subsumed within the colloquy that occurred between counsel during these proceedings with the commission members present and was confirmed by the commission's own counsel during the course of those proceedings the order itself is an order of the smiths the position at the time and during the course of the proceedings and on which the commission acted was that if they dismissed the complaint against my client the effect of that would be complaint seeking a discharge of deputies let such a surgeon tart down in fact occur the proceedings before the circuit court were in the nature of the administrat review and the circuit court certified to this court the question of whether the order of the commission dismissing the complaint was voided initio as a result of the commission lacking the authority and therefore acting in excess of its authority to dismiss the plane without conducting an evidentiary the rubber flaps in the  briefs addressed this that during the course of the proceedings and in particular the arguments on the motion to reinstate there were certain items with either counsel agree or the commission found it would require some evidence before the commission could make a determination on any spew did factual type issues there were other issues which did not require testimonial evidence but which were fully argued before the commission not just on one occasion but  two separate occasions with an intervening deliberation period during which they had suggested on the record that they would receive and considering advice of their own counsel with respect to the procedures to be employed so commission so he's well preserved this issue of these raised at every opportunity if would be great if they think that the passion of the commission both prior to and subsequent to it so acting is void  statutory responsibility of adjudicating and resolving that complaint the manner in which resolve must be must be attended to the nature of this before district there is no rule which requires her as a deputy sheriff a correctional officer in the foyer of the sheriff's department to pick a child of this one so now more like a dismiss arguments before the commission and in fact argued we had argued that the complaint see you heard this heard was not filed within a reasonable time there's no dispute and nothing to hear evidence on as to whether or not the argued before the circuit court and were not part of the certified questions on the locker tory feel that this story in the sense that there is never been a claim that the commission's findings are actions or decision was the materials but simply acted on emotion supported by argument and submissions deliberation subsequent argument and the order and it's our contention that certified  to whether or not any action is void additional yes to be answered in the negative it's not void whether or not it was you're wrong because for one or more reasons wasn't the question presented wasn't the argument made in the commission and wasn't filed and that is that the action of the pollution control board in dismissing that appeal without conducting a hearing was invalid  the statute nothing in the state of authorized them to dismiss without a hearing that appeal that similar to the situation and kurds are coots versus the mere commission where the  farmed the dismissal of an appeal that was taken from a sanction imposed of twenty nine days when the statutory provisions permitted an appeal take to be taken if there was a suspension of thirty days or more what we're saying here the intuitive case of this complaint sinking her discharge follow a form a procedure that had been initially of the very first meeting agreed upon there was agreements with respect to discovering what would be provided the time frame within which would be provided there was an agreement at the hearings with the bifurcated in the sense that there would be initial proceedings relating to whether or not the grounds existed for her disturb and then if that was sustained there was a separate proceeding relating to what the appropriate sanction would be because the mere commission even if it were to find in favor the sure then have to dismiss my client there's a range of sanctions under the rules and the statute american commission can impose so we bifurcated this pursuit ing we have agreements with respect to that we filed this motion to reinstate service certain some things which would have required some have ins some things which did not there was there were some interest with were in the school within the scope of the agency's knowledge the board's knowledge of the commission's knowledge in another stop such as the failure of the sheriff to have provided the stance authority required report adjudicating any specific sanction to be imposed some of those items like that like the failure to have adopted rules like the failure to have voted and have officers for the commission itself not provide the product that without pay for more than three days except under certain circumstances the rules require that looks there was some cause shown towards a late attributed to the parties that the hearing should be held within thirty days and with s c a service is hoots there are two other cases that i think addressed that fan generally as well that you can in case you can averse to slants the members were dismissed and employers requests for if for example the sheriff saw the discharge of an individual because they hear all the intended time sick within a matter of thirty days the employee is in titles or hearing the employee request a hearing they come in in the employee in the answer which was required by the rules that was an answer for which we define the employee says yes i called in ten times but i don't think i should be fired i think i should be suspended and their condition doesn't need help or all the semantical war of humans under this record the answer would be no and it would be no for this reason when the sheriff filed his complaint for administrative review which you listen title to within the thirty days thirty five days which was required living at the only allegation set forth in that complaint for administrative review the prayer for relief filed on behalf of the sheriff by his counsel in the arguments before  court all pointed soley into the argument and the contention that the actions of the commission were