Smart, Higdon endorse Galloway rezoning plan in referendum, support city vetting process
Citing the potential for a dangerous precedent, the leaders of Springfield's largest university and community college are publicly weighing in on the proposed rezoning of 4.2 acres near Sequiota Park, even though neither of them live in the area.
Clif Smart, president of Missouri State University, and Hal Higdon, chancellor of Ozarks Technical Community College, said they will vote "yes" on Question 1, a local referendum, on Nov. 8.
If a majority of voters approve, the land on South Lone Pine Avenue will be rezoned from single-family residential, allowing the developer to move forward with a multi-story apartment complex across from the park. The controversial project has faced years of opposition from the Galloway Village Neighborhood Association.
The developer secured approval from the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council, but was put on hold when a contingent of neighbors gathered several thousand signatures to force a referendum election on the issue.
The referendum process, outlined in the City Charter, allows citizens to take a recently-enacted decision by City Council to a vote of the people.
Aided by city staff, the developer sued to block the referendum vote, saying the process was in conflict with state zoning law. A Greene County judge agreed, but was overruled by the Missouri Court of Appeals in June in a unanimous judgment that described the city's rationale for avoiding a public vote as "cancerous" and implied it could be seen as an attempted "end-run around the referendum requirements in its own charter."
By order of the court, the issue was placed on the ballot, where it will be decided by voters across the city, after years of back-and-forth.
Smart, Higdon say vote is about economic development
Higdon and Smart said the ramifications of the vote are significant.
"This is a very, very dangerous precedent we're setting in our city. If you're looking at economic development, if this thing is successful, it's going to set the city back decades," Higdon said.
He put it a different way: "If this fails, Springfield is closed for business."
Smart said there is a simple question at the heart of this debate: "Are we going to be a pro-growth community or not?"
He said pushing the decision on a narrow zoning issue to a vote of the entire city may have a chilling effect on future development, which may impact the university. He referenced the expansion of IDEA Commons, daylighting of Jordan Creek, the Grant Avenue Corridor, and other work downtown and near Missouri State.
"If in fact the community, as a whole, is going to have to vote to approve development projects, the result of that is we're not going to have any or we're going to have very few," Smart said.
He said the city's existing process for vetting projects "makes sure conservation is taken into account, that neighbors are taken into account, as well as the economic development piece."
Smart said voters elect the mayor and City Council, which appoints the Planning & Zoning Commission. "We have to trust them to analyze projects and decide what is appropriate and work with developments in neighborhoods to drive consensus and then approve a project and move forward."
More:Anonymous texts seek to gather information about voter thoughts ahead of Galloway rezoning
A Facebook page urging a "yes" vote on the local referendum announced its first public endorsements Friday: Higdon and Smart. They were asked to speak out by the developer, Mitchell Jenkins.
On Monday, two more names — Christina Ford and Scott Bailes — were added.
In interviews Monday with the News-Leader, Smart and Higdon said they were motivated to get involved because the bigger issue — not this particular development — although both said they support the plan.
"Is it a good development? Yes. Is it an appropriate use of space? Yes," Higdon said.
The Springfield Area Chamber of Commerce has signaled its support for the project. Higdon, on the chamber board, met the developer and followed the issue closely.
"This is a great young couple who are Springfield natives who are putting their life savings in it and I just feel like it is a good development," Higdon said. "If we're going to have rules to work in Springfield, we have got to abide by those rules and not let a small group of people hold the city hostage on important issues like economic development."
Smart called it a "solid project that I would have voted for" but acknowledged if rezoning was the only issue, he would not have weighed in.
"What we are all really voting on here is do we want Springfield to continue to grow and thrive and be a place that people move to and have adequate housing and great facilities," he said. "That is what is on the ballot."
Smart said the city vetting process worked and, as a result, the neighborhood had "significant input" in reshaping the project.
"They're maintaining most of the trees. They're maintaining four of the historic buildings," Smart said. "Everything that should have happened, happened here. The neighborhood had real input and adjustments were made so that we have a project that fits the neighborhood."
Smart said developers who want to build in the city have to trust that if they follow the rules, and they secure approval at each level, the projects will move forward.
"The process gets tremendously bogged down if there are public votes," Smart said. "The result is that developers will develop projects somewhere else, whether that's Republic or Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania."
He added: "We need to be one of those cities that wants great projects."
In September, after the chamber endorsement, the Galloway Village Neighborhood Association said: "The remedy of the referendum should be reserved for only the most egregious cases of government failure to represent the will of its citizens, which unfortunately has occurred in this case."
The association said the referendum process is not an easy process "but citizens felt so strongly about this dense proposal and Sequiota Park that we were able to gather 2800+ signatures in 18 days. The character of our unique corner of Springfield should not be sacrificed through attempts to silence the lawful rights of Springfield citizens granted under our City’s Charter."
Both leaders say endorsement is appropriate
As the longest-tenured higher education officials in this part of Missouri, Smart and Higdon are well known. They also serve on numerous boards in the community.
Asked if it was appropriate for them to weigh in on the rezoning issue, both said yes.
"It is no less appropriate than do I vote in the next presidential election? Do I give to candidates who I agree with? Do I express my opinion on my personal Facebook page?" Higdon said. "When you become a public official, unless you are an elected official, I don't think you give up your individual rights."
Smart, as the MSU president, said he looks at ballot issues through the lens of how it impacts the university. He said in the past dozen years, he has only publicly endorsed one other "issue" on the ballot: The city ordinance that banned discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
In the past, Smart has also endorsed candidates and made public his stance on proposed tax issues.
Smart said he supports "meaningful growth," good housing and "projects that make this a good place to live" and that is also important to the long-term success of Missouri State.
"In the 12 years I've been doing this, my board that I report to, has specifically said 'Clif we want you do be more than the leader of the university, we want you to be a community leader.' So that is the expectation," Smart said.
"When there are things that ... are happening in our city that impact the university, they expect me to be involved and representing the university on those issues."
Claudette Riley is the education reporter for the News-Leader. Email tips and story ideas to criley@news-leader.com.
This article originally appeared on Springfield News-Leader: Smart, Higdon publicly endorse plan to rezone land in Galloway area
