Missouri Citizens for Property Rights seeks to restore constitutional protection against private use eminent domain.

About CPR

Amendment Language and summary

Contact

Article I petition sample

Article VI petition sample

Petitioner's Guide (Flash Video)

Petitioner's Guide (PDF)

Volunteer

Businesses: Click here

Missouri Citizens for
Property Rights

33867 Highway E
Dixon, MO 65459
(573) 759-3585

info@mo-cpr.org

DONATE
online

Donations are NOT tax deductible.

Join Email Group





Find a place near you to sign the petition. Type your Zip Code below.
ZIP Code*
Search within Miles
Number record to display
Powered by ZIPCodeWorld™ Store Locator Live

 

 

ESSAYS Please Read These!
Read about the historical perspective of American Property rights. (click here)

How should we deal with “blight”? (click here)

DONATE
online
Donate

Donations are NOT tax deductible
Donate online or mail your check today to:
MO-CPR c/o Richard Westbrook, CPA
205 W Main St
Richmond, MO 64085

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure." - Thomas Jefferson

Endorsements

The Heritage Foundation
“I endorse the worthy and valuable principals of the Missouri Citizens for Property Rights' proposed constitutional amendment to better protect property rights, and I support the enactment of any proposal like it that prevents abuses of traditional eminent domain powers and provides safeguards against the confiscation of private property for other private uses.” -
Todd Gaziano, Director, Center for Legal and Judicial Studies The Heritage Foundation

Property Rights Alliance
Property Rights Alliance (PRA) commends Missouri Citizens for Property Rights for their efforts to protect private property in the state of Missouri. With the threat of eminent domain abuse looming at the state and national level, it is imperative that organizations and activists work together to protect property owners and small business enterprises from government’s grasp. PRA applauds the work of Missouri Citizens for Property Rights and supports its continued efforts to protect the Missourian property owner.” -Scott A. LaGanga, Executive Director of Property Rights Alliance (PRA)

Reason Foundation
I have looked at a lot of legislation and efforts around the country to limit eminent domain abuse. Most of them are laudable. But the effort of Missouri Citizens for Property Rights stands out from the crowd. Not only are they meticulous about changing the law to confine eminent domain to true public uses, they put real effort into discussing alternatives to eminent domain for cities dealing with blight and economic development challenges. I am impressed by how they combine a hard line on property rights with an effort to address the public policy consequences.“ Dr. Adrian Moore, Vice President, Reason Foundation (Blog)

American Policy Center
The threat to private property is real. Since the Supreme Court's ruling in Kelo VS New London, no home is secure. As the battle rages across the country, two approaches have emerged: those who try to appease, consequently doing little for property owner's protection -- and those who are serious about protecting private property from the ravages of Eminent Domain. The effort by the Missouri Citizens for Property Rights takes the no-compromising stand and gets it right.” Tom DeWeese, President, American Policy Center

The Rutherford Institute
"I commend the Missouri Citizens for Property Rights in their work to protect the rights of private property owners. This is essential legislation and should be used in other states to ensure that what happened in Connecticut by way of the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo decision does not happen again."--
John W. Whitehead, President, The Rutherford Institute

The Claremont Institute
Our government officials seem to have lost their way. The primary purpose of government is supposed to be the protection of the inalienable rights of its citizens, including the right to own property, yet all too frequently planning department bureaucrats, with the sanction of both elected officials and courts, view their role as implementing some communitarian ideal, trampling individual rights for what these bureaucrats believe to be the common good. I therefore applaud the efforts of Missouri Citizens for Property Rights
to reinvigorate the protection of private property that the Missouri Constitution has historically afforded, amending the constitution to forestall erroneous interpretations of the long-standing provisions. The restoration of property rights as one of our fundamental rights, deserving protection against tyrannical majorities for all but the most compelling of public use reasons, is an important battle, and I wish you much success.” - John Eastman, Director, The Claremont Institute Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence and Professor of Law, Chapman University School of Law

Missouri Property Rights -

Defenders of Property Rights-
“Defenders of Property Rights applauds the Missouri Citizens for Property Rights for their effort to restore the traditional, constitutional principles of property rights in the state of Missouri. Considering the recent tragic results of eminent domain abuse, it is essential that organization’s collaborative efforts work towards returning eminent domain to its appropriate use and prevent private property owners from more unjust takings. Defenders of Property Rights commends the determination of Missouri Citizens for Property Rights in defending property rights and will continue to support their efforts to minimize the victimization of Missourian private property owners as a result of eminent domain abuse.” –
Nancie Marzulla, President, Defenders of Property Rights

MEDAC (Missouri Eminent Domain Abuse – Coalition)

Concerned Citizens for Family Farms and Heritage, Doug McDaniel President-

The O’Fallon Old Town Preservation Committee
The O’Fallon Old Town Preservation Committee is proud to endorse the Missouri Constitutional Amendments proposed by the Missouri Citizens for Property Rights.”

New Life Evangelistic Center

Concerned Women for America

 

MISSOURI SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST PROPERTY RIGHTS IN MOST IMPORTANT PROPERTY RIGHTS CASE IN MISSOURI SUPREME COURT HISTORY - March 18, 2008

Link to the court decision
Link to Institute for Justice press release

Links to Briefs and other court documents .
Historical Documents
News Reports

Missouri Supreme Court Heard Landmark Eminent Domain Case (Thursday, January 17, 2008

JEFFERSON CITY — An analysis of the arguments if forthcoming, but to listen to the Oral Arguments now, Click Here.

Media Contact:
Ron Calzone, chairman
Missouri Citizens for Property Rights
ron@mo-cpr.org
(573) 759-3585

Old News: MO-CPR helps Arnold, MO businesses man score a huge victory in court. Property owners in non-chartered cities across the state benefit. <more>

Decisions and Briefs in the case:

BACKGROUND
 

Backgrounder from the Pacific Legal Foundation (Read this first)

  Jefferson County Circuit Court Judgment
    Homer and Julie Tourkakis were represented by attorneys Michael A. Wolff and Tracy Gilroy in the circuit court of Jefferson County where they won a decision on May 22, 2007.

BRIEFS FROM BOTH PARTIES
  City of Arnold's Appeals Brief
  Dr. Tourkakis' Respondent's Brief
  City of Arnold's Reply Brief

AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS - In Support of Dr. Tourkakis
  The Institute for Justice Brief
  The Show-Me Institute Brief
  The NFIB Foundation Brief
  Ron Calzone, pro se Brief

AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF - In support of the Developer and the City of Arnold
  The Missouri Municipal League and various Cities

UNRELATED BUT SIGNIFICANT CASES
(Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District finds no relief for property owner in the 2006 Eminent Domain Bill)
  Alright Properties, Inc., Appellant, v. Tax Increment Financing Commission of Kansas City

Historical Documents Relevant to the Case:

1874 Constitutional Convention - Debate transcripts and Journal entries
  (Bookmarks make it easy to find the pertinent clauses.)
  Debates - Volume 1
  Debates - Volume 4
  Debates - Preface
  Journal - Volume 1
  Journal - Volume 2

 

1943-1944 Constitutional Convention - Debate transcripts and Journal entries
  Key background about the convention
  Proposal 336
  Report 1 - File 12
  Journal - Volume 1
  Journal - Volume 2


#