Appeal from Department-Identified Misexpenditure Sample Clauses

Appeal from Department-Identified Misexpenditure. If the Department’s notice of Misexpenditure is based on a Misexpenditure solely of the type described in Section 13(b) or (c) of Exhibit A, LPHA and the Department shall engage in the process described in this Section 1.c.iii.(B)(i.) to resolve a dispute regarding the noticed Misexpenditure. First, LPHA and Department shall engage in non-binding discussions to give LPHA an opportunity to present reasons why it believes that there is, in fact, no Misexpenditure or that the amount of the Misexpenditure is different than the amount identified by the Department, and to give the Department the opportunity to reconsider its notice. LPHA and Department may negotiate an appropriate apportionment of responsibility for the repayment of a Misexpenditure. At LPHA request, Department will meet and negotiate with LPHA in good faith concerning appropriate apportionment of responsibility for repayment of a Misexpenditure. In determining an appropriate apportionment of responsibility, LPHA and Department 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 the Department and LPHA reach agreement on the amount owed to the Department, LPHA shall promptly repay that amount to Department by issuing payment to Department or by directing Department to withhold future payments pursuant to Section 1.c.iii.(C) below. If Department and LPHA continue to disagree as to whether or not there has been a Misexpenditure or as to the amount owed, the parties may agree to consider further appropriate dispute resolution processes including, subject to Oregon Department of Justice and LPHA counsel approval, arbitration.