charles R. Samuels pressed city administrators on whether tapping into the $10 million stabilization fund is consistent with the city’s financial policies, which limit use of the funds to unforeseen or catastrophic events that result in an increase in city expenditures of at least 0.5 percent of the current budget.

The snowstorm cleanup cost alone does not meet that criteria, but the city’s chief administrator for finance, Lenora Reid, argued it does qualify if you include the $3.8 million in overspending on public safety.

Samuels argued that was not the result of a catastrophic event, nor should it have been unavoidable.

“All of those items should have been foreseen,” he said.

“That’s your opinion,” Reid responded.

Asked for an opinion, deputy city attorney Haskell C. Brown III said even if it went against city policy, it would not be illegal because the policy is laid out only in a resolution. He said the bigger issue would be how violating the policy might impact the city’s credit rating.

“Doing something the rating agencies see as contrary to the policy is probably something you want to get some financial advice on,” he said.