out of this  and we have been here before obviously and right now i've approached the court asking for the court's help because i think madison county desperately needs it and i and a trying to work this argument together i thought you know best thing i can do is keep it simple this is just an appeal from the crowd court's order regarding an injunction ok what the poor did i think they did they they made a mistake  i did until the last part of it  well first of all i didn't know about this one when my argument here before ok it was i mean we kind of got into this and once i got involved in the case i discovered that there was a south and i actually asked the executive board for the v a see it is left over from past years i think judge judge becker made that point at the hearing on of them breaking because he said everybody knows and to be clear to the people in mount vernon that there's seven hundred thousand dollars is there and it's left over from past years where they didn't spend the money and and and they took money away from that seven hundred thousand dollars to pay expenses when they when allegedly the v a c exceeded what they brought in and what they were authorized in a given year that we know we don't know any of that but so is it an investment my understanding is it's just a cash cow and it's actually left over mindset now that now if the v a if the county was following the law they have a special account i'm not sure the county is following the law but the tax law and i cited i don't know the exact section number but there's it that the county supposed to say ok we're going to get seven hundred fifty thousand dollars for veterans this year we approve that how much what's the percentage rate we need to tack on to the county tax rate to raise it they levy it they collect it and it's supposed to go into a special fund segregated just from b a c or right now if they following the law that money should be out there and should be available and we should be allowed to use and it's a simple that because it's already been approved that's that's the thing and one job where i say just back from a mistaken injunction he says that money is there it's available to pay expenses but you first have to go and get a second approval to spend to to go into it to get into right now finance committee gets involved and says heck no they basically are thumbing their nose at this court and one of the reasons i asked the actual motion for for contempt was for judge packard to cold the finance committee the auditor the state's attorney and all the county officials that were involved in contempt of this court's order and love the one where they had resolved once you make that approval you can't deal with the ac milan's that's the supervisor the superintendent with an office in the county that's one to pay his salary three pay pay the expenses and quit interfering with the v a sees expenses once you've approved there and right and that still maintains a percentage that's the proceeding that the most recent rulings occurred on which is the subject of the piece on seventeen appeal if you if the court thinks it ha i basically ask when someone is in contempt of court because i know i will be one sad and they're ignoring it and so therefore somebody is going to be given the opportunity and i did some research and i said sure enough it's you know what the question for this panel you know what they call and it's clear as day in the opinion that was written down and you're saying you don't have an obligation to tell your own county board that wait a minute your actions are in violation of  of the finance committee everyone on the finance committee who voted to interfere with the expenditure of funds and to refuse to pay war sixteen that for contempt citation requiring them to appear each one of them did in fact appear on the eighteenth in the mask or house for that hearing that occur cause so back issue was present before the court on the eighteenth our position is he made a mistake in discharging the content and so that's one of the reasons and i think that's a collateral if you two but not a necessary i really going to have a situation where the state's attorney of the various counties of the fifth district can get by with ignoring the fifth district orders i don't think so and i think they should  and to just take the act it's not it's a it's not to say they did not the fact that they refuse to speak up at the here they don't deny the fact that mr gilbert was present at that finance committee meeting when they took that while it was over my objection i want to call the judge and each and every one of i don't know i'll tell you what happened at that hearing we had an extremely extensive three hearing conference in chambers off the record or a lot of argument back and forth as peggy place to some degree judge specter tried to say as much of the as he could on the record once we were in or but frankly he said that and this this was one of my points of the arguments  yes yes yes and in fact in the record i wrote it down here after lengthy pre hearing discussion doug becker decided that he would not allow me to call any of the alleged come to him or to testify under oath but he said he would presume that he would let the matter proceed under the assumption that if called as witnesses almost like he conducted an offer proved right in the courtroom but this is in the record he said each of the county officials would be called to testify i would say number eight they knew there was money be there was proximately seven hundred thousand dollars see they could vote to authorize the expenditure of seven thousand dollars and d c they did it they refused those are facts that you can yes well well that's yes and i think if you go he says even if all those facts are present it makes no difference to me and i go what i don't understand i simply didn't on the i didn't  a group of people accounting to ignore the clear language of the will be one i think not and that's why i suggest to you look the research that i did suggest yes well three sixty six i think it is supreme court rule my brief what i said in my reply to what i said as well and start to mean motioning to strike what they put in the record i'm just going to put in what's there to show what they in fact did we're dealing with this pursuit of records show and here that's an interesting thing though that bring that up the reason i brought that up is like the the big thing that they convinced us becker which i think was a misrepresentation and i don't usually use that word but we can't you can't hold these people in contempt because they don't have the authority to spend any more money because there is zero guess what happens during the next fifteen days they spent over sixty five thousand dollars and they cut the checks and they didn't have an emergency appropriation not well that's what i think yes i think they produce that seven hundred thousand dollars because now it's down to around five hundred pounds that's why i think you're right i th i gree so that's where they got the money from well they could have and i argue this time the just the traffic court was very particular about splitting the annual approved fun into the admin account and the direct aid account mr levy got to