Jones v. Rockefeller, s. 15783

Decision Date17 May 1983
Docket Number15864,15863,15865,Nos. 15783,s. 15783
Citation303 S.E.2d 668,172 W.Va. 30
PartiesOrton A. JONES, Committee of Doris R. Smith, an Incompetent; Marjorie Lattimer, Individually and as Next Friend of Shirley Mae Lattimer and Roger Lattimer, Incompetents; Arnold C. Mace; Donna S. Hickman; Nathan Sanchez; Larry Ferrell; Lauren Atkinson and Betty Miller v. The Honorable John D. ROCKEFELLER, IV, Governor of the State of West Virginia; Dr. L. Clark Hansbarger, Director, West Virginia Department of Health; Desmond Byrne, Superintendent, Spencer Hospital; and Arnold Margolin, Director of Finance and Administration of the State of West Virginia. Orton A. JONES, Committee of Doris R. Smith, an Incompetent; Marjorie Lattimer, Individually and as Next Friend of Shirley Mae Lattimer and Roger Lattimer, Incompetents; Arnold C. Mace; Donna S. Hickman; Nathan Sanchez; Larry Ferrell; Lauren Atkinson and Betty Miller v. Honorable John D. ROCKEFELLER, IV, Governor of the State of West Virginia; and Honorable Donald L. Kopp, Clerk of the House of Delegates of the State of West Virginia. Vonda GOODWIN, Norman Jean Davis, Willard Bruce Johnson, Arlene Starcher, on Behalf of Delmer Lovell, and WVADD (West Virginia Advocates For the Developmentally Disabled, Inc.) v. L. Clark HANSBARGER, Director, West Virginia Department of Health; and Donald Kopp, Clerk, West Virginia House of Delegates. Tom WOODRUFF, Linda Moore, Robert Nichols, Terry Williams, Sherry Blosser, William P. White, Linda Nichols, Ronzell Boggs, Ruth Boggs, Paula Moore, Ruth Dawson, Madeline Smith, Josephine Summers, James Bradley, Rex Starcher, Charles White, Rita Ringer, and Phillip Ambrose v. Dr. L. Clark HANSBARGER, Director, West Virginia Department of Health; and Donald E. Kopp, Clerk, West Virginia House of Delegates.
CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

1. Pursuant to W.Va. Const., art. VI, § 51, the Modern Budget Amendment, the governor's disapproval or reduction of items or parts of items contained within the budget bill is void unless the governor returns to each house of the legislature or files in the office of the secretary of state, as the case may be, objections for such disapproval or reduction.

2. "The word 'objections,' as used in the Modern Budget Amendment, means a statement of an adverse reason in opposition to a budget bill, or its items or parts, and the action of the Governor in the elimination of the amount of an item in the bill by striking the amount by drawing a line through the figures or the substitution of a reduced amount and the addition of the initials of the Governor does not constitute the objections required by the Amendment." Syl. pt. 3, State ex rel. Browning v. Blankenship, 154 W.Va. 253, 175 S.E.2d 172 (1970).

3. Pursuant to W.Va. Const., art. VI, § 51, the Modern Budget Amendment, the validity of the governor's disapproval or reduction of items or parts of items contained within the budget bill depends upon the governor's objections to such items or parts of items. The objections, to satisfy the mandate of the Modern Budget Amendment, need communicate in a rational manner to the public and current or future legislatures a statement of an adverse reason in opposition to a budget bill, or its items or parts, as to why the budget bill, or an item or part of an item within the budget bill, has been disapproved or reduced by the governor.

4. Where the West Virginia Legislature passed the budget bill containing Account No. 4160, which account enumerated appropriations for the state mental hospitals for fiscal year 1983-84, and furthermore, the legislature produced, pursuant to W.Va.Code, 4-1-18 [1969], a legislative digest directing specific appropriations within Account No. 4160 to Spencer Hospital, a subsequent reduction by the governor of appropriations within Account No. 4160 of the budget bill, which reductions would result in the closing or substantial curtailment of services at Spencer Hospital, was void under W.Va. Const., art. VI, § 51, the Modern Budget Amendment, because the governor failed to file objections to those appropriations, as required by the Amendment, where (1) the governor merely struck through certain appropriations, substituted reduced amounts, and added his initials, (2) the governor's message filed with the budget bill described the effects of the governor's reduction of appropriations upon certain state hospitals, rather than adverse reasons why appropriations for Spencer Hospital should be reduced and (3) the governor's message filed with the budget bill merely stated a general desire by the governor to eliminate the duplication of administrative costs with respect to state hospitals.

Hedges & Jones, G.F. Hedges, Jr. and Orton A. Jones, Thomas C. Evans, III, Richard D. Frum, Spencer, for petitioners in Nos. 15783 and 15863.

Gerald M. Titus, Jr., Spencer, for petitioners in No. 15863.

Daniel F. Hedges and C. Cooper Fulton, Charleston, for petitioners in No. 15864.

Crandall, Pyles & Crandall, Penelope Crandall and Grant Crandall, Charleston, for petitioners in No. 15865.

Chauncey Browning, Atty. Gen., Victor A. Barone, Deputy Atty. Gen. and David Patrick Lambert, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charleston, for respondents.

