SB 40 BOARDS NEED TO HAVE LOCAL AUTHORITY

When legislation was passed in the late 1960s to set up county boards across Missouri to administer sheltered workshops and levy taxes to support those workshops, a giant step forward was taken on behalf of mentally and physically disabled workers.

Thanks to the workshops, thousands of otherwise unemployable workers have had productive and fulfilling jobs.

After all these years, the county boards are still called "Senate Bill 40 boards." That was the name of the original legislation.

In addition to providing for administration and tax revenue for workshops, SB 40 also authorized using some of the tax revenue for residential care facilities and "related services."

The exact definition of "related services" wasn't spelled out. In some cases, county boards have seen fit to spend some SB 40 tax revenue on such things as respite care, Special Olympics and day care for disabled children.

But in some counties there have been fierce disagreements over spending the tax revenue on anything other than workshops and residential care.

As sheltered workshops have succeeded around the state, they also have become a powerful special-interest group.

And many sheltered workshop officials oppose a new bill that would end any confusion by specifically permitting the use of SB 40 tax revenue to meet the needs of disabled Missourians beyond workshops and residential care.

The issue is made murkier by a 1999 court ruling. The decision by the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District said using the tax revenue for anything other than workshops and residential care is inappropriate. "Related services," the court said, must involve workshops or residential care.

But the Western District covers only a third of the state, so some SB 40 boards in other parts of the state have continued to fund other services for the disabled.

The bill sponsored by state Sen. Sidney Johnson of St. Joseph, Mo., would clear up any ambiguity about using SB 40 tax revenue for a variety of services for the disabled.

But the bill faces strong opposition from other senators who have been lobbied hard by sheltered workshop officials to restrict the funding much in the same way as interpreted by the appellate court.

In counties with SB 40 boards, decisions are made by local folks who should know best what the needs are in that county. In some counties, it might be best to use all of the funding for workshops and residential care.

But other counties might have other needs that could be funded without imperiling sheltered workshops. In those cases, those boards should have that leeway.

Let local boards decide what's best for their counties, not legislators in Jefferson City.