testify on the eighteenth he says you know half it east three thousand fifty six thousand i don't remember exact numbers but over fifty thousand dollars left over calley god bless technology publishes those audios of those on the internet so i can actually go and listen to what they're saying and i even cite that in my brief put just as if you had asked a question earlier about the seven thousand dollars and i know that you have a background in the private sector just last but you have an appreciation of how everything comes together at the industry level to f operations up and it does please but not in this case the county is required to perpetrate bonds on an annual basis to allow for expenditures associated with each budgeted line item within each of the f that are set up in the county those expenditures are only to come from a bonds that have been appropriated within those pacific categories of the budget of the scene the budget their way there's a bunch of different fines with different line items et the the seven hundred thousand dollars is accounted for as a separate fund within the counties budget now if the court's question is that i don't know the answer to that question if that seven hundred thousand dollars is parked in its own separate bank account if that's what the court is asking or if it's pooled with the remainder of the investments of the county and tract as accounted for on an accounting basis i don't know the answer there but i do know that the budget there's there's two separate appropriations that the statute the copycats the military veterans assistance act mandates that there are two separate and distinct appropriations that be made by the county on behalf of the of the  the first one is a section two of section two of the statute appropriation which is the one that's designed to carry out the spirit and the intent of the act of the issues that was before this court dealt with a expenditures over five hundred thousand dollars and the procedures to get those approved and the selection of the attorney those were ordinances or policies which the court hell  livy one interfered with the operations of the v a c and therefore the court was not going to allow the county to do those things in that context what i of itemized invoices signed by the superintendent and grants the county specifically by statute general oversight over the expenditure of all funds appropriated for the v a see the military veterans assistance act which interferes with the operations of the v a c in fact that's an operation that's specifically contemplated to occur by statute which is not being done and of importance prior to this court's decision and holding it would sixteen one sixteen two and sixteen three all of which were paid by the county but all of which contained itemized statements of the expenses as required by section nine of the statute it was only after the decision of eighty one the in the eat in warrant sixteen for there was no description of any of the work that was performed by mr burkhardt there was i believe not zero completely void of any narrative section so there were i believe there was a date maybe an amount of time and a corresponding cost  i believe that there may have been payments out of the admin fund which i believe were also addressed through a emergency appropriation i know the one was prepared for the county  decision correct i think the approach at the time was to still try to work this out to bring an end to the litigation with the hopes that at that hearing something could have been reached i was apparent pretty quickly at that hearing that that that's the basis for the general oversight and the requests for itemized invoices now the county code is as in general and fifty five miles yes as what deals with budgeting and appropriation and says there has to be an annual  procreation you can't spend more than what you prove to be spent and if you do you can shore that up by passing an emergency appropriation the statute the county code a emergency supplemental appropriation which extends or gives whatever entity it is additional spending an additional preparation ok thousand dollars or something they say i want to buy a truck i don't buy the truck that year they don't come back the next year and say well you said i could do this last year so now i get to do it this year because the appropriations are different o matter what the expenses i mean they don't take it back the money is still there you know and there's reasons for that money to be in that fund for a variety of things one with the property tax cycle especially madison county which is adopted or elected to go to a four payment cycle there needs to be funds on hand from a casual basis to meet projected expenses that are targeted to be paid out of those funds so it's not like you're starting with zero zero zero fund balance and then saying ok we're to have this money coming in at some point the future which is in india because these are property tax based revenue so you're levying the money comes in down the road so how do you fund those expenses in the meantime there's reserves to address those expense account but maybe they'd like it less property tax which is what they've done in the last several years to reduce the amount of balance that's in that fund that's it's the v c money however it's funded whether it's property  annual budget appropriation process which stay in that fund account and they can still only be used on v a c expenses but those funds do not actually belong to the v c the v c can't go to the treasury situations where they've exceeded their budget that is right that is correct and they could do that right they could do that for tracy in fact that was actually suggested to the v a c at the time was that that was the proper course of action to address this issue just chapman of the what it's in the record i want to point to but in september as early as september well before the november here right after and we'll count both of those cases indicate section nine doesn't a pot they get are going to section one thing in oversight and all that you said could be one we've already been down this road will county's case money for what's appropriate and frankly if my reading of the whole thing were not subject to appropriate actions the v a c operates on it's all it's not supposed to be subject to the  of appropriations of what the county board says you can and can that when justice kate was asking what doesn't the county get about look p d one i'll tell you what they said and it's in the record what they said was oh it's just i go no it's not it is not dicta if there's a clear ruling saying keep your hands off of the ac money now there was some argument may make that the statute provides the days but frankly if there are there's any part of an argument it's a separate funds and i don't think there is a one annual approval that's where they have their control and if they don't give us the money we want we have the baucus expenses that's a separate fund it's in a separate sentence within section ten and then form a fourth one is all expenses that the v a c employees have superintendent in all his office service office app which would include attorney's fees to vindicate their right that's the port on the expenses