|
MOSES: I guess we need some guidance as to what we need to do to make that happen, right?
<br />To set this up, because when we did make the decision to approve for this to be funded, yeah,
<br />thinking that everything's just gonna happen the way we thought it would be, so I guess we need
<br />guidance in how we're gonna set that up. Give the approval that is necessary so that it can start.
<br />OWENS: Correct. And the, one of the first things they need is who is responsible. It has to be
<br />the claimant. On every other claim that has come in on the geothermal has had an individual
<br />who has put their name down and said, "I, Raylene Moses, am the claimant, and I will receive
<br />the money. I will distribute the money. I will pay the people. I will make the reports, and it's
<br />on my head under." I'll stop at that.
<br />PATEL: Mr. Chair, if I can. So, justso everyone's on the same page, the Commission nor the
<br />claims adjuster can't set anything up, right? Because ultimately what we can do and what I think
<br />is being done here today is identifying what the issues are. Hopefully, the claimants can take
<br />that back, you know, figure out what they need to do to make a good claim that's gonna go
<br />through the claims adjuster and ultimately comply with procurement.
<br />But, for the Commission to tell any claimant what needs to be said in a claim and how that claim
<br />needs to be finally be presented puts the Commission in a conflict position, right? You wouldn't
<br />go into court and ask the judge to tell me how to file my—what I need to write in my complaint.
<br />So, I think the best we can do, and I think what's been happening at the past meetings, is we
<br />identify the issues. We're here today to understand how the analysis goes. Ultimately, it's up to
<br />the claimants whether it be these claimants, any other claimants in the future, to come up and
<br />submit a claim that's gonna be in compliance with the rules and in compliance with procurement.
<br />So, keep in mind there are, with this particular claim, there's two separate issues, right? There's
<br />Rule 12. The Commission did approve initially as against the claim adjuster's report. That was
<br />reconsidered, but even if a new claim is submitted that complies with Rule 12 and the claims
<br />adjuster recommends or produces a favorable recommendation, that claim, separate and apart
<br />from the claim's adjuster's recommendation, is still gonna be, still gonna need to be in
<br />compliance with procurement.
<br />So, in a nutshell, I think the best we can do is identify the issues, understand the analysis and the
<br />process. Hopefully, everyone can take that moving forward and submit something that can go
<br />through, that can make what they want to make happen actually happen.
<br />HEAUKULANL And toward that end, I think it's helpful that we, we stay away from rhetorical
<br />metaphors and that we say exactly what we mean. Mr. Owens, you used a metaphor of someone
<br />calling you a name versus somebody punching you in the face, and I think, and correct me if I'm
<br />wrong, but I think you said that in the former case, that would not be a claim, but in the latter
<br />case, it would be a claim. Is that your position?
<br />OWENS: Yes.
<br />7
<br />EXHIBIT D
<br />
|