McHUGH, Justice:

These actions, No. 15783, No. 15863, No. 15864 and No. 15865, are before this Court upon petitions in mandamus which seek publication of the West Virginia budget bill for fiscal year 1983-84 as enacted by the West Virginia Legislature and without subsequent budgetary reductions by the governor relating to Spencer Hospital. By orders entered on March 31, 1983, this Court issued rules directing the respondents to show cause why relief should not be awarded against them. These actions were later consolidated for argument and submission to this Court. This Court has before it the petitions, the consolidated response, all matters of record, the briefs, the amicus curiae brief and argument of counsel.

Spencer Hospital, located in Roane County, West Virginia, is a state hospital established under W.Va.Code, 27-2-1 [1977], and controlled by the West Virginia Department of Health. It was initially established prior to 1900. See W.Va.Code, ch. 58, sec. 1 [1891]. The petitioners seek to prevent the governor from either closing Spencer Hospital or substantially curtailing its services. The petitioners include a number of patients and patient representatives of Spencer Hospital, employees of Spencer Hospital and various Roane County community leaders. The respondents include John D. Rockefeller IV, Governor; L. Clark Hansbarger, Director of the Department of Health; Desmond Byrne, Superintendent of Spencer Hospital; Arnold Margolin, Director of the Department of Finance and Administration, and Donald L. Kopp, Clerk of the House of Delegates of the West Virginia Legislature.

As indicated below, various proceedings have occurred before this Court concerning Spencer Hospital.

THE ORDER OF FEBRUARY 9, 1983

On January 12, 1983, the governor in his State of the State address, announced that as a result of poor national and state economic conditions, he would reduce state agency expenditures by ten per cent, with the exception of expenditures for public education which would be reduced by four per cent. In that address, the governor stated that such a reduction in state spending would, inter alia, result in "the permanent closing of Spencer State Hospital and the transfer of 300 patients to our other state health institutions...."

The ten per cent general reduction in state agency expenditures and the four per cent reduction in expenditures for public education related to fiscal year 1982-83. Those reductions were confirmed by the governor by Executive Order No. 4-83, dated January 13, 1983. 1

The record indicates that in response to the governor, the West Virginia Senate on January 14, 1983, adopted Senate Resolution No. 8 which urged the governor to delay the closing of Spencer Hospital and the transfer of patients "until the Legislature has had an opportunity to examine alternatives...."

Subsequently, actions in mandamus were filed in this Court by various individuals including employees and patient representatives of Spencer Hospital seeking the continued operation of that facility. Those actions resulted in the February 9, 1983, order of this Court in which, upon the basis of DeVault v. Nicholson, 170 W.Va. 719, 296 S.E.2d 682 (1982), this Court directed the respondent governor and others to "operate and maintain Spencer State Hospital at the level of services as required by law, until such time as the Legislature by proper enactment shall direct otherwise...." 2

THE ORDER OF APRIL 27, 1983

During the 1983 session of the West Virginia Legislature, bills were introduced in both the House and Senate authorizing the closing of Spencer Hospital. Those bills were unsuccessful.

On March 4, 1983, the legislature approved a supplemental appropriation bill, designated Senate Bill No. 252, appropriating $1,500,000 to Spencer Hospital for the balance of the 1982-83 fiscal year. The governor did not veto that supplemental appropriation. That appropriation consisted of $1,063,675 for personal services; $409,225 for current expenses; $16,700 for repairs and alterations and $10,400 for equipment.

On March 31, 1983, the present actions, No. 15783, No. 15863, No. 15864 and No. 15865, were filed in this Court. In these actions, the authority of the governor to close or substantially curtail services at Spencer Hospital by way of the budgetary process is challenged. The actions are primarily concerned with the budget bill for fiscal year 1983-84.

With respect to fiscal year 1982-83, however, this Court, by order entered on April 27, 1983, granted relief to the petitioners in these actions comparable to the relief granted by this Court in its order of February 9, 1983. Noting (1) that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • STATE EX REL. v. Tomblin
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • March 26, 2001
    ...Digest as its detailed explanation concerning the manner in which appropriations are to be expended"); Jones v. Rockefeller, 172 W.Va. 30, 34 n. 4, 303 S.E.2d 668, 672 n. 4 (1983) (observing that legislative intent as to contemplated expenditure of budgetary appropriations may be gleaned fr......
  • DePond v. Gainer
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • March 12, 1986
    ...raise the spectre of executive control of judicial compensation.3 See, e.g., Queen v. Moore, 340 S.E.2d 838 (W.Va.1986); Jones v. Rockefeller, 303 S.E.2d 668 (W.Va.1983); State ex rel. Board of Education v. Rockefeller, 281 S.E.2d 131 (W.Va.1981); State ex rel. Brotherton v. Moore, 159 W.Va......
  • Mitchell v. Broudnax
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • July 16, 1999
    ...the law, adjudicating individual disputes arising thereunder." (citations omitted)). See also Jones v. Rockefeller, 172 W. Va. 30, 46, 303 S.E.2d 668, 684 (1983) (Neely, J., dissenting) ("The American tradition of separation of powers and the principle of court deference to the executive an......
  • Bel-O-Mar Interstate Planning Com'n v. West Virginia Com'n on Aging
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • December 10, 1992
    ...Benedict v. Polan, 186 W.Va. 452, 413 S.E.2d 107 (1991); Dadisman v. Moore, 181 W.Va. 779, 384 S.E.2d 816 (1988); Jones v. Rockefeller, 172 W.Va. 30, 303 S.E.2d 668 (1983); O'Connor v. Margolin, 170 W.Va. 762, 296 S.E.2d 892 (1982).4 The relevant portion of 45 C.F.R. § 1321.17 is: "To recei......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT