Did the Missouri AG approve the form of Winston Apple's 2019 Article III §39 (local minimum wage) initiative petition (file 2020-093)?
Plain-English summary
Petition 2020-093 was a Winston Apple proposal to amend Article III, Section 39 of the Missouri Constitution. The companion fiscal note review (opinion 139-2019) treats this as a "local minimum wage" authority petition, that is, a measure that would have allowed cities and counties to set local minimum-wage floors above the state baseline.
Under § 116.332 RSMo the AG reviews initiative petitions for "sufficiency as to form." The check is procedural. AG Schmitt approved the form of this petition. Final form approval rests with the Secretary of State, who can still reject the petition.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2019. 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.
Common questions
Q: What does "sufficiency as to form" mean?
A: A procedural look at whether the petition document satisfies the drafting rules in Chapter 116 RSMo, that is, brackets around deleted text, underlining for new text, single-subject limitation, and the like. The AG does not opine on whether the proposal is good policy or whether it is constitutional.
Q: Why is local-minimum-wage authority a constitutional question in Missouri?
A: Article III, Section 39 enumerates limitations on the General Assembly's powers. A constitutional amendment is one route to override Missouri's 2017 statutory preemption (Senate Bill 19, 2017) that barred cities like St. Louis and Kansas City from setting local minimum-wage floors above the state level.
Q: Why does AG approval not "preclude" the Secretary of State from rejecting?
A: § 116.332 gives the Secretary of State the final call. The AG opinion is advisory; the Secretary can take a different view on form.
Q: Did this petition reach the ballot?
A: The opinion does not say. None of Apple's 2019 petitions appears to have reached the 2020 statewide ballot.
Background and statutory framework
Chapter 116 RSMo lays out the initiative-petition pipeline. This opinion sits at step 2:
- Proponent files the petition with the Secretary of State.
- AG reviews sufficiency as to form under § 116.332 RSMo (this opinion).
- State Auditor prepares a fiscal note; AG reviews under § 116.175.4 RSMo.
- Secretary of State drafts a summary statement; AG reviews under § 116.334 RSMo.
- Petition certified for circulation.
Citations and references
Statutes: § 116.332 RSMo (the operative provision); § 116.050 RSMo (drafting form); § 116.175 RSMo; § 116.334 RSMo. Mo. Const. art. III, § 39.
Companion fiscal-note opinion (2020-093): 139-2019.
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/117-2019.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
July 3, 2019
OPINION LETTER NO. 117-2019
The Honorable John R. Ashcroft
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Secretary Ashcroft:
This opinion letter responds to your request dated June 27, 2019, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition to amend Article III, Section 39 of the Missouri Constitution submitted by Winston Apple (2020-093).
We approve the petition as to form, but § 116.332 gives the Secretary of State final authority to approve or reject the petition. Therefore, our approval of the form of the petition does not preclude you from rejecting the petition.
Because our review of the petition is simply for the purpose of determining sufficiency as to form, the fact that we do not reject the petition is not to be construed as a determination that the petition is sufficient as to substance. Likewise, because our review is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the petition or of the objectives of its proponents, or the expression of any view respecting the adequacy or inadequacy of the petition generally.
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-2019-0142