BY: ANNELISE HANSHAW
Missouri Independent
A Cole County Circuit Court judge rejected an attempt to invalidate an initiative petition on sports betting Friday, allowing voters to decide whether to enshrine sports wagering in Missouri’s Constitution on the November ballot.
“Lawsuits seeking to remove an initiative petition from the ballot after it has been certified as sufficient by the secretary (of state) are highly disfavored,” Judge Daniel Green wrote in his ruling, quoting from another case that he must rule with “restraint, trepidation and a healthy suspicion of the partisan that would use the judiciary to prevent the initiative process from taking its course.”
Green reviewed lists of petition signatures plaintiffs submitted to allege that the amendment did not meet the minimum threshold in Missouri’s 1st congressional district. The evidence included 95 signatures that plaintiffs called “disqualified voters.”
Green, in his ruling, said the evidence did not show that the voters were ineligible when they signed the petition. Without these 95 signatures thrown out, the petition meets minimum qualifications.
Beyond that, plaintiffs’ argument failed to convince Green that the Missouri Secretary of State incorrectly certified the signatures.
In an argument led by Marc Ellinger — a seasoned Jefferson City attorney with experience representing Missouri gaming companies — plaintiffs took issue with the method the secretary used when calculating the number of votes needed in each district.
But, Green wrote, this calculation has been constant throughout all initiatives in 2022 and 2024 and was used by previous secretaries of state. The number was determined by multiplying the number of votes cast for governor in 2020 by 8%.
Ellinger said the number should be based on congressional district maps drawn after the 2020 election, but he “presented no evidence from which the court could determine what plaintiff’s target number should be,” Green wrote.
Should the threshold stand, Ellinger argued that there were a plethora of signatures that were improperly certified. For this, his expert witness was Kevin Oglesby, who manages National Political Consultants Inc and was hired to look at the signatures.
Oglesby received information from the secretary of state’s office to assess signatures, and his testimony was a large part of Thursday’s trial as he explained instances he deemed errors.
Local election authorities, which processed the petition for the secretary of state, had more information when reviewing signatures.
Green noted that plaintiffs “did not present evidence to qualify (Oglesby) as a handwriting expert.”
“Court did not find the testimony of the plaintiff’s witness to be credible or particularly helpful,” Green said in his judgment.
His ruling also dismissed a counter-claim by intervenors Winning for Missouri Education, the initiative’s campaign committee. The claim alleged that the committee, which has raised over $6.5 million to support the petition, is harmed by plaintiffs’ accusations
Green said there was no evidence presented on the matter, rendering it “moot.”
Winning for Missouri Education spokesman Jack Cardetti celebrated the victory Friday, focusing on the increased tax dollars that could go to public education if the initiative is approved.
“Today’s ruling, while expected, is nevertheless a big victory for Missourians, who overwhelmingly want to join the 38 other states that allow sports betting, so that we can provide tens of millions in permanent, dedicated funding each year to our public school,” he said. “For too many years, Missourians have watched as fans cross state lines to place sport bets, which deprives our Missouri public schools of much needed funding.”
Ellinger did not respond to a timely request for comment.