Vocational Services, Inc. v. The Developmental Disabilities Resource Bd

• Decision Date: 23 November 1999
• Citation: 5 S.W.3d 625
• Parties: (Mo.App. W.D. 1999) Vocational Services, Inc., A Missouri Not-For-Profit Corporation, Appellant-Respondent, v. The Developmental Disabilities Resource Board, Respondent-Appellant, Lighthouse Preschool, Inc., A Missouri Not-For-Profit Corporation, Respondent. WD56186 and WD56231
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

5 S.W.3d 625 (Mo.App. W.D. 1999)

Vocational Services, Inc., A Missouri Not-For-Profit Corporation, Appellant-Respondent, v. The Developmental Disabilities Resource Board, Respondent-Appellant, Lighthouse Preschool, Inc., A Missouri Not-For-Profit Corporation, Respondent.

WD56186 and WD56231

Missouri Court of Appeals Western District

11/23/99

Appeal From: Circuit Court of Clay County, Hon. David W. Russell

Counsel for Appellant: Jon M. Krebbs

Counsel for Respondent: Gary Kevin Patton

Opinion Summary: Vocational Services Inc. (VSI) filed suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief, requesting that the trial court prevent the Developmental Disabilities Resource Board (DDRB) from further funding programs for the handicapped provided by entities which are not sheltered workshops or residence facilities. Section 205.968 authorizes the DDRB to distribute tax funds to provide sheltered workshops, residence facilities, and related services for the care or employment, or both, of the handicapped. The trial court found that the term "related services" in the statute included entities which provide acts or commodities which are connected or associated with vocational training, vocational teaching, vocational activities, vocational workshops or actual residential facilities for the care or employment of handicapped persons, even if the entities themselves are not sheltered workshops or residence facilities. The trial court thus refused to enjoin the DDRB's distribution of tax funds to any entities falling within the boundaries of this definition, and enjoined further distribution of funds to those entities which did not provide services falling within this definition. The DDRB appeals, and VSI cross-appeals, the decision of the trial court, asserting error in the trial court's interpretation of "related services."

Division Two holds: The trial court did not err in interpreting the term "related services." The primary rule of statutory construction is to determine the intent of the legislature. If the language of a statute is not plain and clear, but rather ambiguous, then we look past its plain meaning and construe it with other statutes and in light of other principles of statutory construction in order to determine its meaning. Reading Sections 205.968 and 205.970 together, and looking to their plain an ordinary meaning, the DDRB is permitted to fund sheltered workshops, residence facilities and those providing some or all of the same or related services for the care or employment of handicapped persons, that is, services of the type which would be provided by or supportive of a sheltered workshop or residence facility. The trial court's application of the statute is fully consistent with this interpretation. Thus, we find no error.

Lowenstein, P.J. and Hanna¹, S.J., concur

Laura Denvir Stith, Judge

The Developmental Disabilities Resource Board (DDRB) has the authority to distribute Clay County tax funds, collected pursuant to Section 205.968-205.972 RSMo 1994 & RSMo Cum. Supp. 1995, to sheltered workshops, residence facilities, and related services for the care or employment, or both, of the handicapped. Vocational Services Inc. (VSI) filed suit for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief, requesting that the trial court prevent the DDRB from further funding of programs for the handicapped provided by entities which are not sheltered workshops or residence facilities. At trial, Judge David W. Russell declared the extent of the authority of the DDRB to distribute the tax funds for the handicapped was limited by Section 205.968's phrase "related services." Judge Russell interpreted the phrase "related services" to include entities which provide acts or commodities which are connected or associated with vocational training, vocational teaching, vocational activities, vocational workshops or actual residential facilities for the care or employment of handicapped persons, even if the entities are not themselves sheltered workshops or residence facilities, and refused to enjoin distribution of tax funds to these entities. Judge Russell did enjoin the DDRB from distributing tax levy funds to entities which fall outside the statutory parameters, even if they provide other care of the handicapped. VSI appeals so much of the decision as allows distribution of funds to entities other than sheltered workshops and residence facilities. The DDRB appeals so much of the decision as requires programs to be connected with vocational training, teaching or activities. Intervenor Lighthouse Preschool supports the DDRB's interpretation of the statute, although it was not in fact harmed by the decision below.

