is not only the clerk of the court is permitted to record these proceedings today reply brief in this case we did ask the court to please understand our failure to to file a reply brief does not reflect in any way our feelings as to the importance of this issue we believe that the that is before the court today is critical not only for the resolution of the issue and say clear county but as it relates to a statement as to the interplay of the courts as it relates to st clair county or any counties ability with their funding to control the courts the reality is judge we didn't receive the police brief until yesterday we read it yesterday if you look at the service list we didn't get it i believe that mr  any circuit must provide probation services for all counties in the circuit in our circuit st clair county we have five counties local four thousand four hundred and eight is the collective barge bardi the agent for the probation department and in addition to that they enter into an annual collective bargaining agreement with the chief judge the state is their employee this is an important point i'd like to make it early the state is their employee they are employed by the state and the chief judge is the personification of the state there's been some discussion about whether they did this one place county employees if you look at the supreme court case in a rennick it specifically states that these employees are state employees the state as personified by the chief judge the agreement is circuit wide the agreement is that their cell recent benefits are submitted to the supreme court probation services division for approval they're after the state reimburses the counties for their expenditures on probation services now let me put it if the court would not for over forty years in st clair county the chief judge has directed the county to administer funding for the probation department for the entire circuit that's been the custom in practice until two thousand and eighteen and saying clair county is the largest county is then reimbursed by each county for whatever expenses sickler county paid as to services rendered by each of those counties and but for the fact that this case was resolved on a motion for judgment on is that we would have had evidence to show that every out of county morrow randolph washington and perry are all paid up to the dollar in november of two thousand eight hundred dollars st clair county and the side that wasn't going to fund any probation officer so reese and wes they work in st clair county and their proposed budget so reflected they took a position that they don't have to advance research for officers who don't work in st clair county in two thousand and eighteen they prepared by just at the very end of the year and when we became aware of the budget we filed suit because that would have taken away salaries medical benefits and medical expenses for many of those what we refer to as out of county probation officers we agreed to an injunction the injunction stayed in place and then at that point that was the status until the trial court entered this order from which we appeal in order that was entered once again on a motion for judgment on the pleats for two years in two thousand and twenty and two thousand and twenty one st clair county has been operating under budgets which do not on the probation and probation officer statute and specifically this language the amount of compensation should be determined by the county boards of the several counties in which such officers respectively or appointed him shall be paid by the county treasurer now we've asked the court to please understand in this case the counties are responsible for funding they alternately pay all of the bills st clair they are paid we are not talking about this statute in a funding we're talking about the chief judge's discretion to budget this isn't funding this is the trial this is the chief judge's discretion as to how he's going probation department in its annual budget so they don't have to that's not the issue you're on hers the issue is whether the chief judge can require say clara county to adhere to a budget in a rage when necessary so that the courts can be supported in their mission which is i'm going to point out of my separation of powers argument and my own rennick argument trot every other issue including this the statute and whether or not simply because the judge ref it's gone on for four years is that whether that arrangement is escape explicitly required or mandated in the act is not the issue the issue is whether or not their arrangement in fact is consistent with supreme court precedent with the constitution and of course with a factual record which we could have developed which would show that it is not let's start with a conversation about separation of powers is certainly a principle that we all learned we learned it i'm sorry i can't hear you mr keith let me ask you what i was a little confused about that here was judge limbert the judge that heard this  separation of powers it's the most basic one of the most basic priddle and it's so important and it's so important for the judiciary the purpose of the doctrine is to keep each branch free from control or course of influence from the other branches the judicial power in the state of illinois lies with the courts including the power to administer the court system that's from the constitution you know my constitution and that same constitution country place only one unified court system under which it ministration of justice is a matter of statewide concern as to the poundings authority that appears in the county coat in the county code the supreme court has specifically said clearly absent from the county code is any statement provided for control by the county over any operation of the court or clerks in the circuit court with respect to that the court's administrative authority and this is part of the supreme court's hold georgia is over the judicial branch quote carries with it the corresponding authority to require production of the facilities personnel and resources necessary to enable judicial branch to perform its duties that is separation of powers in fact it is so critical because if we go all the way back to the federalist papers in epicenter hamilton he said to us the judiciary must rely upon other branches of government it has no influence over either the sword or the purse in fact there is a statement that appears in georgia which read it or it's that very principle the judiciary must possess the inherent power to those sums of money which are reasonable and necessary to carry out its mandated responsibilities and its power to a duties to administer justice if it is in reality to be a c clair county in just decided that they were no longer going to pay for the out of county probation officers how the effect of that has literally hamstrung the twenty's judicial circuit and judge gleason in his ability to administer the probation department at the end of my argument i hope to give you specific examples of what they'll be in the nature of offers of proof because there is no record in this instance we also believe judge webber who's a fine