Common use of Appeals Process Clause in Contracts

Appeals Process. Upon receipt of the final notice, if Organization notifies County that it wishes to engage in the Appeals Process, Organization and County shall engage in non-binding discussions to give the Organization an opportunity to present reasons why it believes that there was no underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure, or that the amount of the underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure was different than the amount identified by County, and to give County the opportunity to reconsider its notice. Organization and County may negotiate an appropriate apportionment of responsibility for the repayment of an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure. At Organization request, County will meet and negotiate with Organization in good faith concerning appropriate apportionment of responsibility for repayment of an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure. In determining an appropriate apportionment of responsibility, Organization and County may consider any relevant factors. An example of a relevant factor is the extent to which either party contributed to an interpretation of a statute, regulation or rule prior to the expenditure that was officially reinterpreted after the expenditure. If County and Organization reach agreement on the amount owed to County, Organization shall promptly repay that amount to County by issuing payment to County. If County and Organization are unable to agree to whether there has been an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure or as to the amount owed, the parties may agree to consider further appropriate dispute resolution processes, including mediation and arbitration.

Appeals Process. Upon receipt of the final notice, if Organization City notifies County that it wishes to engage in the Appeals Process, Organization City and County shall engage in non-binding discussions to give the Organization City an opportunity to present reasons why it believes that there was no underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure, or that the amount of the underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure was different than the amount identified by County, and to give County the opportunity to reconsider its notice. Organization City and County may negotiate an appropriate apportionment of responsibility for the repayment of an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure. At Organization City request, County will meet and negotiate with Organization City in good faith concerning appropriate apportionment of responsibility for repayment of an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure. In determining an appropriate apportionment of responsibility, Organization City and County may consider any relevant factors. An example of a relevant factor is the extent to which either party contributed to an interpretation of a statute, regulation or rule prior to the expenditure that was officially reinterpreted after the expenditure. If County and Organization City reach agreement on the amount owed to County, Organization City shall promptly repay that amount to County by issuing payment to County. If County and Organization City are unable to agree to whether there has been an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure or as to the amount owed, the parties may agree to consider further appropriate dispute resolution processes, including mediation and arbitration.

Appeals Process. Upon receipt of the final notice, if Organization Commission notifies County that it wishes to engage in the Appeals Process, Organization Commission and County shall engage in non-binding discussions to give the Organization Commission an opportunity to present reasons why it believes that there was no underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure, or that the amount of the underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure was different than the amount identified by County, and to give County the opportunity to reconsider its notice. Organization Commission and County may negotiate an appropriate apportionment of responsibility for the repayment of an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure. At Organization Commission request, County will meet and negotiate with Organization Commission in good faith concerning appropriate apportionment of responsibility for repayment of an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure. In determining an appropriate apportionment of responsibility, Organization Commission and County may consider any relevant factors. An example of a relevant factor is the extent to which either party contributed to an interpretation of a statute, regulation or rule prior to the expenditure that was officially reinterpreted after the expenditure. If County and Organization Commission reach agreement on the amount owed to County, Organization Commission shall promptly repay that amount to County by issuing payment to County. If County and Organization Commission are unable to agree to whether there has been an underexpenditure, overexpenditure or misexpenditure or as to the amount owed, the parties may agree to consider further appropriate dispute resolution processes, including mediation and arbitration.