you day in our opinion hinges on the court's interpretation of the phrase an authorized by law as that phrase is used in the field of real estate taxation and the issue here are seven items of the county twenty and tax levy that was passed in december of two thousand and nine plaintiffs filed a claim for a joint the relief including a few other callous those counts were dismissed chose to enjoying the collection of two hundred eighty five thousand dollars in real estate taxes as a result of that junction county treasurer it was late if behind her post time table getting i would say that they were procedurally improper i believe that this case is a matter of form over substance that at the end of the day all parties are in agreement and even this the trial court agreed that these are lawful purposes position is that the counties code section five dash one zero two four press in the forty two let me taxes for these purposes so long as they do not exceed the statutory limit of zero point two seven percent the i thought the the i think it's a matter of interpretation as to how that was a controversy there is no i think everyone agrees that there is no separate statutory authority that specifically says real estate taxes up to x number of dollars or x percentage of value for these purposes rather they just simply say the county will provide the services and do these thing in the county will pay for it it doesn't it's in the late eighty's the legislature sort of streamlined the taxing process and increased the general corporate levy rate while getting rid of some of these special tax items so that rather than have all these separate documents this what do a county here rather have all the separate documents that it would just fall into one large umbrella our position is that the that that legislative change did not remove that correct correct and i would agree there is potential for mischief there but there was no mischief here that it was below the statutory rape and the county's code and  county just for background purposes as we point out everything is reflected by affidavits in the record and with county the county clerk typically would review all these at the end of the day those way to i know you need intentionally but could be a way to stiff the taxpayer simply because there's there's not your real mind exclusively on the county clerk and if you've got a practice that's historical or and i don't know that it would be smaller counties necessarily that were well this is the way we do things it goes by in could happen in successive years without anybody notice perhaps but if it's not intentional and the shrub characterizes mischief i think it would be more of a just a breakdown of the system well that's why it's interesting that you say that the levees were procedurally improper it is the very process that we're talking about the process by which these monies are levied and collected for and that process suggests that the reform change of the law said figure out what you need and levy correct and don't nickel and dime in specific areas than are specifically offered i mean i i what those guys were doing cross the street i would agree but i think you hit the nail on the head he said procedurally that's that's the essence of our argument that you don't authorized by law exception to the exclusive procedure set up by the property tax for tax objection play pay your taxes you protest them and if there was something wrong get a refund it's an exception to the general and authorized by law exception work that allows recognize that's a fine distinction to make and i recognize that the supreme court of illinois in a four three decision i mean obviously if it wasn't a fine distinction to make it would have been more a bit more of a consensus i think of doing what the county can lawfully do that if somebody if if it turns out that the if properly the recourse by individual taxpayers is not in equity it's not by way of injunction each individual taxpayer has a right to show up in four file facts just play and complain about those procedural regular so we should have a thousand lawsuits one correct or even worse only five hundred and the other five hundred people don't know what's going on that would that could happen and right now and do it county on those cases that were dismissed there are roughly four hundred players in court with cases pending matters pending maybe that's the mystery that's pardon is just funny that's not a very good use of the process to require the individual that's what we have but this taxes are not authorized by law isn't well the county assessor's of each county are authorized by law to assess and tax off property not exempted from taxation but that's not what you did  you you specifically included a levy or seven items that were not allowed which you were not allowed to post a specific off something else and levy used separate levy documents for example like an ambulance tax or something else but if the long used to say you can levy on these specific items the law was changed  the general rate was increased with the seven items were wiped out you can't do it it's no longer authorized by law to levy on the specific items wrestled with young authorized by law dr in that case there was a property that was leased by the chicago park district that was taxed and they filed the taxpayer found  looked at it slightly differently believing that it was not whether the issue was the assessors decision to tax the property and how to classify it which if that's what the issue was then it would be appropriate to go through the tax objection i'm going to do and it's a nice distinction but why should we fall on your side of the distinction but when you look at the power of the assessor function i think you have to take a broader take step back take a broader look at all real estate then they go through the valuations they see if there's an increase in assessment they set up a notice to the taxpayer so that they're involved in setting the fixing the value based on that value the taxing property that were an extra into villages and disconnected from the fire protection district by operational law the taxpayer being double taxed for duplicative services they had a fire said that regardless of the irregularity of the taxes they were not an authorized within the merely meaning of that term so i think that principle would apply to this case as well and authorized by law at the very narrowly he still needs the money to pay the things that these taxes were to fund so if the county and is the course decision here will determine whether kelly what options are available to the kelly to recoup those funds thank you the judge also pointed out his fear that the truth really is secret by this and so he had good reason to do taxpayer you may find yourself ok forty fifty one hundred five hundred dollars in the case of the largest taxpayer two hundred fifty thousand dollar raised the level of scrutiny that this judge look at maybe that's why misters you suggest is it was the record show that these potentially up to fifteen times what should be that related to the seven levies or was that in the other if i were a supreme court justice say i think  wasn't certified as a class this isn't a class action case it was only mr spencer for the court the such a broad brush that they were focused and concerned soley with the taxpayers that were before the i can't think of which case it was but i know that there was one that concerned a class action  assert rights on behalf of people who have no connection to it there might be people out there that are content with the way things are they may have looked at all of this just procedural or that's fine i'll pay my taxes what right does he have to step in the shoes of every taxpayer in the way county the way the property tax code is set up by the legislature that prohibits class action allows for mass jointer of players that just can't be the law  levees whether it's one document under the heading general corporate levy or if the county were to choose to break it up into two hundred documents covering each individual  purpose for which they're living that's the source of the authority and if it all let's say broken up into two hundred separate documents if the aggregate of those two hundred documents does not exceed the statutory cap the s