judge and a fine gentleman he did not analyze nor did he mention even super separation of power doctrine nor did he even mention other than in passage supreme court precedent now i'd like to talk about or remix or when if we believe the supreme court case which is controlling our here with the facts the oh my state labor relations board said that the courts nontraditional employee were just joint employees of both the chief judge and the county influence over our budget because we were trying to negotiate with these employees if these guys are going to be a coat employer they're going to come in whoa they're going to lowball us and it's going to make it impossible for us to do our job because they're go use funding to exercise undue hardship and i do control on the judiciary branch welp the court simply agreed and the court said and this is important the court ultimately held when it comes to the circuit court's nontraditional employees the county serves a function funding but the county's function is quote subject to the court's ultimate power to ensure provision of services in the circuit and with this statement it is critical the eleanore constitution contemplates only one unified court system operating state wide and does not contemplate nor does it authorize the exercise of any control over or permit the imposition of a burden on the judicial system by any local entity what say for county has done and done for the past two years is they have created a terrible burden on  judges ability to administer his court system and because i see where i am on time i can come back to this well why did you st talk about if we had given been given a chance to make a record this would certain evidence that would demonstrate the burden that has been created by say a clear cut and unilateral decision i took to take away a funding for the out of county probation if we had had a chance the evidence would have applications and appropriate paperwork to say clerk county to fill these vacancies sickler county refuses to process the paperwork because they say it's not in their budget now consider that they have in by doing what they have done is is that they have in effect eliminated the judge's ability to hire the necessary personnel of all things in the outer county the judge has be deprived of his constitutional duty to to minister probation services now in addition to that because st clair county has taken this position and remember this isn't funny it's the judge's ability to control his funding mechanism because they have done that what has happened is that the judge heads in effect been prevented from doing what he has been ordered by the statute to do now let's make one thing clear st clair county is not prejudiced by this they are merely a flow through for payment that that's not terribly important but it is something that needs to be said is that they don't advance money or pay benefits there is a fun from which they can draw and they draw from it rich all the time they have never advance funds what this is more than anything is this is an order that is making the judge automatically deal with five payrolls for human apartments disparate salaries can you imagine one unified circuit dealing with one collective bargaining agent and yet there's going to be different salaries and different benefits that's what stinker county has done and by doing that they haven't posted undue hardship of upon the court considered the union issues consider this since the sense the office is unionized that would mean that the chief judge would now have to negotiate with five separate counties with obviously different desperate results which would make use unmanageable an untenable this is simply a question about st clair county exercising funding  influence and as a result of that funding influence depriving the court pursuant to separation of powers and the supreme court authority of its power to administer and affectively administer its probation department the defendants at billy's st clair county treasurer and your local know st clair county board chairman mark turn and st clair county single issue that this court has been asked to rule on in this appeal is a straightforward issue of statutory construction and that is whether the l n only probation and probation officers acts requires and i want to put an emphasis on the word required whether the act requires st clair county to pay the compensation and provide fringe benefits to the affected numbers which are defined in plan of cement a complaint as the local four hundred and forty a probation officer members that work in randolph monro washington and perry counties for the following reasons the answer to this question is no effective members are probation officers who are designated to work on a county basis that is to work solely in a county that is within the twenty of judicial circuit but that is exclusively outside of st clair county with no work being performed within st clair county as i will discuss regardless of how st clair county said its budget in previous years st clair is not required to pay the compensation and provide friendship benefits to probation officers who are specifically designated on a county basis to work exclusively and a county that is outside of st clair county before during the language of the act which is the subject of this appeal this court has repeatedly and routinely observed that the primary rule of statutory construction is to give effect to the true intent of the legislature which is best determined from the statutory language itself without resorting to other areas of construction it is a cardinal rule statutory construction that when statutory language is clear and unambiguous it must be given a fact without resort to other a under section fifteen to a the act the chief judge of each judicial circuit is required to provide full time probation services for all counties within the circuit in a manner consistent with the annual corporation plan standards policies and regulations established by the supreme court section ninety three dollars of the act provides the decisive distinction between probation officers designated on a circuit wide basis and those designated on a county basis by expressly stating that probation officers are judicial employees designated on a circuit wide or on a county basis and compensated by the appropriate county board or boards section fourteen of the acts contemplates the payment mechanism for a probation officer designated on a county basis and relevant part section fourteen states that the amount of compensation to be paid any court services or probation officer shall be determined by the county boards of the several counties in which such officers are appointed and shall be paid by the county treasurer on the warrant of the county controversial or or other person authorized to issue warrants on the county treasurer section fourteen of the act goes on to differentiate the payment mechanism for a probation officer that is appointed on a circuit white basis and relevant part section fourteen further provides that the salary for probation officers serving throughout such circuit or probation officer district shall be