Did Missouri's AG approve the form of the Winston Apple initiative petition to amend Article III, version 2 (Petition 2020-035)?

Plain-English summary

This is the companion to opinion 16-2019, issued the same day. Winston Apple had submitted two alternative versions of an initiative petition to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution. Both were rejected on the same form ground.

For Petition 2020-035 (version 2), the AG concluded that the petition did not contain "all matter which is to be deleted included in its proper place enclosed in brackets and all new matter shown underlined" as required by § 116.050, RSMo. The AG did not reach any other potential defects.

Under § 116.332.4, RSMo, the Secretary of State retains final authority on form. See companion opinion 16-2019 (version 1, Petition 2020-034, same defect).

The two-version filing pattern is common. Sponsors who want to gather signatures often file multiple alternative drafts so they can pick the version that survives review and seems most attractive to voters.

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. Whether Apple refiled corrected versions is a separate question that the Missouri Secretary of State's records would show.

Common questions

Why submit two versions if both have the same defect?

Sponsors often draft alternative versions and submit them together. They may differ on substantive choices the sponsor was undecided about. Here, both versions shared the same bracket-and-underline defect, so both were rejected at this stage.

What does the sponsor do now?

Refile a corrected version with the deletions in brackets and new matter underlined. The Secretary of State will issue a new petition number and the AG and Secretary will review the corrected draft.

Why does the AG repeat itself rather than consolidating?

Because the law requires a separate opinion for each separate petition. Even when the defect is identical, each petition is reviewed independently and gets its own opinion letter.

What's the underlying substantive proposal?

The opinion does not address it. Article III governs the Missouri General Assembly. Apple's two drafts proposed changes to that article, but the form rejection ended the review before the substance was reached.

Background and statutory framework

The same rules apply as in opinion 16-2019:

• § 116.050, RSMo: deletions in brackets, new matter underlined.
• § 116.332, RSMo: AG form review on Secretary's request.
• § 116.332.4, RSMo: Secretary of State's final authority.

The bracket-and-underline rule is essential when a petition proposes to amend existing constitutional or statutory text. It serves voter notice. Sponsors who fail it almost always know how to fix it; the rule is straightforward markup.

Source

• Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/attachments/17-2019.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, ATTORNEY GENERAL
JEFFERSON CITY, P.O. Box 899, 65102
(573) 751-3321

January 18, 2019

OPINION LETTER NO. 17-2019

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 January 8, 2019, for our review under § 116.332, RSMo, of the sufficiency as to form of an initiative petition submitted by Winston Apple, (2020-035).

We conclude that the petition must be rejected for at least the following reasons:

1. The petition does not contain "all matter which is to be deleted included in its proper place enclosed in brackets and all new matter shown underlined" as required pursuant to § 116.050, RSMo.

Because of our rejection of the form of the petition for the reasons stated above, we have not reviewed the petition to determine whether additional deficiencies exist. Pursuant to § 116.332.4, RSMo, the Secretary of State is authorized to review this opinion and "make a final decision as to the approval or rejection of the form of the petition."

Very truly yours,
ERIC S. SCHMITT
Attorney General

OP-2019-0007