Did Missouri approve ballot wording guaranteeing 365 days for signatures and requiring 90% to change initiatives?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2025. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Missouri law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey approved the legal content and form of the proposed summary statement for Michael Lester's initiative petition 2026-067. The statement described guaranteeing at least 365 days to gather signatures for the next possible election and allowing initiative proponents to prepare an official ballot summary while permitting any voter to challenge misleading titles.
The statement also described court rewriting of misleading titles under exclusive procedures in Cole County and the Missouri Supreme Court, a 90% approval threshold for legislative changes to voter-approved initiatives, a bar on laws weakening initiative or referendum powers, and general-election placement for most measures unless 90% of legislators and the governor approved otherwise. The opinion did not endorse the petition.
What this means for you
Initiative petition proponents and voters
The reviewed statement described at least 365 signature-gathering days, proponent preparation of the official ballot summary, and voter challenges to misleading titles.
State legislators and election officials
The statement described a 90% threshold for legislative changes and for departure from general-election placement with the governor.
Courts and election lawyers
The statement described exclusive procedures in Cole County and the Missouri Supreme Court for rewriting misleading titles.
Common questions
Q: How long would proponents have to gather signatures?
A: At least 365 days for the next possible election.
Q: Who would prepare the official ballot summary?
A: The statement described allowing initiative proponents to prepare it.
Q: Could voters challenge a misleading title?
A: Yes. The statement described challenges by any voter and court rewriting of misleading titles.
Q: What threshold did it identify for legislative changes?
A: Ninety percent approval.
Background and statutory framework
The Missouri Secretary of State requested review on July 2, 2025. The attorney general reviewed the proposed summary statement under § 116.334, RSMo and approved it on July 11, 2025.
The proposal was identified as Michael Lester's petition 2026-067. The opinion reproduced the statement's six provisions concerning signature time, ballot summaries, court procedures, legislative changes, initiative powers, and election timing.
Citations and references
Statute: § 116.334, RSMo.
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/128-2025.pdf
Original opinion text
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
ANDREW BAILEY
July 11, 2025
OPINION LETTER NO. 128-2025
The Honorable Denny Hoskins
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Secretary Hoskins:
This opinion letter responds to your request dated July 2, 2025 for our review under § 116.334, RSMo of a proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Michael Lester, 2026-067. The proposed summary statement is as follows:
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:
• Guarantee citizens at least 365 days to gather signatures for the next possible election;
• Allow initiative proponents to prepare an official ballot summary, and allow any voter to challenge misleading titles;
• Require courts to rewrite misleading titles and set exclusive procedures in Cole County and the Missouri Supreme Court;
• Prohibit the legislature from changing voter-approved initiatives without 90% approval;
• Bar laws from weakening initiative or referendum powers; and
• Require most measures to appear on general election ballots unless 90% of legislators and the governor approve otherwise?
Pursuant to § 116.334, RSMo, we approve the legal content and form of the proposed statement. Because our review of the statement is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the petition, nor as the expression of any view regarding the objectives of its proponents.
Very truly yours,
ANDREW BAILEY
Attorney General
OP-2025-140
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
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2025 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Missouri statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.