apportioned between such counties on the basis of their population as you term and by the last national census and their respective portions there of shall be paid by the county treasurer upon warrants issued by the chief circuit judge based on the foregoing language under section fourteen although probation officers are considered judicial employees the responsibility for their compensation falls on the county to which they are assigned unless the officers are appointed on a circuit wide basis in which case the officers salaries are a portion finally section fifteen  act expressly requires the county to which the probation officer is it signed is responsible for fringe benefits such as health insurance these probation officers and relevant part section fifteen  provided at the respective counties shall be responsible for capital and space costs for any benefits clerical costs equipment etc applying the statutory construction principles it is clear that sinclair county is not statutorily obligated to pay the salaries health insurance premiums and other fringe benefits of the affected numbers again plaintiffs argue no it is not asserted on behalf of the probation officer assigned to st clair county it centers only on the probation officers assigned to the remaining other counties in the th judicial circuit which are randolph monro washington and perry counties the act does not count to plate the previous practice of the counties within the th judicial circuit whereby st clair compensates the probation officers assigned on a county basis in advance and then obtains reimbursement from those counties there after the act actually expressly requires otherwise as jones lambert accurately observed in his order granting defendants motion for judgment on the pleadings the only mention payment by the most populous county of the circuit which in the th judicial circuit is st clair deals with funds received from the supreme court for probation services section fifteen b n simply requires the most populous county to distribute funds received from the supreme court to the various counties of the circuit section fifteen b nine does not mandate that the most populous county of the circuit pay all of the probation officers salaries and fringe benefits for the entire circuit and then seek reimbursement from the other counties of the circuit again the issue here is not whether the affected members will be paid it is the mechanism by which the affected members should be paid in accordance with the act for all for all of these reasons defendants respectfully request that this court affirmed the trial court's order granting defendant's motion for judgment on the pleading payments how do you square that round of that only applies if you have a court i can do or procedures but it would seem confusing to have two separate mechanisms one for probation officers from the doing juvenile cases and a whole separate system for adult probation when your honor it's dependent position that we are not depriving the chief judge of circuit probation department funding it simply defendants position that the pros probation act provides to statutory mechanisms through which probation officer paid depending on their designation as a county basis versus stark and wide and based upon the affected members designation to counties outside of st clair as opposed to a circuit w probation the probation officers are assigned yes certain probation officers are assigned to counties and they only work in those counties while others are assigned on a circuit wide basis but another county employees are not boy a circuit address separation of powers issue you know there's no separation of power issue exists here because defendants have under no circumstances interfered with the th judicial circuits and ministration of or decision making regarding its probation services again the issue here is not whether the affected members will be paid it is simply the mechanism by which the affected members should be paid in accordance with  in the reason the juvenile statute says that is because it is in effect a funding mechanism which does pay appropriate deference to the overriding principles of separation of power and the need to have a judicia which has the resources in order to do its job the statute as mr horner has argued he's trying to argue that the statute literally trumps the constitution and it trumps literally trumps the supreme court precedent which is interpret the constitution the reason this issue is so critical because this involves the power of the judiciary in this case to do its job and that job is a statutorily mandated job to run the probation depar hostage by the county who controls the purse strings may please point out the following in already the following statement is made in that so there's no misunderstanding as to what mr said he says the judicial employees already says this not only are nontraditional employees of a court the employees of a state agency rather than of a county but even the counties south resetting and facilities rennick it's clear on its face because they cannot get around the language furthermore it's the oh i constitution contemplates only one unified court system operating state wide and does not contemplate nor does it authorize the exercise of any control over or permit the imposition the imposition of a burden on the judicial system by the local entity imposition of what they have done is they salaries of circuit courts non judicial employees but this authority is tempered by the court's responsibility to administer justice and the retention of inherent powers to protect themselves in the public they serve against default of their constitutional obligations what sinclair county is doing is causing the chief judge to default on his obligations and judge in answer to your earlier question yes these probation employees are all part of the same circuit we are we have we are the largest county but we are the th judicial circuit all of those employees report to judge please judge gleason his responsibility for administering the probation department in all five counties furthermore i would say this as it relates to what the court also said it said the retain power and this is what we're talking about here of the court includes the power to recognize or strike at the power to require production of the facilities personnel and resources reasonably necessary for the court's operation they have specifically ignored that principle in their argument they have specifically acted contrary to that also point one other thing not in their brief they say that we say there are judicial in place we do not we say that they are not traditional employees we say that they are state employees in the chief judge is the personification of the state our authority for that statement came straight from already which i read to you earlier is that the judge the chief judge acts on behalf of the state this is an important issue runners it's an important issue as it relates to separation of powers and i've asked the court to remand the case with instructions to judge lambert to every hearing and to apply the facts to the principals we have are you here today thank you