Southeast brief urges court to side with city

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Southeast Missouri State University has weighed into the legal battle between the city of Cape Girardeau and businessman Jim Drury over the university's proposed River Campus.

The Missouri Supreme Court has agreed to decide if lower courts were correct in tossing out a voter-approved tax increase to help fund the project because the city ordinance that put the proposal on the ballot was faulty. The court is expected to hear oral arguments in the matter in January.

Southeast is not a party in the lawsuit, initiated by Drury and his MidAmerica Hotels Inc., but has a substantial stake in the court's decision.

Without the $9 million the tax would provide, the future of the $36 million effort to transform the former St. Vincent's Seminary into a school for visual and performing arts would be further cast in doubt.

The state has set aside $16.55 million for the project, but the money is dependent on the city coming through with its share. The university is privately raising another $10 million.

In a friend-of-the-court brief prepared by attorney J. Brian Baehr on behalf of the university, Southeast contends that the lower courts had no jurisdiction to hear Drury's challenge. Baehr argues, as have other supporters of the city in court documents, that Drury's suit attempts to overturn the results of an election.

State law requires such challenges to be filed within 30 days of an election. In this case, the election was held in November 1998. Drury filed his suit in April 1999.

Sam Drusch, Drury's attorney, has said his client isn't challenging the validity of the election results but the ordinance which allowed the election to be held.

As of Friday, Drusch hadn't yet filed a brief in advance of oral arguments.

In the city's brief, attorney James E. Mello argues that upholding the lower court decision could have wide-reaching impact on other cities' ordinances and state statutes. The lower courts held that the ordinance violated "clear title" provisions of the city charter and the Missouri Constitution. Such provisions require that the content of a law be clearly expressed in the measure's title to guard against deceptive legislation.

If the court declared the ordinance invalid, "the floodgates would open to similar challenges to a host of other enactments, with possible ramifications for millions of Missourians," Mello said in his brief.

That view is supported by attorneys for the cities of St. Louis and Kansas City, both of which have "clear title" provisions in their city charters nearly identical to Cape Girardeau's. All recently filed followup legal arguments supporting the merits of Cape Girardeau's position.

mpowers@semissourian.com

(573) 635-4608