What ballot summary did Missouri approve for Andrew Prewitt's Osage River gambling petition 2026-145?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2025. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Missouri law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Missouri Attorney General Catherine L. Hanaway approved the legal content and form of the proposed ballot summary for Andrew Prewitt's initiative petition 2026-145, version 1 of an Article III amendment.
The approved summary said the proposal would allow gambling boats, floating facilities, or nonfloating gambling facilities at one legally defined Osage River site in Miller County. It required approval from the Miller County Commission and the City of Lake Ozark Board of Aldermen, authorized the Missouri Gaming Commission to issue one additional license for the site, and required compliance with Missouri gaming statutes.
The Attorney General's review under § 116.334, RSMo was limited to legal content and form and did not endorse the proposal.
What this means for you
Miller County and Lake Ozark officials
The approved summary made formal approval by both the county commission and city board of aldermen a condition of the proposal.
Gaming regulators and researchers
The summary limited the authorization to one described site and one additional gambling license, while retaining statutory taxation and fee-transfer requirements.
Initiative petition proponents
The proposed summary passed legal-content and form review. The opinion did not take a position on the petition's objectives.
Common questions
Q: Where would the proposal permit gambling operations?
A: At one legally defined Osage River site identified through parcel and boundary descriptions in Miller County.
Q: What local approvals would be required?
A: Formal approval from both the Miller County Commission and the City of Lake Ozark Board of Aldermen.
Q: How many additional gambling licenses did the summary describe?
A: One additional license for the site.
Background and statutory framework
The Secretary of State requested review on December 23, 2025. The proposed summary concerned Andrew Prewitt's petition 2026-145, version 1, to amend Article III of the Missouri Constitution.
The Attorney General issued Opinion 347-2025 on December 30, 2025 and approved the summary's legal content and form under § 116.334, RSMo.
Citations and references
- § 116.334, RSMo
Source
- Landing page: https://ago.mo.gov/other-resources/ag-opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/347-2025.pdf
Original opinion text
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI
CATHERINE L. HANAWAY
December 30, 2025
OPINION LETTER NO. 347-2025
The Honorable Denny Hoskins, CPA
Missouri Secretary of State
James C. Kirkpatrick State Information Center
600 West Main Street
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Dear Secretary Hoskins:
This opinion letter responds to your request dated December 23, 2025, for our review under § 116.334, RSMo, of a proposed summary statement prepared for the petition submitted by Andrew Prewitt (2026-145) regarding a proposed amendment to amend Article III, version 1, of the Missouri Constitution. The proposed summary statement is as follows:
Shall the Missouri Constitution be amended to:
-
allow gambling operations in the form of gambling boats, floating facilities, or nonfloating gambling facilities on the Osage River, limiting this authorization to one legally defined by specific parcel and boundary descriptions in Miller County;
-
require formal approval from both the Miller County Commission and the City of Lake Ozark Board of Aldermen;
-
grant the Missouri Gaming Commission authority to issue only one additional gambling license for this site; and
-
require compliance with all Missouri gaming statutes, including taxation requirements on adjusted gross receipts and transfer of fees to state and local governments?
Pursuant to § 116.334, RSMo, we approve the legal content and form of the proposed statement. Because our review of the statement is mandated by statute, no action that we take with respect to such review should be construed as an endorsement of the petition, nor as the expression of any view regarding the objectives of its proponents.
Very truly yours,
CATHERINE L. HANAWAY
Attorney General
OP-2025-365
Supreme Court Building, 207 W. High Street, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO 65102 | Phone: (573) 751-3321 | www.ago.mo.gov
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2025 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Missouri statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.