you create a fire protection district to provide the fire action and the voters approve that and so the bush issues begin between the village in the new fire protection district for the transfer of functions from the fire department of the village to the parties agreed on the formula it's set forth in the letter of april twenty six this and stating the facts the intergovernmental agreement set forth the formula again and made one and then there were there were some letters that were exchange really didn't think we were going to do that did you there was a sleaze or there are is that if you had to if you could all you force contracts where you one hundred percent believe that the other side is going to follow through we would have a lot associated with this case either in this case or in a separate case to a mandatory injunction that something should happen so the way it is we pursued the case was we took his ministry to review of  lost lost profits and of course illinois been fairly specific in saying that well just because you can't say for sure and just because you kid have an exact amount on time all along the exact the intergovernmental agreement by the village board that says who are going to do this and as a result off we think this is much more like one of those situations where pension fund with a salary that is not authorized in the pension code in the pension regulation which is a village discovered through this litigation your honor and and if we look at the pension code we look at the pension regulations reading concert what they provide is salaries annual salary received right here only this attached to the firefighters rank set forth in the and i don't know whether that was reviewed by plaintiff's counsel at the time but at this village was the one who had to come up with some thoughts that if you read that the village is the one who is responsible for that salary because he's going to leave before he's the good he is thirty is here right but in order to get to death thirty years here and get the multiplier in to seventy five percent we the calculation see receive his paycheck for that the period on the salary so when most what this provision requires is the village to pay him an additional three hundred twenty two dollars to make up the ort with the provisions in the pension code in the pension regulations and in their way it's really no plan to bring before the pension or a sale re that is not authorized by the he's not entitled to any relief from attorney's fees three hundred twenty two dollars now if if this core deems does this of this plan set forth in this may seventeenth letter valid then he would be entitled to three hundred considers pension benefits but that's not what it would be it would be damages absolute it damages would be the calculation of was pension benefits maybe he would many they would take steps to ensure that his salary would be increased so he could enjoy the pension that he would give him the serve the entire thirty years at deposition rick that's the argument that they're making actually actually your honor and in the villages position is it did increase a salary it didn't june it increases by a change in status form the fact is that his vacation and sick pay out was on the increase salary but is this may well the village we have two different parties who would manage the pension if this had happened the way the plaintiffs contemplated the pitch is rewarded for the village review proceeding to determine they also and they are on this was an illegal pension spike and they knew they were they did not say in the in their arguments we that the i g a did not confront their current beneficiary stand as to mr barr bought and dismissed the claims of third party breach of contract based on third party beneficiary and that's the only issue right now as to the fire protection district all the talk about these letters may seventeenth twenty six that was all between the village and his department council that did not involve the fire protection district the only claim with regard to the fire protection district is generally states each generally states but there's no indication that all of those general provisions do not apply across the twenty four page agreement mr barlow was not the only individual or entity specifically named in that agreement a third party but no third party beneficiary clauses to him then under general conference construction principles you can feel it dated against all those other entities and we discussed this in our brief they talk about the u to who's going to provide emergency services through the window by the way and from another place for another fire station all these different entities and individuals are named to that agreement so if you don't third party beneficiaries does not apply to mr par out is to everybody and i think that's a pretty drastic step for the court to take and i think even if you say ok that's a point of plate not conclusive i don't think he's a third party beneficiary without that clause if you read the entire twenty four were married to figure out if you turned he said that in the course of these proceedings and i thought it was the cities but now it sounds like it's more like the bill of the districts i think that it might have been just tricks i can honestly say that this rings to regard to said hey wait a minute you realized that there might be a problem with this you negotiated with through all of these letters all these provisions with what the phillips was going to do for you you did not rule of law by first of all you tendered your intention to resign in february before you met with the fire protection district so it's not as if you're leading with the fire protect the district convinced you to retire and secondly when you actually tendered your resignation in august way