Finding no error in the trial court's interpretation and application of the statute in either respect, we affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

At trial, the parties stipulated to the following facts:

In 1969, the Missouri Legislature enacted Sections 205.968-205.972 to address the establishment and operation of county sheltered workshops. This legislation authorized the county court of any county in Missouri to establish a sheltered workshop and residence facility for the care and employment of post-school handicapped persons. Section 205.971 permitted the county court, upon approval by a majority of the qualified voters of the county, to "levy and collect a tax not to exceed two mills per dollar of assessed valuation upon all taxable property within the county for the purpose of establishing and maintaining the county sheltered workshop and residence facility." Sec. 205.971 RSMo 1969.

In the Spring of 1971, pursuant to the above statutes, the Clay County voters approved a tax levy for the county to establish and maintain a sheltered workshop and residence facility. At this time, the county also created the Developmental Disabilities Review Board, or DDRB, as the Clay County Sheltered Facilities Board, to distribute the funds collected through the county tax. Pursuant to Sections 205.968-205.972, the DDRB was given exclusive control over the revenues collected under the tax levy and the statutory authority to spend the funds in accordance with the purposes set out in the statute.

In 1984, Section 205.968 was amended to expand the scope of activities permitted to be funded. As amended, the statute permitted a county to establish a sheltered workshop, residence facility, "or related services, or any combination of any such sheltered workshops, residence facilities, or related services, for the care or employment, or both, of handicapped persons." Sec. 205.968.1 RSMo 1984 (emphasis added). The 1984 amendments further provided:

Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, and irrespective of whether or not a county sheltered workshop or residence facility has been established, the board may contract with any not for profit corporation for such corporation to provide services relating in whole or in part to the services which the board itself may provide to handicapped persons as defined in this law and for such purpose may expend the tax funds or other funds.

Sec. 205.970.3 RSMo 1984 (emphasis added).

On February 7, 1989, the Clay County voters approved an increase in its existing tax to maintain sheltered workshops and residence facilities for handicapped persons. In 1993, the first sentence of Section 205.968 was further amended to state, "The board of directors shall be a legal entity empowered to establish and/or operate a sheltered workshop as defined in section 178.900, RSMo, residence facilities, or related services, for the care or employment, or both, of handicapped persons."

Beginning with the amendment of the statute in 1984, the DDRB expanded its funding to include both sheltered workshops and residence facilities, and programs which it believed fell within the parameters of the statutory term "related services" because they provided services for the care or employment of handicapped persons, although they were not themselves sheltered workshops or residence facilities. Since 1993, the DDRB has distributed tax funds in excess of one million dollars per year. The recipients have included VSI and Concerned Care, Inc. (CCI), a residence facility. The recipients have also included Intervenor Lighthouse Preschool; Clay County Respite; College Education Experience for Adults with Developmental Disabilities (CEADD); Missouri Special Olympics; Missouri Parents Act (MPACT); Metropolitan Organization to Counter Sexual Assault (MOSCA); Developmental Work Activity Association (DWAA); Missouri Family Trust; Jewish Vocational Services; Della Lamb Community Services; United Cerebral Palsy of Greater Kansas City; and Parent Consumer Training Program (Parent/Cons).

On May 24, 1996, VSI brought an action for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against the DDRB, requesting the court to declare public tax funds collected pursuant to Section 205.968-205.968 can be spent, granted or contracted solely for the benefit of sheltered workshops or residential facilities, or for services directly related to the running of sheltered workshops and residential facilities. It also requested the court to declare that, of those receiving funds from the DDRB, only it and CCI meet this definition of a sheltered workshop, residence facility, or related service provider, and to enter an order enjoining all other expenditures of tax funds by the DDRB as unlawful.

Lighthouse Preschool filed a motion to intervene as a matter of right, or in the alternative, for permissive intervention. Neither VSI nor the DDRB filed objections to the motion, and the court granted Lighthouse permission to intervene, without identifying in which capacity it granted Lighthouse's motion.

On June 6, 1998, the trial court entered an order in which it noted that the statute permits the DDRB to spend tax levy funds only for sheltered workshops, residential facilities and "related services" for the care or employment of the...