Drury responds to appeal

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- The city of Cape Girardeau and its supporters are arguing on emotion, not evidence, in claiming dire consequences should businessman Jim Drury ultimately prevail in the River Campus lawsuit, Drury's attorney says in legal documents submitted to the Missouri Supreme Court on Wednesday.

The court will decide if lower courts were correct in invalidating a tax increase approved by city voters in 1998 to fund the River Campus project on the grounds that the city ordinance placing the issue on the ballot was faulty.

At stake is the fate of the proposed $36 million effort to turn a former Catholic seminary into a visual and performing arts center for Southeast Missouri State University. The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments in the case in January, though a date hasn't yet been set.

'Clear title' issue

A key issue in the dispute is whether the ballot ordinance passed by the Cape Girardeau City Council violated "clear title" requirements of the city charter and the state Constitution. Those provisions require that legislation be limited to one subject, the content of which is clearly reflected in the title.

The city, in a legal brief submitted last month, claims a Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District decision finding fault with the clarity of the election ordinance would expose countless other ordinances in municipalities around the state and even state statutes to legal challenges. The cities of St. Louis and Kansas City and the state attorney general's office have filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting this view.

However, Walter S. Drusch, the attorney for Drury and his MidAmerica Hotels Inc., says in his response brief that legal precedent doesn't back that claim.

"The political rush exhibited by this 'argument' would appear closely akin to the familiar premonition that 'the sky is falling," Drusch wrote. Drusch said the ordinance title calls for an election to increase and extend the city's hotel/motel/restaurant tax. However, other sections of the ordinance, including that the revenue raised would go toward the River Campus project and authorizing a cooperative agreement between the city and university to undertake the project, aren't mentioned in the title.

Often state laws have a provision to clarify if a court voids one section of the statute, the other sections will be considered valid.

mpowers@semissourian.com

(573) 635-4608