bring these cases to you asking the court to review and up hold an administrative decision a personal decision that was made at the local level by a committee of the board of  to certify and submit pension related forms that violate i am ira at your your county guidelines and in the view of the county contained in accurate and false information  denby asking that in closing thirteen pages of i am aware of forms and asking this entity to enroll mr penn who was the public defender at the time and i am our raf and to certify retroactive and omitted service credit going back twenty nine and a half years that's why there were thirteen pages of forms because there's about twelve months on each form and then those forms someone filled out and that an estimate and it was admitted in the letter that these were estimates of hours worked by mr pound over the years this request came twenty nine and a half years give or take since  since the beginning of the first of several more time year contracts with peoria and the town circuit under which mr penn acted as an independent contractor public defender letter demanded that the enrollment of the certification all take place by the following tuesday which happened to be one day before the end of mr pounds last contract provided some wasn't relating to this request and at the end of after a couple of months misspent the and coordination with the state's attorney and the county administrator which was part of the procedure to review these sorts of requests denied the request in a letter that there were there was a correspondence and it was june sixteenth twenty fourteen a letter from atkins who was in the state's attorney's office to yes your honor and there was no further discussion but the decision had been made and within a couple of months you consider that this is at the staff level yes but there is a procedure of there is a procedure process process for an appeal to the committee that made the administrative decision in this case when mr may in the community hated through that letter drafted by  was in the county code in the employee manual for personnel issues know that was one of the procedures that was not followed at the time and one of the reasons why the forms were not submitted to o'mara for many other reasons but six point zero five of the reconfiguration of the committees and we did provide all that documentation is an appendix for supplemental brief on the issue that the court asked us about that there was a body to appeal this put on hold basically by the circuit court for purposes of pursuit and exhaustion of administrative run of these the parties submitted expense which it was the mandamus case at that point that was the only one we haven't really gotten to the point of whether it was a necessary part of the first issue we tackle and because of the process that we believe is require is to exhaust the administrative remedy this is a local issue that should be decided locally and that's the purpose of the administrative enough if i'm not sure either your honor i understood and i think we understood as we worked this case through that the a r l provision which i believe this thirty five days and the administrative review complaint that's the sixteen m r case was filed prior to september thirtieth the the county operations committee proceeded with an administrative area on the issues the issue of the certification of the forms and submission of those forms to i am ira and it made several factual findings and under the  the committee found that the provisions the latter on april twenty fourth did not comply with the i m r of provisions to to tender the fee would be ours match the actual time records and where the participant certifies that he is a participant in a number of i m r f mr penn was not he certified that he was and the result of all of these issues including that he was an independent contractor  misspent be to decline to certify and submit these forms and finally i just want to get this out before roboto riders and that is that the statute at issue here at least one of the statutes which which is the pension code seven dash one on one two and three very specifically says that independent contractors are not to be covered under the i am around part three as a catchall are three  classes of them ways that maybe did something unusual mcnally's our lives or business for example public defenders represent individuals who are adverse to the county and believe what the legislature is trying to do there is to make sure that if you are employed if you are controlled by the county in this instance and if you are paid by the county and you are not an independent contractor the county is not in a position to create classes of requisite minimum numbers all of our lives for and there was there was not documentation there was plenty of testimony in fact mr parent testified that he did not have any documents that reflected the hours that he spent not necessarily unusual as a as a criminal defense lawyer many of us to write down every single minute of what we do and so we're used to that  but he did not have time records that was one of the difficulties that mr and b had in fact she testified specifically to that she could not based on what was in front of her certified those hours additionally when we have verbal or oral testimony a great hearing that did not match up in any way shape or form with the hours that have been estimated and the forms that have been the promoter heard of that testimony result the would absolutely agree with that and there was no opportunity to do that until to account for that over the time because of the repeated understanding and conversations about his status as an independent contractor time that he was in the position was that position reasonably required to work the minimum number of alt that said now that's those are the two questions that are put forth in this appeal as to the first and i  receive earnings from the general or special phones of a county or are employees of the county notwithstanding that they may be appointed by and are subject to the direction of other person or persons that's it to be a qualifying you have to be a qualifying position in an employee yeah that's that's a prerequisite yes so that is totally consistent with special memorandum to sixty sets which was public defenders and their assistants are that independent contractors public defenders are employees for purposes of i am or are they say in the record it says if they certify the hours  independent legal significance these forms are not i believe we could have filed this lawsuit without the forms i believe we could have filed this appeal without well there's a lot of distraction on these forms as if they have some independent medical significance was very concerned and was three or four times assured by the county that this would get to the i m r that's what pace and in that process he said what they said was judge administrative remedy of law if this ends up being that this is for some other means then i'm going to not be happy so why aren't they crean in the process and the process was to allow them to get their evidence record what was shocking i mean the that mr penn was not informed of two months after he was in the world when they all made this mistake that he was an independent contractor and that that didn't apply well when they need a mistake an independent contractor does not is not required to be in the i think you're absolutely right i can appeal the landmark decision on a on a larger scale and i'd be back in court as soon as your decision for me i am on but i can't get that decision until this court and what i'm told they are signing the documents d for any particular outcome other than we very strongly believed that this was a personal matter to be handled locally and for the committee to do the job that it did we're here under specifically in this county ordinance specifically addresses an appeal procedure for omitted service credit and the the other relief the omitted and past service credit requests that mr penn made create wasn't created it was transformed and there was a consolidation of others and so it was a new name for a couple of different committees that had different jobs but one of those was human resources in and you know you police officer was on whether or not they are participating or where when there is a dispute in this solved within that community and there's a challenge to yes i believe the answer is yes rather let me just say one thing that is come up from all three of your honor's and that is that there is in the record i do not have the cite but there is a board resolution that approved the procedure wasn't created it was put together through other hearing procedures from other components of the board such as busy day of the board in cages and hearings all the time in different types and knows how to do so and that that resolution and that procedure does say it makes it very clear that the committee was delegated the responsibility to handle this and that the decision will be the board's final decision so i think that also  question and i just want to say in terms of the supplemental briefing at least the understanding we had of the question was is this case here properly on administrative review and we are an administrative agency i would love to be able to say gee i guess it should be no deal here but we are going to strain of agency and that's and we set forth in our brief accurately i think what the the answers were to your questions and we concluded this court does have jurisdiction under the administrative review are now you know our position is that the trial court didn't do this the right way and that the accounting committee did do it the right way and that this court should up all the county committee's decision because it didn't listen to the other in this it did review the evidence judge keith omitted at least fifty to sixty percent of the factual findings the becan in the lead from his opinion and those findings which triggered the action here which we cannot certify the forums that's really the action that was made or not that those factual findings are not challenged by anyone anywhere and under the uphold the county committees in ministry of decision based on the work that was done including extensive read here in submissions and all the hearing and deliberations that went over the course of a couple of months