WORKSHOP CONCERNS: TIME TO TALK TO EACH OTHER

Few individuals in Missouri have a better perspective of the state's efforts to improve the lives of mentally retarded residents and others who have mental impairments than Al Spradling, a well-known lawyer and former state senator who is also the father of Cape Girardeau's mayor, Al Spradling III.

Back in 1969, Spradling was serving in the Legislature. He joined the effort to pass legislation that created tax-funded sheltered workshops for the mentally disabled. Up to that time, most residents of this state -- and most others as well -- were either under the care of parents or relatives or institutionalized in one of several large facilities spread around the state.

More than 30 years later, almost anyone who works with the mentally disabled or has a family member who is mentally retarded or disabled knows about Senate Bill 40. That was the legislation Spradling worked on successfully to pass. SB 40 allowed counties to adopt tax levies with revenue going to set up workshops and fund their operations. SB 40 also provided for the appointment, by county commissions, of special boards to allocate the tax revenue.

In the beginning, many counties, mostly in rural areas, only had one sheltered workshop to receive the SB 40 funds. Even today, there are a good number of counties with just one workshop. Sheltered workshops provide a work environment for the mentally disabled where they can be taught skills suitable to their levels of competence. The workshops then contract services to area companies.

In quite a few counties around the state, the same individuals have been serving on SB 40 boards for many years. These boards require individuals with a special interest in the welfare of the mentally disabled and a special understanding of the role sheltered workshops.

It isn't until a controversy arises -- SB 40 boards and the workshops they fund have, for the most part, been smooth-running operations -- that board members discover they technically aren't properly appointed to the positions to which they've devoted so much time and effort. In one nearby county, an SB 40 board's decision to allocate some funding to a new workshop instead of giving all the revenue to a 30-year-old workshop, as usual, created enough tension to bring the issue of board appointments into question.

In these cases, board members who have worked on behalf of sheltered workshop without so much as a question or concern suddenly find themselves removed and under a cloud of suspicion. This is unfortunate.

The problem about board membership arises from the fact that SB 40 established terms for those appointed to serve. Typically, the same people have continued to serve even after their terms expired, and county commissions have either overlooked requirements to make appointments or have forgotten the requirement even existed.

In Perry County, the county commission recently wrote letters to SB 40 board members that they were no longer members because they had not sought reappointment after their three-year terms expired. Of course, the county commission hadn't addressed that issue either at the appropriate time.

It's perplexing that the SB 40 board and the Perry County Commission haven't arranged a meeting to talk about workshop concerns or the board appointments. These folks are neighbors, attend church together and are involved in the same communities. Surely a visit would to a long way to easing some of the tension.

Meanwhile, there is a move afoot in the Legislature to allow some of the SB 40 funding to be diverted from workshops to other programs for the mentally disabled. Al Spradling doesn't think that's a good idea. Neither do we. If other programs need funding, the state needs to come up with the revenue. But sheltered workshops have proven their worth and their need for SB 40 funding.