is toronto can i just ask this would i be right in boiling down your position to the following attacks is covered by three point three a as long as it meets the st sentence is three requirements for being a real estate tax namely it's assessed against a building or land without regard to the benefit to the property and for the purpose of finding general government services and the nd sentence does not in fact narrow the  it's simply a numerate situations in which impositions do not meet all three requirements of the st is that fair yes an honor it is i'd like to point out to the boy to the court that the  sentence actually contains the exact same language for excluding what is defined as a real estate tax as the st sentence of section three dollars which defines what is a real estate tax and that appears to me to potentially have been a drafting error because the exclusion from the definition actually was the entire definition of what is a real estate tax and then exceed that we look at the distinction of what is a present or future the nd sentence is it just identifies a few situations it is not in fact an exclusion of anything that would otherwise fall into sins number one it identifies a number of situations in every one of which at least one of the st sentences three requirements is missing and it simply clarifies that if all that you have is that for example the tax is opposed against the building or land that's not enough and it doesn't matter whether it's a present or future tax and if it's a special assessment that's not for general purposes but nothing in the nd sentence conflicts with and thereby narrows the  i believe that is correct your honor i understand the question now can you please do i was indicating that this is an important question because real estate tax reimbursements on this facility that are like that located in prince george's county maryland over a twenty three year term impact which the building is located without regard to benefits to the property for the purpose of funding general government services the lease also provides that real state taxes shall not include without limitation general or special cessna's building improvement district assessment or any other president for future taxes as government charges that are imposed upon the left for orange dust against the building or the land upon which the building is located the board erred by focusing exclusively on the word future to exclude a clean water tax and an educational tax from a partial award made because these items were added to the tax bill in the line item format after the lease commencements err by considering the future taxes and excluded from reimbursement can i ask you this is it that this is just trying to again assume for purposes of this question that we were to reject what i think please continue i was explaining that prince george's county began allocating certain taxes for governmental purposes after this lease was executed which was on september nd two thousand and five to provide  this is evident by the fact that g s a just last year rejected a new solid waste charge on the tax bill for nineteen thousand four hundred and sixty dollars because of its future nature as a new line item clearly we all know that you know i think the key clause is the final clause about any other president future taxes and i was just wondering if if we deleted the words any other president or so it just went straight to future taxes and governmental charges so the nd sentence would read real estate taxes shall not include without limitation journal and or special assessments business improvement district assessments or future taxes of governmental charges that are imposed upon a less or more assessed against the building and or the land upon which the building is located if if the of been written that way would you agree that it would be no maryland that's liable for these particular two taxes i would  think that's essentially what happened at the board as that the board wrote out or any other present or future tax that i proposed to well we adhered to the position your honor that the more correct reading of th is that the firm and any other present or future taxes then is modifying or intending to describe the charges impose exclusion to the of the two words that are just prior to it being present or i believe we have to read present or future taxes together and i believe they are speaking about present or future taxes that are imposed upon the le for so i believe that that makes some sense that we can indicate that present future taxes or governmental charges that are imposed against the left or would absolutely work in the traditional definition of what is a real estate tax it with the way that the parties were in fact utilizing the tax provision prior to the dispute about future taxes and it certainly complies with my client's understanding of what would be paid here if we were to take any comma after the word left or that too is helpful in providing some meaning and breaks because present or future taxes are governmental charges that are imposed against the left for would make sense those are factors which would is very easy to read as completely consistent with the st sentence not as carving out an exception to something that would otherwise be covered in the st sentence which i should say is not tempora limited at all there's no time language in the st sentence respectfully your honor we disagree we we believe that g s a is a liability at the time of contract extended to or incurred liability for those then present taxes that satisfy the definition in the contract of a real estate anywhere where is their language in the st sentence about then present the present language is in the nd sentence your honor and when appropriately understood in conjunction with the st sentence the reference to other presidents taxes should be understood to refer to taxes that fall outside the category of real estate taxes as defined in the preceding and additionally beyond preclude moving from g s a is liability other than present taxes the exclusionary provision excluded from