State ex rel. Junior College Dist. of Sedalia v. Barker

• Decision Date: 30 August 1967
• Docket Number: No. 52939,52939
• Citation: 418 S.W.2d 62
• Parties: STATE of Missouri ex rel. JUNIOR COLLEGE DISTRICT OF SEDALIA, William C. Hopkins, C. Gordon Stauffacher, Donald C. Proctor, John W. Ragland, E. L. Rhodes, and Clarence Frisch, Trustees; the State Board of Education and Hubert Wheeler, Commissioner of Education, Relators, v. The Honorable Charles V. BARKER, Judge, Circuit Court of Benton County, 30th Judicial Circuit, Respondent.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

Page 62

418 S.W.2d 62

STATE of Missouri ex rel. JUNIOR COLLEGE DISTRICT OF SEDALIA, William C. Hopkins, C. Gordon Stauffacher, Donald C. Proctor, John W. Ragland, E. L. Rhodes, and Clarence Frisch, Trustees; the State Board of Education and Hubert Wheeler, Commissioner of Education, Relators, v. The Honorable Charles V. BARKER, Judge, Circuit Court of Benton County, 30th Judicial Circuit, Respondent.

No. 52939.

Supreme Court of Missouri, En Banc.

Aug. 30, 1967.

William F. Brown and James T. Buckley, Sedalia, for relators Board of Trustees of Junior College District of Sedalia.

Norman H. Anderson, Atty. Gen., Louis C. DeFeo, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for relators Commissioner of Education and State Board of Education.

Winston Cook and Thomas A. Vetter, Jefferson City, for respondent Charles V. Barker, Judge, Circuit Court of Benton County, 30th Judicial District.

HENLEY, Judge.

This is an original proceeding in prohibition to prevent respondent from exercising jurisdiction in the case of Stelljes, et al., v. Lamkin, et al., members of the State Board of Education; Hubert Wheeler, State Commissioner of Education; and William C. Hopkins, et al., Trustees of The Junior College District of Sedalia, filed and pending in the circuit court of Benton County, except to enter a final judgment dismissing the case. Stelljes, et al., are hereinafter referred to as plaintiffs.

The case of Stelljes, et al., v. Lamkin, et al., filed by residents and taxpayers of Benton county, arose out of the recent or ganization of The Junior College District of Sedalia, Missouri, one of the relators, hereinafter sometimes referred to as the District. The District consists of parts of both Benton and Pettis counties.

Prior to December 5, 1965, a petition was presented to the State Board of Education (hereinafter referred to as State Board or Board) by voters of each component school district within the proposed junior college district area praying that the area described therein be organized as 'The Junior College District of Sedalia, Missouri.' On the latter date the Relator, State Board, determined that the area proposed to be included within the District met the standards established for junior college districts and ordered that an election be held within that area on April 5, 1966, to vote on the proposal and to elect trustees. The proposal to organize the District was approved by the voters and the relators, William C. Hopkins, et al., were at the same time elected as the six trustees of the District. Thereafter the results of the election were transmitted to the State Board and on May 6, 1966, that Board made an order declaring the District organized. The steps taken and the procedure outlined in this paragraph are provided for in § 178.800. (All statutory references are to RSMo 1959 and V.A.M.S.)

On May 6, 1966, the same day the Board made its above-mentioned order, counsel for the plaintiffs, Stelljes, et al., presented a petition to the Board requesting a hearing on '* * * whether the Board's determination of December 5, 1966, was supported by evidence as required by statute and by administrative rules and regulations of the Board.' The request for a hearing was denied and, as indicated, the Board entered its order declaring the District organized.

Seven days later, on May 13, 1966, plaintiffs filed their suit sounding in the nature of a petition for review pursuant to Chapter 536, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S., for a declaratory judgment, and for an injunction. Three of the trustees of the District, defendants in that suit and relators herein, are residents of Benton county.

Plaintiffs' petition alleges that the action is brought to review the 'Principles, Regulations and Standards for the Organization and Accreditation of Public Junior Colleges in Missouri adopted by the State Board pursuant to §§ 178.770--178.890 * * *' and to review '* * * the legality of the application of those rules and proceedings with respect to the formation of * * *' this District. The petition states that they were denied a hearing before the Board and are, therefore, entitled to a hearing before the court with the right to present evidence in support of their allegations. The petition further alleges that §§ 178.770--178.890 violate Article II and § 9(b) of Article IX, Constitution of Missouri, V.A.M.S., in that they constitute an unlawful delegation of powers by the General Assembly to the State Board by permitting the Board to determine whether an additional educational institution is necessary. The petition further alleges that the 'Principles, Regulations and Standards * * *' adopted by the Board are arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable and, therefore, unlawful, because they do not provide for a public hearing to insure that the initiative to establish a junior college district does in fact come from the area to be served, and because those Principles, etc., do not furnish criteria or standards for determining whether: (1) a junior college is needed in a proposed district, (2) the tax base is sufficient to support such college, (3) the high schools within the district graduate each year a sufficient number of persons to maintain an adequate enrollment. The petition further alleges that the State Board unlawfully delegated its powers to make a survey to determine the need and potential for a junior college in the area to a private group not representative of the whole area, but representative only of Pettis county and the city of Sedalia in particular, and that this group, in securing signatures on the petition for formation of the District, misrepresented the facts and misled the citizens of Benton county signing the petition. The petition further alleges that the proposal to form the District was not submitted to the Missouri Commission on Higher Education established by Chapter 173, RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S. and, because it was not so submitted and is not a part of the plan for higher education that Commission is charged with establishing, formation of the District was arbitrary, unreasonable, and contrary to the intent of the General Assembly in enacting Chapter 173. The petition further alleges, in substance, that the State Board did not follow the constitution, statutes, or its own rules, and abused its discretion and acted arbitrarily and unlawfully in approving formation of the District in that the District: (1) does not fit logically into a state-wide system of public supported colleges, (2) is not compact in area, (3) does not include a population large enough to justify a two-year college, (4) does not include a territory of such size that resident students can commute from home to school in a reasonable length of time, (5) does not encompass enough area to provide a tax base sufficient to support an accredited junior college program, (6) is not needed because there is no lack of post high school educational opportunities; and, further, that the high schools within the District do not graduate each year a sufficient number of students to maintain an adequate enrollment.

The prayer of the petition is for a decree (1) that §§ 178.770--178.890 are unconstitutional; (2) that the 'Principles, Regulations and Standards,' adopted by the State Board are invalid, insofar as they apply to the District; (3) that the District was not organized in accordance with the law; and (4) that the Trustees be permanently enjoined from taking any further steps in connection with the formation, organization or operation of the...