Ezel / AG Opinions / MO
MO Opinion No. 2-2020 2020-01-16

What did the Missouri Attorney General decide about James Owen's renewable energy initiative petition (version 2) when reviewed for form in January 2020?

Short answer: Attorney General Eric Schmitt approved the petition's form under § 116.332, RSMo. The approval did not address whether the underlying renewable energy proposal was a good idea or whether the petition would survive a substantive challenge. The Secretary of State retained final authority to approve or reject the petition's form.
Currency note: this opinion is from 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.
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 AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent.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

In January 2020, James Owen filed multiple versions of a citizen-initiated proposal to amend Chapter 393 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, the chapter governing investor-owned electric utilities. Owen's renewable energy package would have raised Missouri's renewable portfolio standard. Under Missouri's initiative process, the Secretary of State must send each filed petition to the Attorney General for a quick legal review of "form" before the petition is approved for circulation.

Opinion 2-2020 is the AG's approval of version 2 of Owen's petition (assigned the Secretary's tracking number 2020-143). The AG reviewed only the petition's "sufficiency as to form" under § 116.332, RSMo. That is a narrow technical review, asking whether the petition complies with formatting and drafting rules in §§ 116.040 and 116.050, RSMo (e.g., proper headings, bracketed deletions, underlined additions). The AG approved the form. The Secretary of State retained statutory authority to make a final decision.

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

Missouri's initiative process is governed by Chapter 116 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri. Citizens who want to put a constitutional amendment or statutory change before the voters submit a petition. Before circulation, the petition has to clear a series of procedural reviews:

  1. Form review by the AG (§ 116.332, RSMo). The Secretary of State sends the petition to the AG within a few days of filing. The AG checks whether the petition meets the form rules in §§ 116.040 (cover sheet and signature page format) and 116.050 (text-marking rules: deletions in brackets, additions underlined). The AG either approves or rejects. § 116.332.4 gives the Secretary the final say.

  2. Summary statement preparation by the Secretary of State. Once the form passes, the Secretary writes the ballot summary that voters will see.

  3. AG review of the summary statement (§ 116.334, RSMo). Approves or rejects for legal content and form.

  4. Fiscal note preparation by the State Auditor and AG review (§ 116.175, RSMo). A fiscal impact statement and short summary go through a parallel approval cycle.

  5. Circulation. Once everything is approved, proponents can collect signatures.

The AG's reviews are deliberately narrow. None of them addresses whether the underlying proposal is a good idea, whether the substance is constitutional, or whether the petition would withstand challenge in court. The AG's approval is also expressly not an endorsement of the proponents.

For Opinion 2-2020 in particular, the AG's letter contains essentially no substantive analysis beyond the standard recital. The petition's form passed muster. That is all the opinion concludes.

The James Owen initiative bundle (versions 1, 2, and 3, tracked as 2020-142, 2020-143, and 2020-144) generated companion opinions across the AG's docket: form approvals (2-2020, 3-2020), fiscal note approvals (8-2020, 9-2020, 10-2020), and summary statement approvals (11-2020, 12-2020, 13-2020).

Common questions

Did the AG endorse the renewable energy proposal?

No. AG review under § 116.332 is statutorily mandated. The opinion explicitly notes that "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."

Did Owen's initiative ever make it to the ballot?

This opinion does not answer that. The form approval is one of several procedural hurdles. Whether enough signatures were collected, whether the petition survived court challenges, and whether voters approved or rejected it are separate questions that depend on Secretary of State and Missouri Ethics Commission records.

What is "sufficiency as to form"?

Compliance with §§ 116.040 and 116.050, RSMo. Cover sheet format, the requirement that deletions appear in brackets and additions appear underlined, and similar drafting standards. It is not a substantive review.

What is the Secretary of State's role after AG approval?

§ 116.332.4 lets the Secretary "make a final decision as to the approval or rejection of the form of the petition." The AG's approval does not bind the Secretary. In practice, the Secretary usually follows the AG's recommendation.

Citations

  • § 116.332, RSMo (sufficiency-as-to-form review of initiative petitions)
  • § 116.040, RSMo (petition format)
  • § 116.050, RSMo (text-marking rules for petitions)

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
January 16, 2020

OPINION LETTER NO. 2-2020

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 January 6, 2020, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition to amend Chapter 393, Revised Statutes of Missouri, submitted by James Owen, version 2 (2020-143).

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-2020-0002