after the i was entered you stated what you were relying on and you said i'm relying on tendering my retirement resignation on may seventeenth letter from my attorney and the twenty fifth letter from the phillips that establishes the procedures and what's going to happen that's what i rely on he did not say i rely on the fire protection district representations he didn't say i relied on the ga and i think that opens and shuts the case as to the fire protection district to script wri entity and city was no longer going to exist when the transfer came to the fire protection district but that doesn't make the fire protection district a bad actor they just that that bureau is no longer going to exist we already have a chief in place for the for the fire department was chief spain you're not going to have achieved position the position we can give you in the fire protection district is as a lieutenant but then you're going to get the sailor eight which is a lower salary attached to the lieutenant  vacation for ten and a half months he said i want to resign i want to end my active service march twenty ninth of two thousand and seven and i want to take ten and a half months if it came to right out into my thirty year and the fire protection district was not one that he wanted and started negotiating with the village which was fine i'm not going to speak to anything he did with the fillets on the site it doesn't apply to the fire protection district we were not me and him trying to cheat him out of something there just wasn't going to be going to do anything from this debacle other than join to defend him if he is challenged in pension before the pension board it says the village is going to make a sale readjustment the village is going to do these things to protect his pension not the fire represented himself and then said we want you to pick up the payment we want you to reimburse to the attorneys fees and we said no even if you are a third party beneficiary saying we're trying to jointly defend you we don't owe you the fees because you didn't come in and asked us to defend you you hired your own attorney and came in and now are handing us the bill who are not going to pay it so we don't even know you're now saying you have absolutely no obligation to do anything for him because he was not your employee you would have defended him never came and asked us to do that i think now that doesn't mean it was going to make an illegal pension spiking legal i don't think our attorney in our district ever examined the issue because again we weren't going to pay out any money we didn't hire him he wasn't our employee but i think and asked about wait for it wasn't just a few words changed in that second amended complaint if you look at page seventeen of our brief he changed the substance of nine this previously played fact allegations and he added seven entirely the pension color for firefighters says that your pension is determined by the salary ted st you're really paying your last day of employment and the parties agreed to attach a salary of ninety six thousand dollars  the one sentence in the may seventeenth letter that says that he'll get a certain salary affected on a certain day when the purpose of that was reflected in the may in the april twenty sixth wire in the intergovernmental agreement they were indeed the country actually arrangement is i and you know there are lots of ways creative lawyers come up with a circuit they said we work to do this because we think this is the best way to do it and mr parker agreed now are you standing on your brief concerning the fees yes is a schedule payment in the schedule maybe annually kornel even monthly were any of the basis and the qualifier of any other basis it would be perhaps by meekly by a monthly and looking at the last one dictionary plain definition of the term regular rate is defined as a fixed in certain intervals regular point of time you know corns was so consistent or periodical or after may first so what was he going to do in order to have a job that sounded so what was he going to do for you at that salary because there was nothing he could do for the village any more absolutely your honor but remember this is right and the letter was may seventeenth the date of retirement was retroactive to may first the pay raise was retroactive to people my team now there is nothing that prevented plaintiff counsel from saying i want this pay raise are being rushed away to the six months prior so at least it is to establish some sort of where you where are you with this salary and then also require payment of the salary but best not what was done in this weather and mass why the pension board said this is a pension spike and if we look at the regulations in the statue the village will submit this didn't design it the village didn't write the may seventeenth letter but it wasn't anything you say you don't think it was in compliance with the code sin and the issues but as counsel has said this the spirit of the pension code boy and there the court need only look at the statutes in the regulations compare them to this may seventeenth letter and i don't think this court can avoid a finding that this was  on authorize pension spike which has the effect of putting over room on the pension fund so the heart of this this agreement agree it's like this it's not just confined to the parties it harms the pension fund it harms taxpayers who are contributing taxpayer dollars to fund the pension fund it harms other firefighters who are holding in expecting that that pension fund is solvent at the time they  retire is a lot of this speculation where you're saying you're a well basically what you're saying is if the pension fund paid this to mr barber it would break the fund is that what you're saying i'm saying you would put a burden on the one