|
<br />MELROSE: At some point, this becomes a procurement process, and it, there is you know, you
<br />follow procurement law to how you, how you do this. The study, the way the RFP is structured,
<br />it’s really structured around a set of core questions. What are the things we’re really try to solve
<br />for, and asks the responder to provide detailed sense of how they would—what science would
<br />they bring to it. What kind of context would they shape. What kind of science would they shape
<br />to do their study with. So, in the evaluation committee, you select people who have expertise in
<br />that area, or have specific expertise around epidemiology of the way we’ve talked about this
<br />process. This would be a combination of community members that by law has to be three
<br />County members on that committee, and then a series of PhD’s who have expertise in that area,
<br />and the group was very clear about wanting to make sure that there was good science and good
<br />background in the evaluation process. So, whether, you know the role of the Planning
<br />Commission, which is I think what you’re asking, Commissioner, is a complex review process. I
<br />don’t know how you would go about including the Commissioners consideration of applications.
<br />I frankly don’t see a way that the Commission would necessarily be involved in the evaluation of
<br />the proposals, but the goal is to find as much, as much qualified expertise to provide a
<br />professional judgment on which one of these studies makes the most sense, which one of these
<br />proposers makes the most sense. Does that answer the question?
<br />
<br />HEAUKULANI: It helps me.
<br />
<br />HENKEL: Mr. Chair?
<br />
<br />MIYASATO: Commissioner Henkel.
<br />
<br />HENKEL: Yeah, is—is this an all or nothing situation cause if we happen to you know not
<br />recommend it and go for a delay is, is this money not going to be used for a study or are you
<br />guys gonna come up with something else? I’m—you know, I live in the area just a few miles
<br />downwind from geothermal, and I’ve been impacted you know from ’91 and recent activities,
<br />too, and I really sympathize with these people, but I’m also the kind of guy that, you know, if
<br />you offer me a cupcake now or a cupcake in a half hour, I just, I want to eat the cupcake now
<br />because I don’t want to—I don’t know if we’ll both still be there in a half hour, and I would hate
<br />to you know to try to delay this funding, and then have it, have it not be available at all. So, I
<br />mean, help me out here.
<br />
<br />DAYTON: I think the reason it’s before you today is that there is, there’s a strong desire on the
<br />part of the community for many years now to get to the bottom of this in some sense, to get a
<br />scientific inquiry and to get it moving, and I think you heard that in some of the testimony today.
<br />Honestly, I remember sitting through a meeting before this Commission a little while ago when
<br />the County was in fact scolded for not moving quickly enough on this, and I understand the
<br />frustration. I’ve listened to concerns about geothermal since the nineties. I think all of us have.
<br />So, you know, would we give up and walk away? No, but I think this is something that the
<br />community’s been asking for, for a very long time, and frankly you know, the Mayor feels it’s
<br />the right thing to do, and it’s, it’s a well thought out process, a well thought out study, and it’s
<br />appropriate. Am I answering your question?
<br />
<br />25
<br />EXHIBIT F
<br />
<br />
<br />
|