Did the Missouri AG approve the fiscal note for DeeAnn Aull's 2019 Article IX education-funding initiative petition (version 2, file 2020-118)?
Plain-English summary
DeeAnn Aull filed several drafts of an initiative petition in fall 2019 (numbers 2020-117 through 2020-122) to amend Article IX of the Missouri Constitution, the public-education article. Petition 2020-118 is version 2.
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 2:
State governmental entities anticipate possible changes to state general revenue of an unknown amount. Costs to the state are unknown but may be up to $2.45 billion annually. School districts may have a positive fiscal impact.
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: Why does the cost ceiling vary across Aull versions?
A: Different versions of the petition produce different estimates because the policy variants differ. Version 2 (this opinion) projects up to $2.45 billion in annual state cost. Other versions in the cluster project either $1.29 billion or $2.45 billion depending on whether early-childhood programs are included.
Q: Where do the dollar figures come from?
A: The State Auditor compiles fiscal notes from inputs by affected agencies (Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Revenue) and stakeholders. The AG reviews legal form, not the inputs.
Q: What does "school districts may have a positive fiscal impact" mean?
A: The Auditor's projection is that local school districts would gain revenue if the petition passed, because the petition would shift more funding their way. The amount is unknown.
Q: Did this petition reach the ballot?
A: The opinion does not say. None of the Aull versions in this cluster 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:
- 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.
Citations and references
Statutes: § 116.175 RSMo, § 116.175.4 RSMo (the operative provisions); § 116.332 RSMo (sufficiency-as-to-form); § 116.334 RSMo (summary-statement pipeline); § 116.190 RSMo (judicial challenges).
Constitutional provisions referenced: Mo. Const. art. IX (public education); art. X §§ 16-24 (Hancock Amendment); art. III § 50 (initiative).
Sister Aull Article IX fiscal-note opinions in this cluster: 213-2019 (version 1, 2020-117, $1.29 billion), 215-2019 (version 3, 2020-119, $1.29 billion), plus 216-2019 (v4, 20-120), 222-2019 (v1, 20-121), 223-2019 (v2, 20-122).
Form-review opinions for the same Aull cluster (earlier in pipeline): 206-2019 (v4, 2020-120), 207-2019 (v1, 2020-121), 208-2019 (v2, 2020-122).
Summary-statement opinions for the same Aull cluster (later in pipeline): 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/214-2019.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 10, 2019
OPINION LETTER NO. 214-2019
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 30, 2019, submitting a fiscal note and fiscal note summary prepared under § 116.175, RSMo, for an initiative petition submitted by DeeAnn Aull, version 2 (20-118). The fiscal note summary that you submitted is as follows:
State governmental entities anticipate possible changes to state general revenue of an unknown amount. Costs to the state are unknown but may be up to $2.45 billion annually. School districts may have a positive fiscal impact.
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-2019-0244