agreement entered into between the city and school district most important now since on this appeal we think is the standard the court has to apply and reviews in reviewing the constitutional challenge of waste is to defend its position essentially throughout their bridge that the standard is very differential rational basis test essentially saying that once the reason is a spouse is sufficient to pass constitutional muster we believe this simply not the case  unusual generally i think it is your honor and if you look at some of the cases cited in particularly the the uniform or the yes the uniformly clause cases in the breeze none of those cases were decided on a education the tax to non state property you're not bringing in any more students in the area to put additional burden on the school is now again that's assuming that the city were to come forward and say our raises a rational basis for posing as taxes of citizens who are outside within the school district but outside the city limits in addition there are other school districts whose families come into the city of sycamore who are not in that text so i think that  just it's speech today that they've been a member to the school called to allow the counties to fund schools through the sales tax but is there any such statutory construction in place that apart from that you see the school district in this case can't raise revenue by imposing transfer taxes therefore it can't enter into merely under the guise that intergovernmental cooperation agreement but the city do that for it and the issue here is not the type of issue where strict scrutiny traditionally lands in terms of the denial of let's say welfare benefits or the right to employment some of the supreme units that are contained in plaintiff's relief where you really do need to have that level of scrutiny and because it is in fact your fundamental right here the transfer tax and more specifically the exemption to the transfer tax doesn't exemption somehow offends the constitution of those united states or the constitution state down in this situation the fact that the exemption is based on those people that cannot do harm to the school district because they've been of those types of them so you're saying it's not necessarily the number of people who are gonna have to change this particular few parts around and some of them don't work so it's not that they have to pay this but the resources and to combine to share services but actually courageousness it in terms of promoting effective government and further the school code itself section five had slashed twenty while it does go through a lot more on the list of specific duties that the school districts have also provides that they are entitled to take on the he canceled larry and additional responsibilities there are related explicitly committed him here fees are one example of other kinds of revenue sharing so those are some of the examples and then furthermore there is the issue of whether or not through this intergovernmental agreement that the parties entered into responsible for for example their own financing the in governmental cooperation there and the constitution provides for this kind of sharing someone is it's not other models explicitly prohibited by law and they have have a school district even though it might have a small part of the the city that's covered by a different school district is pretty common sense they're a quality education for a major part of the city of the bulk of the city or almost all of the state even though there are some  about the ability of these government units to do this we know that there are some plaintiffs that who did it didn't have to pay the tax we know that to everyone else who is in the city you can he doesn't pay up to their three year we'll have to pay between an intent of the city for supporting it's the local public school system to educate its constituents there is a very close fit between right thank you thank you you to briefly on this issue of the need to develop facts because again i think under any basis to develop facts counsel just said we know that there's a coolness fit here we know that there's a clo food here we know that there's a close fit here that we don't know that there's a close fit to hear you talk about whether there's a bright line test what is arbitrary and capricious what is the percentage is there a magical to dismiss that i know in the other two areas that was not and i think again the seeing is case that this idea of the rational basis just pushes higher screaming has evolved since the ball decision