Jennifer Fielder D4

JENNIFER FIELDER

CURRENT OCCUPATION: Business Owner CAMPAIGN WEBSITE: www.jenniferfielder.com

Arrow-Circle-Right Briefly introduce yourself. My husband Paul and I live near Thompson Falls in beautiful Northwest Montana. We have two grown children and five little grandchildren. We enjoy managing our timber land for optimal health, and like many Montanans, we love the outdoors.

I have been a successful business owner for the past 20+ years. These last 8 years, I had the honor of representing a large portion of Northwest Montana in the State Senate. I also served as CEO of a national nonprofit organization for 4 years.

Professionally, I have worked on projects involving railways, pipelines, large utilities, public works projects, federal energy regulatory proceedings, engineering, finance, litigation management, and regulatory compliance.

In addition to the valuable experiences I have gained related to the functions of the Public Service Commission and the industries it regulates, I offer the strong work ethic, objective thinking, and commitment to integrity that I believe will serve the PSC, and the people, well. Arrow-Circle-Right Would you approach your

role in this position as a policy influencer, advocating as such, or as a regulator, applying and enforcing existing law? Please

explain. In alignment with existing law, I intend to approach this position as a fair and objective regulator.

By law, the Commission’s function is that of a regulatory agency, not a policy influencer. I believe it is important for the Commission to operate in accordance with the existing laws.

I have great respect for the separation of powers and checks and balances established in our state and national constitutions. As the PSC is a quasi-judicial entity, it is critical to maintain objectivity and refrain from judicial activism.

I will do my best to adhere to the laws that are set before us by the legislature, to review each case with an open mind, and to respect the separation of powers principles established in our constitutions.

Arrow-Circle-Right Do you favor the creation of

an advocacy staff for the PSC (independent in action, but administratively tied), or to leave that responsibility to the Montana Consumer Council? Please explain.

As established by the State Constitution, Montana has a fully-funded rate-payer advocacy agency that is independent of the PSC. It is important to maintain this separation so this agency (MCC - Montana Consumer Counsel) can focus specifically on representing the interests of the rate-payers without any undue influence from the PSC (either real or perceived).

For these reasons, I feel it is prudent to leave the rate-payer advocacy duties with the MCC as opposed to creating a new government entity that is tied to the PSC; however if the MCC is in need of improvement to carry out its duties better, I would favor state action to make those improvements.

Regarding policy or issue advocacy, the avenues for this are established within the constitutional democratic process via the legislative branch. This is the setting specifically designed for advocacy organizations, citizens, lobbyists, and elected representatives from throughout Montana to debate and consider changes in policy.

Arrow-Circle-Right Would you support alternative

dispute resolution practices over the traditional contested case process when such matters come before the PSC? Why or why not?

There may be other methods that I am not familiar with, but I believe the Contested Case Process is designed to be a transparent and fair method. For example, under this process all parties have an equal opportunity to present their views and share facts (which they must do under oath), and it also allows witnesses to be questioned by members of the Commission. It is a public hearing process which provides important opportunity for both sides of an issue to be heard, as well as opportunity for Commission members to seek clarification. I would have to carefully scrutinize the details of any proposed Alternative Dispute Process to assess whether or not it is apt to be fair and transparent; and ultimately whether it might be better or worse than the current standard. stop