matter of great importance to the people of guam in that this will be determined whether or not the people will be required to pay a substantial amount of money in the form of a debt obligation that the current administration as well as  right my concern with your position is and under our law we issue they've been reading the two thousand and three decision almost every factual statement there is a kin to what's going on in guam you have a governor you have an attorney general which is appointed in virgin islands you have a legislature and in that interpretation of the federal sealing requirement it's in forty eight u s c section four hundred twenty three eight it's because of the substance of what's being asked to grow letting the people that would benefit from this plan and ensure which is fourteen million dollars decide what the equation they did point out that the reason why the debt ceiling was put there was to protect the community the people against a government that would be throwing ruinous and oppressive amounts to death and what was put before the was only authorized to estimate within three year windows between appraisals and as the attorney general this whole issue came up procedurally because i was expected to sign off on the vine indentured and we had to put a halt to the process because we saw the government july ninth so we did full battery of three things without much time to develop a factual record and headed cision up by july twenty three and on that goes to our procedural problem that we were facing and how we could develop exceeded again it's unusual to have the attorney general went against the client that i meant by dint of the other our obligation to protect the public interest i say this with with a lot of caution that we've come to the floor with a government that has failed to follow the law if one fails because we are territory under the of genic act and of the u s constitution normally it's the feds the federal government that would have to bill itself one would think that part of the jury has direct supervisory control over our government if the local government officials waiver issues first i want to point out this with respect to rule twenty six rule twenty six incorporates only specific rules or of civil procedure not necessarily from procedure in the specific rules primarily focus on the issues of pleadings and in this particular case your honor this is not a situation where we have one opponent suing another planet trying to seek damages so in that regard i think again one of the things the issue that the attorney general's office raises is they weren't allowed to provide an answer to a complaint that's not the process that's required in this particular case around revealing with the clerk for just write it under specific statute and that's also another distinction that i'd like to point out to the court i think the attorney general than initially identified before he went to forth as providing facts were presented to the attorney general and soft identifies prior to the actual hearing before the court he raised the question with respect to how thanks for the hand of not receiving an answer from the court nevertheless submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court and submitted that he claims was he was prepared to present but inexplicably didn't present during the hearings your honor and he offers no explanation for why he didn't present it although his brief claims to having had these facts available at the time o parameter that the court held ok well now that you understand that you've got to go out and assess our determine actual value and accept this right now we leave it to you determine what the local system would be in order to you know some of the details that's i think if you went so fast  you know the interesting part about the attorney general's argument is that we have to look at the assessed value because that indicates how much net tax revenue and the cash flow how much net tax revenues are being drawn exactly if that's the limitation are we then we should look at the actually and we think that that is a significant distinction with respect for china to congress wanted to get involved very specifically in the fiction islands put into place the tax scheme on a general basis and that's what you make of that with a hybrid federal and local tax  if you know if it's ironic the the attorney general has repeatedly argued that you know local law cannot interpret or control federal law but that's the exact argument that he's making is that the spark in the case you have a local law which has a  which is argued now must be binding on an interpretation of federal which is the definition i think i wish but we know that that requirement your honor it's not a requirement for gets any purposes and again looking at the split specific language at that statute it also l that in effect became an issue then of course the legislature could amend it and they wouldn't be controlled then by thirty five percent figure that effect very early on the figure was fifty percent and it was readjusted so it just indicates the arbitrariness i guess  local deference complete local their john with respect to the quintessential quintessential local issue in this particular case the court determined through the role of necessity which has been followed by this court as well as the u s supreme court mandated that you know they had to use these justices if that were the payment to the the justices government income was an issue and that's an issue that would affect any person sitting on the bench as well as the attorney general for that matter your honor i mean  in this case that is the are the democratic process that is set up here the politicians must raise the taxes and face the public scrutiny in order to get the amount of borrowing that they want in this case the supreme court has maxed out the potential mo saying this is how much you can borrow but has not commensurately increased the real property taxes which the statute passed by congress specifically references and we would take issue that the gross receipts taxes are the proper gauge it may or may not have  eighteen million dollars debt may have been contingent on approaches these taxes but that's not a property tax that's a a tax on goods and services and the congress specifically tied in the ability to borrow based upon the local tax rate no where in does congress tell us how to tax real property and that's where i've must correct a mistake in our position on this i'm not saying that local statute can't define a federal statute that's from syquest violation but as in the current case the virgin islands congress put the ad for a lair on the method of taxing in the actual event a cap and they stay put one point two five percent and they told the virgin islands how you're going to tax your real property they never did that they just used that word tax and that's why i see all this the same example a year later the legislature has now reduced the gross receipts tax for whatever reason the public pressure has caused the senators to reduce it from the six percent which was intended the additional two percent from four to six percent was intended to support this bonaventure it didn't happen the way that the politicians wanted it to happen and now we're back down four percent just recently and it received quite a bit of public support and i know that is factual statement but so we believe that the  credibility to repay the tax is just only rational and consistent with the reason why you don't want the government incurring so much that you don't want the horse to be out of the barn first you want people to seek the taxation coming to them having to face it and then the politicians starting to intrude upon indentures so that the public good mr early vote out the politician have a referendum one has two statutes on its books that before you do a tax increase or before you do a bond investor more than twenty five million you must get a of the people in this public like twenty seven nineteen they exempted themselves from it which again is a highly suspicious nature why aren't you putting it to people and i know that it's not a federal government that you have a referendum before increasing taxes but that is on the books of  we also have the two thousand and three burn decision which has just as far as i'm sorry as far as pointed out it's just me that's obvious the the actual value apart from how you value the properties or not or whether the debt ceiling is high or low cash for ash is more like language politicians that don't want to see a high tax rate because they could lose their properties one is a similar situation and how can you enter into a note and expect the taxpayers to pay when there's not a present villages to repay because once you enter into that