Missouri Appeals Court Revives Homeowner's Fight Over Sunflower Garden

Ruling Gives St. Peters Resident the Right to Jury Trial Over Landscaping Citations

St. Peters, Mo. — A Missouri appeals court has ruled that a St. Peters homeowner accused of violating the city's lawn ordinance by growing sunflowers instead of turf grass is entitled to a jury trial, reviving a long-running dispute over how much control local governments can exercise over residential landscaping.

The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed a lower court's decision denying Chris Bank a jury trial. The ruling means the city must now decide whether to pursue its case before a jury or drop the citations.

City Requires Majority of Yard to Be Turf Grass

The dispute centers on a St. Peters ordinance requiring homeowners to devote at least 50% of their yard—and 70% of their front yard—to turf grass. The ordinance specifically excludes sunflowers and certain other plants from counting toward that requirement.

Bank has repeatedly planted sunflowers in his yard, leading the city to cite him each year for violating the ordinance.

According to Bank, the flowers are harmless and well maintained, yet they do not satisfy the city's landscaping rules.

Appeals Court Restores Jury Trial Right

In previous years, Bank responded to the citations by demanding a jury trial. Rather than present the case to a jury, the city dismissed the charges.

This year, however, a trial court ruled that Bank had no right to a jury trial.

Bank appealed, and the Missouri Court of Appeals disagreed.

"We always want people accused of misconduct to have their case heard by a jury," attorney Bevis Schock of the Goldwater Institute's American Freedom Network said. "The Missouri Constitution says that the people are the source of all political power and also guarantees the right to a jury trial. A jury of one's peers deciding a case provides a check against unjust prosecutions."

Case Centers on Property Rights

The appeal does not decide whether Bank violated the ordinance. Instead, it determines that he may have the allegations decided by a jury if the city chooses to continue prosecuting the case.

Bank and his attorneys argue the lawsuit raises broader questions about private property rights.

They contend cities may regulate uses that threaten public health or safety but should not prohibit homeowners from growing harmless plants simply because they do not fit municipal landscaping preferences.

City's Next Move

The appeals court's decision sends the case back to the trial court.

St. Peters must now decide whether to proceed with a jury trial or once again abandon the citations.

Supporters of Bank say the outcome could affect how far local governments may go in regulating residential landscaping, arguing that if municipalities can prohibit homeowners from growing harmless flowers, they may exercise broader control over the use of private property.