Ezel / AG Opinions / MO
MO Opinion No. 120-2019 2019-07-11

Did the Missouri AG approve the form of Winston Apple's 2019 Chapter 130/143 (public campaign finance) initiative petition (file 2020-099)?

Short answer: Yes, as to form. AG Schmitt approved Apple's petition 2020-099 (amending Chapters 130 and 143 RSMo) as sufficient as to form under § 116.332 RSMo. The companion fiscal note (159-2019) frames this as the public campaign finance proposal, redirecting up to $16.1 million annually to a Missouri Elections Trust Fund. Form approval is procedural.
Currency note: this opinion is from 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.
Disclaimer: This is an official Missouri Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Consult a licensed Missouri attorney for advice on your specific situation.

Plain-English summary

Petition 2020-099 was a Winston Apple proposal to amend Chapters 130 and 143 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri. Chapter 130 is Missouri's campaign-finance disclosure code; Chapter 143 is the income-tax code. The companion fiscal note (opinion 159-2019) confirms this is the public campaign finance proposal: a measure that would have redirected income-tax revenue (up to $16.1 million per year) into a Missouri Elections Trust Fund used to finance qualifying candidates' campaigns.

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.

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: Why touch both Chapter 130 and Chapter 143?
A: A public-financing scheme needs both halves: Chapter 130 is the campaign-finance code (where the fund and its disbursement rules go), and Chapter 143 is the income-tax code (where the funding source comes from). Splitting the proposal across two chapters is a routine technique for any initiative that creates a new program funded by an existing tax stream.

Q: What does the form review actually check?
A: A procedural check under Chapter 116 RSMo: bracketing of deleted text and underlining of new text under § 116.050, single-subject limitation, signature-block format, and the like. The AG does not opine on whether the proposal is good policy or constitutional.

Q: Statutory or constitutional?
A: Statutory. Chapter amendments under Title VIII (143) and Title IX (130) of the RSMo are statutory in nature. A future legislature could amend or repeal it with a simple majority. A constitutional amendment would have required Article III work instead.

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:

  1. Proponent files the petition with the Secretary of State.
  2. AG reviews sufficiency as to form under § 116.332 RSMo (this opinion).
  3. State Auditor prepares a fiscal note; AG reviews under § 116.175.4 RSMo.
  4. Secretary of State drafts a summary statement; AG reviews under § 116.334 RSMo.
  5. Petition certified for circulation.

Citations and references

Statutes: § 116.332 RSMo (the operative provision); § 116.050 RSMo; § 116.175 RSMo; § 116.334 RSMo. Chapters 130 and 143 RSMo (the chapters this petition would have amended).

Companion fiscal-note opinion (2020-099): 159-2019.
Companion summary-statement opinion (2020-099): 167-2019.

Source

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 11, 2019
OPINION LETTER NO. 120-2019

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 July 1, 2019, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition to amend Chapters 130 and 143, Revised Statutes of Missouri, submitted by Winston Apple (2020-099).

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-2019-0146