Did the Missouri Attorney General sign off on the State Auditor's fiscal note summary for James Owen's renewable energy initiative (version 3)?
Plain-English summary
Third in the trio of Owen renewable energy fiscal note summary approvals (versions 1, 2, and 3 covered by Opinions 8-2020, 9-2020, and 10-2020). The version 3 summary contained the same numbers as version 2: approximately $143,500 in annual ongoing state costs and a possible electricity rate increase capped by existing law at 1 percent annually. The AG approved the legal content and form under § 116.175.4, RSMo, without reviewing the substantive accuracy of the figures.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2020. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Background and statutory framework
The Missouri initiative process generates parallel AG opinions for each filed version of a petition. The Owen renewable energy package (versions 1-3) generated this matrix:
| Version | Form review | Fiscal note review | Summary statement review |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (2020-142) | (not in our corpus) | 8-2020 | 11-2020 |
| 2 (2020-143) | 2-2020 | 9-2020 | 12-2020 |
| 3 (2020-144) | 3-2020 | 10-2020 | 13-2020 |
Each row is the same proposal at a slightly different draft. Each column is a different statutory review.
The fiscal note summary review under § 116.175.4 is narrow: legal content and form only. The AG repeats in every approval: "our review under § 116.175.4 does not examine the fairness or sufficiency of the estimated fiscal impact."
What this means for you
If you are studying initiative-process throughput
The synchronized two-week cadence of these opinions (form approvals on Jan. 16; fiscal note approvals on Feb. 6; summary statement approvals on Feb. 18) is typical. Initiative proponents who want a smooth path through the AG's reviews benefit from filing in clusters because the State Auditor's office can process related petitions in parallel.
If you are a state legislator
The cost estimates for citizen initiatives often surface during legislative debate over alternative bills addressing the same subject. The fiscal note summary is the official short-form public-facing dollar figure the State Auditor stands behind, but the underlying methodology in the longer fiscal note is where the real analysis lives.
Common questions
Why does this opinion almost exactly mirror 9-2020?
Because the State Auditor produced a fiscal note summary with the same numbers for version 3 as for version 2. Whatever differences existed between the two petition versions did not change the Auditor's estimate.
Are these AG opinions the place to challenge a wrong estimate?
No. The AG explicitly disclaims any review of accuracy. Challenges go to the courts.
Citations
- § 116.175, RSMo (State Auditor's role)
- § 116.175.4, RSMo (AG review of fiscal note summary)
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/10-2020.pdf?sfvrsn=2
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ERIC SCHMITT
February 6, 2020
OPINION LETTER NO. 10-2020
The Honorable Nicole Galloway
Missouri State Auditor
State Capitol, Room 121
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Auditor Galloway:
This office received your letter of January 27, 2020, submitting a fiscal note and fiscal note summary prepared under § 116.175, RSMo, for an initiative petition submitted by James Owen (2020-144). The fiscal note summary that you submitted is as follows:
State governmental entities estimate additional ongoing costs of approximately $143,500 annually. Additionally, state and local governmental entities anticipate a possible unknown increase in electricity costs from this proposal, which is limited by existing law to be no more than an average retail rate increase of one percent annually.
Under § 116.175.4, RSMo, we approve the legal content and form of the fiscal note summary. Because our review of the fiscal note summary is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the initiative petition or as the expression of any view regarding the objectives of its proponents. Furthermore, our review under § 116.175.4 does not examine the fairness or sufficiency of the estimated fiscal impact.
Very truly yours,
ERIC S. SCHMITT
Attorney General
Supreme Court Building
207 W. High Street
P.O. Box 899
Jefferson City, MO 65102
Phone: (573) 751-3321
Fax: (573) 751-0774
www.ago.mo.gov
OP-2020-0010