Did the Missouri AG approve the fiscal note for James Owen's 2019 Chapter 393 renewable-energy-standard initiative petition (version 1, file 2020-113)?
Plain-English summary
James Owen filed four parallel initiative petitions in fall 2019 (numbers 2020-113 through 2020-116) to amend the statutes governing Missouri's renewable energy standard, the law that requires investor-owned electric utilities to source a minimum percentage of their retail sales from renewables. Petition 2020-113 is version 1 of the family.
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 version 1. The summary stated:
State governmental entities estimate additional employment costs of approximately $88,000 annually. Additionally, state and local governmental entities anticipate possible increased costs of electricity, but the amount is unknown.
The AG's review is narrow. It checks whether the summary is legally sufficient as a 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: Why is the fiscal note summary the same across all four Owen versions?
A: The Auditor projected the same $88,000 annual state employment cost (likely Public Service Commission staffing) and noted the same uncertainty around increased electricity costs for all four versions, even though their renewable-energy ramps differ. Operationally, ramping faster or slower may not change near-term staffing costs, and the electricity-cost effect is "unknown" either way.
Q: Where do the $88,000 employment costs come from?
A: The Auditor's projection. Likely it represents incremental staffing at the Public Service Commission (Chapter 386 RSMo) or other state agencies that would administer or monitor the higher renewable-energy standard. The opinion does not break down which agency.
Q: Why does the fiscal note say electricity costs are "unknown"?
A: Forecasting electricity-cost effects of a renewable-energy mandate is contested. Some studies show renewables reduce wholesale prices via merit-order effects; others show they increase retail rates via integration costs. The Auditor declined to pick a number.
Q: Is the fiscal note accurate?
A: The opinion does not say. The AG specifically disclaims any review of accuracy: "our review under § 116.175.4 does not examine the fairness or sufficiency of the estimated fiscal impact." Anyone challenging the fiscal note's accuracy must do so under § 116.190 RSMo in Cole County circuit court within ten days of certification.
Background and statutory framework
Chapter 116 RSMo lays out the initiative-petition pipeline. This opinion sits at step 3 (fiscal note review by the AG):
- Proponent files the petition with the Secretary of State.
- AG reviews sufficiency as to form under § 116.332 RSMo.
- State Auditor prepares a fiscal note; AG reviews under § 116.175.4 RSMo (this opinion).
- Secretary of State drafts a summary statement; AG reviews under § 116.334 RSMo.
- Petition certified for circulation.
The Owen petitions are statutory initiatives (Chapter 393 RSMo, plus 386 in version 4), so they would directly amend RSMo. Statutory initiatives need fewer signatures than constitutional amendments.
Citations and references
Statutes: § 116.175 RSMo, § 116.175.4 RSMo (the operative provisions); § 116.334 RSMo (summary statement pipeline); § 116.190 RSMo (judicial challenges); Chapter 393 RSMo (regulation of public utilities); Chapter 386 RSMo (Public Service Commission); § 393.1020 et seq. RSMo (renewable energy standard).
Sister Owen renewable-energy fiscal-note opinions: 210-2019 (version 2, 2020-114), 211-2019 (version 3, 2020-115), 212-2019 (version 4, 2020-116).
Summary statement reviews on the same Owen cluster (later in pipeline): 218-2019 (v1, 2020-113), 219-2019 (v2, 2020-114), 220-2019 (v3, 2020-115), 221-2019 (v4, 2020-116).
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/209-2019.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
October 4, 2019
OPINION LETTER NO. 209-2019
The Honorable Nicole Galloway
Missouri State Auditor
State Capitol, Room 121
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Auditor Galloway:
This office received your letter of September 24, 2019, submitting a fiscal note and fiscal note summary prepared under § 116.175, RSMo, for an initiative petition submitted by James Owen, version 1 (20-113). The fiscal note summary that you submitted is as follows:
State governmental entities estimate additional employment costs of approximately $88,000 annually. Additionally, state and local governmental entities anticipate possible increased costs of electricity, but the amount is unknown.
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-2019-0239