references are to RSMo 2000 except as otherwise noted. 3 . The AU’s award and decision had used the phrase “no jurisdiction or basis." The Commission’s modification thus deleted the ALJ’s reference to "jurisdiction.” 4 . Mrs. Carter did not raise her constitutional challenge with the Commission. However, we recognize that “[d]eciding constitutional issues is beyond the authority of an administrative agency, and the courts must review agency actions that present constitutional questions.” Westwood P’ship v. Gogarty, 103 S.W.3d 152, 162 (Mo. App. E.D. 2003). Thus, by asserting her constitutional challenge in this appeal, Mrs. Carter has preserved the claim by raising it at the first available opportunity. See Mayes v. Saint Luke’s Hosp. of Kan. City, 430 S.W.3d 260, 266 (Mo. banc 2014) (<HOLDING>). 5 . In Schoemehl v. Treasurer of Missouri,
holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal holding constitutional challenge to void statute may be raised for first time on appeal holding that claims including constitutional claims must be asserted in trial court to be raised on appeal holding that a constitutional question must be raised at the first available opportunity holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be raised for the first time before this court