Ezel / AG Opinions / MO
MO Opinion No. 8-2020 2020-02-06

Did the Missouri Attorney General sign off on the State Auditor's fiscal note summary for James Owen's renewable energy initiative (version 1)?

Short answer: Yes. Attorney General Eric Schmitt approved the fiscal note summary's legal content and form under § 116.175.4, RSMo. The fiscal note summary said state government would face about $147,000 in annual costs and that the change might raise electricity rates by up to 1 percent annually, capped by existing law. The AG's review did not check whether those numbers were correct, only that the summary was legally sufficient.
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 AG opinions are persuasive authority but not binding precedent.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

When an initiative petition is filed in Missouri, the Secretary of State sends it to the State Auditor for a fiscal impact estimate. The Auditor produces a "fiscal note" (a longer document) and a short "fiscal note summary" that will appear on the ballot. The fiscal note summary then goes to the Attorney General for a legal-content-and-form review under § 116.175.4, RSMo. The AG checks that the summary is legally sufficient. The AG does not audit the dollar figures or grade the Auditor's economic analysis.

Opinion 8-2020 approves State Auditor Nicole Galloway's fiscal note summary for James Owen's version 1 renewable energy petition (Secretary's tracking number 2020-142). The summary text the AG approved:

State governmental entities estimate additional ongoing costs of approximately $147,000 annually. Additionally, state and local governmental entities anticipate a possible unknown increase in electricity costs from this proposal, which is limited by existing law to be no more than an average retail rate increase of one percent annually.

The AG signed off on the legal content and form. Whether the underlying $147,000 estimate or the 1 percent ceiling correctly captures the proposal's impact is a separate question that the AG explicitly did not address.

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 fiscal note process for initiative petitions runs in parallel with the AG's form review and the Secretary of State's summary statement preparation:

  1. Petition is filed with the Secretary of State.
  2. AG reviews form under § 116.332, RSMo (e.g., Opinions 2-2020, 4-2020).
  3. State Auditor prepares fiscal note and fiscal note summary under § 116.175, RSMo.
  4. AG reviews fiscal note summary under § 116.175.4 (this is the role exercised in 8-2020, 9-2020, 10-2020).
  5. Secretary of State writes summary statement that will appear on the ballot.
  6. AG reviews summary statement under § 116.334 (Opinions 11-2020, 12-2020, 13-2020).

The AG's review under § 116.175.4 is narrow: legal content and form of the summary, not the accuracy of the financial analysis. The opinion's standard recital says it explicitly:

Furthermore, our review under § 116.175.4 does not examine the fairness or sufficiency of the estimated fiscal impact.

If the fiscal estimate is wrong, the remedy is a court challenge to the Auditor's note, not an AG re-review.

What this means for you

If you are a voter

The fiscal note summary you see at the top of an initiative petition (when signing) and on the ballot has been through one legal review (the AG) and one substantive analysis (the Auditor). The numbers come from the Auditor. The legal review confirms the wording is accurate enough to convey what the Auditor concluded; it does not certify the underlying numbers.

If you are challenging an initiative petition's fiscal note

The path is through the courts, not through a request for AG reconsideration. Missouri's Cole County Circuit Court handles fiscal-note challenges under § 116.175 and § 116.190.

If you are a journalist

The fiscal note summary is the public-facing dollar figure for an initiative. The fiscal note (the longer document) explains the methodology. Both come from the State Auditor's office and are public.

Common questions

What is a fiscal note summary?

A short paragraph that estimates the state and local government cost or revenue impact of an initiative if it passes. The Auditor prepares it under § 116.175. It appears on petitions before signatures are gathered and on the ballot at election time.

Does the AG opinion say the $147,000 estimate is right?

No. The AG's review is limited to "legal content and form." The opinion expressly says it "does not examine the fairness or sufficiency of the estimated fiscal impact."

Why a "1 percent annually" ceiling on electricity costs?

Missouri's existing renewable energy standard caps the cost to ratepayers at a 1 percent average retail rate increase annually. Owen's proposed amendment would have raised the renewable energy mandate but the existing ceiling on cost-pass-through to ratepayers would have continued to apply. The fiscal note summary picks up on this to bound the worst-case rate impact.

What's the difference between the "fiscal note" and the "fiscal note summary"?

The fiscal note is a longer narrative document with the Auditor's full analysis, often including responses from affected agencies. The fiscal note summary is the short paragraph that ends up on the petition and the ballot. Both are public.

Citations

  • § 116.175, RSMo (State Auditor's role in preparing fiscal note and fiscal note summary)
  • § 116.175.4, RSMo (AG review of fiscal note summary for legal content and form)

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
February 6, 2020

OPINION LETTER NO. 8-2020

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

Dear Auditor Galloway:

This office received your letter of January 27, 2020, submitting a fiscal note and fiscal note summary prepared under § 116.175, RSMo, for an initiative petition submitted by James Owen (2020-142). The fiscal note summary that you submitted is as follows:

State governmental entities estimate additional ongoing costs of approximately $147,000 annually. Additionally, state and local governmental entities anticipate a possible unknown increase in electricity costs from this proposal, which is limited by existing law to be no more than an average retail rate increase of one percent annually.

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-2020-0008