also it if you can speak a little louder because everything is being recorded and i've just been told by a quote physician at the microphone that he's not picking up the your voice ok let me ask you with the walking you have is it possible that water can be pushed up here and you can still sit down because i realize that we want to make us comfortable as possible telling your presentation that's her  morning play and meetings were held with a number of representatives of the city with respect to the work being there were negotiations with the city with respect to settlement of this matter and an offer was made by the city to city  respect let me out let me stop you from my castle and just raise this question to you and then you tell me if i have the sequence of events correct and ninety ninety seven  yes ok then i guess somewhere down the lie somewhere realize that this permit i soma could not be issued because there were the orders on the record that made this a  was approved he went forward with the work under the circumstances with the city he hid people working with the sitting and  and the base to punt alleged i don't know so you think that if the planning met the requirements for only well within six months ye probably did with respect to the identification of what the work with before him well came with the city during this entire procedure they were with the then had meetings with i don't know maybe six representatives of the city with respect to what to do and ultimately after the nine million dollar proposal is made by city in response to the city's offer to settle with the teach order after the settlement proposal of april nineteenth know by was worked with respect to the city and was rejected that it was ever in the decision that there should be that there should be no compensation him in that respect case with respect to the city in this respect and we asked for relief and a further question how much  utilized with respect to the expenses incurred in this extended period of time all of this based on the fact that the city council changed the zoning back and i think one hundred ninety eight but it was an issue but it was issued it so how do you answer this question how do you have a right to a building permit that was illegal when issued we suggest that it was not illegal it should have been issued but  work with respect to the morgan place and it was suspended putting the city thank you thank you s lot of money yes we are contesting that point i think the evidence will have to get at least three million for it we operate three and a quarter million but what the evidence shows that the plaintiff spent that the first thing to note i think the first key date is that the plaintiff didn't receive his loan to proceed with the construction intel may of two thousand and four the first application order issued in october two thousand and four so way by looking at a five month period there even though that the delay i agree was four years there were claim to have expended that was about four hundred eighty thousand dollars and when you look at that under the test set forth by the supreme court healey you can't you don't just look at that number in a vacuum you need to look at it in proportion to the total cost of the project the evidence shows a conservative estimate of the total cost of the project was fifteen million dollars the evidence also shows that a conservative estimate of j c t is net worth with over twenty million dollars when you look at those numbers you're coming down to something around hundred two percent and we would say that when you look at it in proportion which the supreme court indicates that you ought to do that that is not in fact a substantial use change in position to give nine million dollars was unrealistic yes absolutely i think that the evidence on that is actually very interesting not only to the plaintiffs only claim to have expended four hundred eighty thousand dollars not one million and there's certainly only evidence showing four hundred eighty thousand dollars in their included a certain number resale contracts for these kind of medium units and the testimony showed that the reason people thought these pre sell contracts were actually relevant is because they were backed up with earnest money each one was accompanied by a check for twenty thousand made a mistake absolutely and it would be very clear with the court the city is not out of that how did that happen incompeten city sent out no fewer than three letters to owners of that property indicating that there would be no that there would be hearings on the proposed change i think that actual notice the court finds its notice one way or the other you can you can i suppose  found it the court also found that the architect that speech he had hired testified that everybody knew that the zoning change was occurring and that's exactly why city she was in such a hurry to get his permits submitted so i think that fact finding also really buttresses the fact that we're not talking about an innocent purchaser here it's the residents of the city and also all of the businesses that are located within the plane manufacturing district who have done nothing wrong here if you allow i read your resumes the complete they did  that's correct however i think the record is very clear and plain to stress this point repeatedly in the presentation of the evidence that the business trips were up in arms over this that there were numerous letters that there was at that press conference held with regard to this there was a lot of a lot of problems that the community viewed with the fact that the city had improperly allowed a residential unit to go into the  relying on this permit in good faith we know that the building that they constructed actually born no resemblance to the plans that were actually approved by the city the foundation was totally different the structural supports were totally different they never did they did not notify the city of those structurally sound and that there is no deviation from the permit so it just sort of one more layer of why the equities do not favor the plaintiffs in this case even though the city erroneously issued a permit they weren't even relying on that typical that i believe that the general requirements of the zoning ordinance but it's also usually specifically written and i hate to say to them that bad you need to break you need to break ground you need to begin work on the property in the first six months now there's no evidence in the record here that that happened and i know counselor fred a little bit to some planning that was going on the court may no factual findings with respect to that and there is no evidence in the record with respect to that that is in the record is that the plaintiff didn't  loan until may of two thousand and four and what he did plenty of work at that point that was not in the first six months after the issuance of the permit so if the court wanted to go in that direction i think it certainly put the circuit court i believe in a footnote explain reasoning for not and that was simply because the city delayed as well just basically the first one buys any gifts based upon a mutual understanding explicit or implicit that the official actions decisions and judgments of any official concerning the business of the city would be influenced by the second one prevents any person with an economic interest officials during the time period in question and the j c t friends of the cost of those officials trip to brazil but i disputed that those officials were intimately involved in the decision to reissue the permit in two thousand and five they were present at all the meetings also involved in other aspects of the development here we believe that this satisfies both of those provisions the circuit court took issue with the fact that as your and i noted when interest testified he relied on law department advice and not on the advice know we believe this or quoting correctly it made a mistake of law with regard to those ordinances neither of those two ordinances requires that the people taking the gift and taking the money actually create the desired result for the per understanding you just have to give any gift that's more than fifty dollars to any city official whose decision could affect your transaction so we think that the circuit court's factual finding there really application  subsequent to the this settlement were appropriate all the facts were considered and we have responded in their brief nothing further