in the middle by red road there's an east eighty and there's a west eighty if you will look on the page after page five of our original river that is the natural greenish course besides the drainage of the lesson property there is a large water shed south of the lesson property which drains through the blossom property part of it drains into the earth through the west eighty part of it drains through the easy when we filed our original complaint be the drainage of the fall one sixty was blocked by the north dish of stone wall row which ran on the north side of the property because this is a little bit confusing and i put it on the clerk's desk there i would ask that we give each one of you a copy of this visual aid for you to see that kind of seven hundred feet south of stonewall rule the ready road runs there by six the property of blessedness it's a half a mile so it's twenty six hundred and some odd feet across and then the gold cross be done bill prady now after the previous appeal that was in this case a settlement was finally reached and it was agreed was installed originally that area where the natural greenish course occurred seven hundred feet south of stonewall was blocked completely blocked and in his testimony engineer starter indicated that because of that there's a pond when that occurs at this area where the natural drainage occurs from the the west would naturally go under r thirtieth of two thousand and ten after hearing engineer star testified that the insulation of the culvert would not increase the amount of watch surface water going in our opinion doesn't make sense because any color on the reddit road would change the direction of the flow of the water otherwise there's no point in putting the culvert in the volume of water has to increase because cross stonewall because of the natural drainage that swirl when it went across stone will be the only logical interpretation carbon in our brief and carbon determines as said there are two things to make this to assist you in regard to your determination you determine the intention of the parties and you take the agreement as a whole now the our position is that the agreement as a whole if you look at it you read it it's in the breeze it is it created a a considerable i can only tell you that the whole thrust of this case from complaint to the end was to reestablish the natural drainage first process and that's what we asked for that's what the agreement if you look at th the background is has to do with drange if the court will look at the amended complaint and also the original complaint is filed by the appellants in this case the detail as to how all the various levels is going to be maintained and went into what each party can do that went into remedial action in the  hari felt that the agreement was that it means maintain there was a market there are standards by which to measure against the agreement that was all the it that was all done  issue with respect to the caller and are ready to roll is basically was put in ask or might be appellants after the agreement had been drafted and indicated that they would like to have the right to put a call when you're ready grow we had already made the agreement and the issue at that time was ok you can put a color on the ring road as long as it doesn't change anything why over really grow you could put a color in such a location so that the water came to that point it would go through color rather than over the road to protect roe there's also testimony that there is a call actually to call birds under r in the situation where it did not want to increase any additional water downstream that the county game can be sued by for somebody else because perhaps somebody else was then flooded with water the  issue is here is that the parties after twenty years of litigation enter into an agreement a current track that was approved by the court each party represented by counsel the plain language of the agreement it ok you can put a color in there but as long as it doesn't change anything because we are changing the rest of it to accommodate you in the complaint there was nothing ever said about race row b question regarding drain each regarding race row only came up in testimony as to whether or not the color that they proposed the point of reading road would change the direction of flaw all or bottom of the water that testimony proper was after the agreement was entered into it is no relevance as far from the room and the agreement as a contract between the parties and is based on what was existing at the time what was as good as thing at the time oh whether or not there is right the natural drainage or whatever you want to call that is that part of the agreement is already been set and by putting in language regarding the property and then this was something that was added to it he said well mom doesn't change what we're doing now world will be going along with that and if you look at the testimony from their engineer as to what agreement that was bargain for the blessings bargain hard for the sick me they read it really was not part of their original and they wanted something already so that was a condition that they put in after the fact the county's concern consistently has been that if this covert was too large that it would create too much water downstream and we would be faced with additional lawsuits not because of this when we originally bargained our understanding was that we were talking about a small cult but as has been pointed out when the plaintiffs and when they came to the council they asked for fly twenty four and that's and then when they had this when the court clarified that they only got one covert then they went to a huge bought scope for five feet by two hundred feet that's a huge amount of water that can flow through here the county had never anticipated that size of a covert would be put in here and i would argue that if there is any ambiguity in this situation it is in the created by the bl when they came in and asked for five coverts instead of one and then there are experts clarified for us and hearing that natural drainage to them meant before read was there before there was farming i mean we were dealing with an issue that is a current problem in time the county has been dealing with drainage issues here since  five feet by two and a half feet that would create problems not only for the dominant bills but for their properties beyond the downtown goals opens the county up to hold a range of new lawsuits i mean we have already have people that are north of the dominant bills that have come to the county about drainage if you adding this type of water just it's exactly what the language that was put in there by the county was put in there to prevent we don't want to be fighting about water here forever we would like to be able to resolve the water issues but this if we allowed would simply create greater problems  there i mean that's that's a huge amount of water and this is a very very flat area the masonic creek is very close by i mean it's a potential good in opens up a whole  as to why all of a sudden they were getting additional water that they do not get today today the water flows down the on the west eighty it flows down the ditch and some of the a lot of it goes west to them is on the river it does not that i think it was for smaller ones with would work better than the one big one but when they may rely on the remote provider for a while that was what he came up with the of the size that he is talking about it it wouldn't be necessary very often but best that's the way it was now is the purpose the intent of the of the dream the agreement i need counsel is going back into you it but there was never a test for a specific number one of the reasons for that was that he never testified as he had never been out and never have served at the time that the trouble with all this training stuff is that if it occurs a particular point in