void yeah initio there was never an argument then the commission's actions were  because the commission's action was iranians in this regard and so those four in addition or alternatively that it was void initio and so forth those reasons then i would fully agree with the court's suggestion that the fact even if this court should believe that perhaps there should have been some further development of the record as to whether the commission's actions were wrong it isn't something that the only issue before this court in the provided you know which were false possibly made and provided with the intention of getting money that she would not otherwise entitled to for that reason filed a complaint the mission which is required by law  discharge her and leave the american mission and he has as of this day contrary to numerous assertions to the contrary not been able to have his complaint heard and that's why we're here i would like to make a few corrections that i think need to be made based on the record note however that the record is challenging to work through it best number one the commission had rules the record is clear that the commission ha the their the motion to dismiss which we're really not sure if we dealt with a motion to reinstate which evolved into a motion to dismiss on the date on which it was argued at the suggestion of  counsel for the mere commission he started is the motion to reinstate it seems based on the record that that's what the commissioners were looking at only to go to dismiss yes that's all that's necessary to dismiss but because they made no findings because the court m the sheriff could not say this finding was erroneous this was arbitrary this is precious the record is it's so screwed up that the sheriff did not know how to approach it  he needs someone to give him the authority to discharge to determine whether or not this employee merits this charge or continue to point i think it's conceded i'm sorry let me let me go back for just a moment i don't know if it's worth getting into but if we were to go down the motion to reinstate each one of those paragraphs could address the most of them require evidence as was just conceded by mr richard and was considered beginning with the trial court argument some of my  guys actually do require factual the trial but we don't know which ones they work so the sheriff can't say this was in a fight because there was no fine the sheriff right now is simply trying to do what he thinks the public requires to have this case stand for the proposition that we think it stands for and we don't we don't back off at all from that the conclusion that the american machine did not have you or your claims but because the record is difficult to work through any precedent that this court comes up with which we may or may not be published is going to be based on a case where there were no findings oh we know it was a motion to dismiss the sixteen was it a six thing was it dismissed on its face which some of these cases referred to were actually dismissed based on the complaint there's no argument and there hasn't been there couldn't that the commission actually ever had hearing on the complaint and hearing jurisdictional issue is it we don't feel like working on the basis for the rationale for this missile is not clear to the extent that this court deems it appropriate to figure out what the american mission was doing if the judgment of only two of the commissioners begin the commission or act commission acts as a party to the commissioners voted to dismiss commissioner schwartz says a number of times we don't know what we're missing and we don't know what she also makes more references to getting taken up on appeal that actually she's the only one who makes numerous references that so it appears that there is no finding that the rules didn't exist effectively there are three potential arguments as to why the american mission might not know rules which they talking yesterday court determined whether or not she fully employed the third issue as we didn't have the wreckers we didn't have the personnel actions of the statute requires the sheriff apply to us i believe that's correct but they are there to be reviewed in the case something like this happens rather more in that case the argument is unequal treatment and you to look at those records the commission hasn't done anything in seventeen so the extent they want to compare apples to apples they've only got one  have that and every one of the cases i believe supports the conclusion that the american mission has very limited powers and in those cases where they were dismissed they were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction twenty nine days you can't do this control board was aware of this injunction said we're not going to have a hearing on this issue over which we have back that's probably the best argument he's got because every other one the statute of the law said you can't do this city of this plains s be answered the question that i cannot answer my client cannot answer and which i suppose this court is being asked to answer by the commission is why do they need this the order to dismiss for reasons which are not apparent in order to achieve the goal of ensuring of determining whether or not sergeant tars service was meritorious the answer to that question is clearly no to the extent that it suggested that the sheriff has to come up with legal authority saying this didn't exist this works very well aware that it's impossible to prove a negative cites the fact that there is no authority or our minds suggests that there is no such a asking that the court term in the action void for lack of legal authority to enter such an order in the complaint further in the hearing on the complaint or administrative review in memory and on the law it was filed which again and the reasons why that motion should be did without the need to conduct further extensive evan entry hearings on the comment by counsel a moment ago that the sheriff couldn't attack the actions or the findings i always initio that's the only issue of before the court the only issue certified the court the commission had the authority to adjudicate the complaint in a fashion which addressed the issues and if those not have eventually issues where that's the real box seven o'clock tonight is supposed to three o'clock in the afternoon