Theres still some risk so i still feel like i felt coming in although the picture may be a little better but wed like to come back quarterly and just let you know how were doing. Now, the blue line that we show, if we were unable to do anything and just use the cca money and also do the half cent increase in the general fund, you will see in the outer years well be in trouble and the dotted blue line wed be on the 15 percent that line represents the 15 percent reserve policy that we have so that we can borrow money and we will be on the black line if were able to save about 8 million a year and so the challenge that we have is you know not only with the ia negotiations mountain tunnel but were also aggressively looking for other customers and really defining our Business Plan plan and thats one thing that were working on as a group but id like todd to come up and go over more details. So thank you general manager and Todd Rydstrom assistant general manager for Business Services and als
Risk profile has diminished and 65 percent would be an appropriate level for where we stand today. Certainly it is a policy call and so as the policy component of our organization if you would like us to revisit that 65 percent we would certainly be willing to do that but this is what we believe to be the best but if theres concern over 65 percent and a desire to go with a higher contingency profile certainly we would do that. I think i want to add i want to thank commissioner torres i think the conversation is valuable and then your response about whether or not we want to take a long hard look at that policy but i want to thank commissioner torres its an important line of questioning. Are we going to continue the report. Thank you very much emilio. I guess were not going to revisit the policy of 65 percent at this point. Im fine with it i just want to make sure 65 percent is a comfortable number i had the same reaction seems like a low number but in understanding how that number is d
65 percent would be an appropriate level for where we stand today. Certainly it is a policy call and so as the policy component of our organization if you would like us to revisit that 65 percent we would certainly be willing to do that but this is what we believe to be the best but if theres concern over 65 percent and a desire to go with a higher contingency profile certainly we would do that. I think i want to add i want to thank commissioner torres i think the conversation is valuable and then your response about whether or not we want to take a long hard look at that policy but i want to thank commissioner torres its an important line of questioning. Are we going to continue the report. Thank you very much emilio. I guess were not going to revisit the policy of 65 percent at this point. Im fine with it i just want to make sure 65 percent is a comfortable number i had the same reaction seems like a low number but in understanding how that number is derived at i think a bullet form
[laughter]. And you also dont want to tell your contractor that just in case you have another hundred thousand tucked away in in a corner. So to cover a hundred percent of it we think would be inappropriate but we also think 50 percent is too low, 65 seems appropriate. Before you start again so the will of the body is we want a short memorandum and once we receive that memorandum well discuss whether we want to revisit or change or delete or leave it as is is that our will . I dont think its a Commission Policy more a policy as it relates to industry type of practice when you are doing a program of what is a risk of a program that you are willing to accept and there are a lot of factors on, you know, for example, what is the exposure i mean you can have people look at it and maybe the exposure which is the cost of it, may not be as big as we are indicating so i mean theres a lot of engineering factors that go with that and i just think looking at everything, we felt very comfortable th