g s a liability future taxes imposed after the contract was executed irrespective of whether those future taxes may otherwise presently status by the definition of a real estate tax and the striking this is judged just to drill down so i can i mean i understand what your position is but i don't quite understand why you're holding that position when we're looking at the text of section three point three a is it your view that when you look at the nd sentence and specifically the final clause as to any other present or future taxes that the word other modifies only present but does not modify future so if you read that final clause as referring to any other present taxes as well as any future taxes because my initial inclination would be to read it as any other present taxes or any other future taxes you what is your position on this question your understanding is correct your honor so g s a incurred its liability for real estate taxes at the time of contracting in two thousand and five i like i'm not ready to hear a story just yet i'm just really focused on how to understand this clause and another way to ask the question is what if you took out the words present or future board and malice of this provision still be correct or would you agree that under those circumstances this final clause just said any other taxes  then that wouldn't exclude the possibility of taxes we're talking about here these clean water and education taxes high would you agree with no of maryland's position about these taxes potentially being real estate taxes in that hypothetical potentially or owner if there was not a prescription against liability for future taxes that were not imposed at the time of contracting it's as possible presuming those taxes otherwise satisfy i don't know you're handling the question i'm afraid is different than my question what is it about the addition of these three extra words present or future into the phrase and the other taxes all the sudden is pivotal and forces a different outcome so  does any other present or future taxes mean something different than any other taxes to me right now they sound like the exact same thing if i'm understanding your honor's question correctly the be inclusion of those words are what serve to create categories of those things that fall outside  possibly your honor but the words are included and the prescription on liability for future taxes is on the big us and precluded liability for the two taxes that are at issue because the board for these two taxes rested its decision only on this future word do you or did you have other arguments about why  reason but we also have other reasons like it's not for general public purposes or whatever the of the others are three requirements in the st seconds do you make either arguments about those yes judge at the board the g s a argued that the two factors that are at issue here were not for purposes of funding general government services the board rejected back position and we the department of justice  reject the future point we reversed that right and don't have a rematch because you haven't argued in the alternative what i think you just identified as the only other  argument that you raised below about non coverage under this three point three provision of these two taxes no judge i would agree with helpful for no that  the only other position that you argued the board rejected the point about looking for a quick moment well your honor i would just say the board did not undertake a full factual assessment as it did with the two taxes that no recovered for at the board to assess the nature of the taxes and discern within the framework that the board applied whether the taxes are otherwise satisfy the definition of a real estate tax and as this court as an  undertake again that same factual analysis for these two disputed facts is that he did with the other two taxes for which no are covered i guess i'll try one last time did you can test the other two factors i do not have a specific answer for the court on that question right now though i'm happy to provide an additional answer through supplemental briefing if the courts desire clause and in the one longest paragraph there is a discussion of several other decisions claims court board  about the term real estate taxes did one or i think there are three cases cited did they involve the same contractual language as we have in front of us  or just real estate taxes but not part of a provision that mirrors this sentence three point three my apologies i requested my time begins now i was offering to answer the question the judge concerning the tax adjustment clause in this lease versus other vs a leap in which it is a standard clause in the other quickly from this contract contract one which is just like the contract language in these other provisions and then you segue into this one is completely unique do you mean unique in ways having nothing to do with this particular language tax base which was negotiated and specifically amended by my client in the lease and then an eleven was the standard you pay over and above those taxes another exploration of that idea is that something called  original bargain that it makes which is to pay for real estate tax increases over and above the bait and if we were to utilize the nd sentence the way that the government has sought to some extent been successful at the board we have the ability for the government to avoid future taxes which can mean essentially anything in terms of a jurisdiction that does certain line items as this one does despite the fact that all of the charges are for general governmental purposes recognize under this case law as appropriate for inclusion as a defined real estate tax i would also like to point out that while certainly maryland would accept a remand i do believe that it is appropriate for this court to outright overturn the decision because the government real estate taxes we certainly argue that the board that they were believe we've also argued at the court that they are the statute under which these practices are authorized are not the statute