Ezel / AG Opinions / MO
MO Opinion No. 179-2019 2019-08-23

Did the Missouri AG approve the fiscal note for Winston Apple's 2019 Article III initiative petition on protecting voter-approved statutes from legislative repeal (file 2020-103)?

Short answer: Yes, as to legal content and form. AG Schmitt approved the State Auditor's fiscal note summary for Apple's Article III petition 2020-103 (a proposal addressing protecting voter-approved statutes from legislative repeal). The AG's review under § 116.175.4 RSMo is procedural and does not vouch for the dollar figures.
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 AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent.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

Winston Apple filed three parallel initiative petitions in August 2019 (numbers 2020-101, 2020-102, 2020-103) addressing different election-system reforms: ranked-choice voting (2020-101), proportional representation for state legislators (2020-102), and protection of voter-approved statutes from legislative repeal (2020-103). Petition 2020-103 addresses protecting voter-approved statutes from legislative repeal.

Once the State Auditor prepared a fiscal note for each version, the AG reviewed the legal content and form of the auditor's summary under § 116.175.4 RSMo. AG Schmitt's letter here approves the fiscal note summary for 2020-103:

State and local governmental entities estimate no costs or savings from this proposal.

The AG's review is narrow: a legal-form check on the fiscal note summary. It does not endorse the petition, vouch for the dollar figures, or examine "the fairness or sufficiency of the estimated fiscal impact."

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 this petition propose?
A: The summary-statement opinion (180-2019, 181-2019, or 182-2019, depending on which Apple petition) recites the substance. 2020-103 proposes protecting voter-approved statutes from legislative repeal. The companion summary-statement opinion is the place to read the ballot question text in full.

Q: Where do the dollar figures come from?
A: The State Auditor compiles fiscal notes from inputs by affected agencies and stakeholders. The AG reviews legal form, not the inputs.

Q: Did this petition reach the ballot?
A: The opinion does not say. None of the Apple August 2019 petitions appears to have advanced to the 2020 ballot.

Background and statutory framework

Chapter 116 RSMo lays out the initiative-petition pipeline. This opinion sits at step 3:

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

Citations and references

Statutes: § 116.175 RSMo, § 116.175.4 RSMo (the operative provisions); § 116.332 RSMo; § 116.334 RSMo; § 116.190 RSMo (judicial challenges).

Sister Apple fiscal-note opinions in this cluster: 177-2019 (2020-101, ranked-choice voting), 178-2019 (2020-102, proportional representation for state legislators).

Summary-statement opinions for the same Apple cluster: 180-2019 (2020-101 ranked-choice), 181-2019 (2020-102 proportional), 182-2019 (2020-103 initiative protection).

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

August 23, 2019

OPINION LETTER NO. 179-2019

The Honorable Nicole Galloway
Missouri State Auditor
State Capitol, Room 121
Jefferson City, MO 65101

Dear Auditor Galloway:

This office received your letter of August 14, 2019, submitting a fiscal note and fiscal note summary prepared under § 116.175, RSMo, for an initiative petition submitted by Winston Apple (20-103). The fiscal note summary that you submitted is as follows:

State and local governmental entities estimate no costs or savings from this proposal.

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-2019-0207