Did the Missouri AG approve the form of DeeAnn Aull's 2019 Article IX education-funding initiative petition (version 1, file 2020-121)?
Plain-English summary
DeeAnn Aull filed several drafts of an initiative petition in fall 2019 to amend Article IX of the Missouri Constitution, the public-education article. The petitions would have authorized the General Assembly to enact school-funding taxes without voter approval, required adequate and equitable funding above 25% of state revenue, and barred state and local financial support for private schools. Petition 2020-121 is version 1.
Under § 116.332 RSMo, the Secretary of State sends each filed petition to the AG for a "sufficiency as to form" review. AG Schmitt's letter here approves the form of version 1. Form approval is structural, it does not endorse the policy and it does not bind the Secretary of State, who retains final approval authority under the same § 116.332.
This opinion is the earliest procedural step in the cluster. Later in the pipeline, the same petition went through fiscal-note review and summary-statement review by the AG (cross-referenced below).
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" actually check?
A: Whether the petition has the structural elements Chapter 116 RSMo requires: a heading, the full text of the proposed amendment, signature pages with statutory recitals, identification of who is circulating it, the bracket-deletion / underline-addition format under § 116.050. The AG does not assess the policy or constitutionality.
Q: How does the form review compare to the later fiscal note and summary statement reviews?
A: Three different statutory checkpoints under different sections: § 116.332 (form, this opinion), § 116.175.4 (fiscal note language), § 116.334 (ballot summary text). All three are mandatory and procedural. None of them endorses the policy.
Q: Where in the cluster does this opinion sit?
A: Earliest. Version 1 of petition 2020-121 got its form approval here. The fiscal-note review for the same petition followed in early October (see cross-references), and the summary-statement review came in mid-October.
Q: Who has final authority on form?
A: The Secretary of State, John R. Ashcroft at the time. § 116.332 expressly reserves "final authority to approve or reject" to him.
Background and statutory framework
Chapter 116 RSMo lays out the initiative-petition pipeline. This opinion covers step 2 of that pipeline:
- 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; signatures gathered.
Citations and references
Statutes: § 116.332 RSMo (the operative provision); § 116.175 RSMo (fiscal-note pipeline); § 116.334 RSMo (summary-statement pipeline); § 116.050 RSMo (drafting requirements).
Sister Aull Article IX form-review opinions in this cluster: 206-2019 (version 4, 2020-120), 208-2019 (version 2, 2020-122).
Fiscal-note opinions for the same Aull cluster (later in the pipeline): 213-2019 (v1, 20-117), 214-2019 (v2, 20-118), 215-2019 (v3, 20-119), 216-2019 (v4, 20-120), 222-2019 (v1, 20-121), 223-2019 (v2, 20-122).
Summary-statement opinions for the same Aull cluster: 225-2019 (v1, 2020-117), 226-2019 (v2, 2020-118), 227-2019 (v3, 2020-119), 228-2019 (v4, 2020-120), 229-2019 (v1, 2020-121).
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/207-2019.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
September 23, 2019
OPINION LETTER NO. 207-2019
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 September 16, 2019, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition to amend Article IX of the Missouri Constitution submitted by DeeAnn Aull, version 1 (2020-121).
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-2019-0237