Court Opinion

ID: 7822717
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-07 17:59:58.879891+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:30:46.565957
License: Public Domain

John I. Purtle, Justice, dissenting. Amendment 54 was approved by the people of Arkansas at the General Election on November 5, 1974 by a vote of 259,639 for and 210,830 against. The pertinent part of Amendment 54 requires all printing, stationery, and supplies purchased by the state to “be under contracts given to the lowest responsible bidder . . . under such regulations as shall be prescribed by law.” This Amendment clearly and expressly repealed Section 15 of Article 19 of the Constitution of the State of Arkansas. Therefore, it is logical to assume the people were dissatisfied with the provisions of the repealed sections of the Constitution. Likewise it is logical they intended to change the result of prior lawsuits on the subject. For these reasons I feel our decisions prior to Amendment 54 are of little value as precedents. So far as I am concerned we have started out with a new slate and the cardinal rule is to give the words their plain and accepted meaning. The clear and unambiguous language we are considering here needs no construction other than to determine the meaning of the phrase “contracts given to the lowest responsible bidder . . .” The Department of Corrections did not submit a bid. The appellant did. The state no doubt had a right to reject all bids as it did. The trial court held that Amendment 54 requires the submission of bids in this type situation. I am in full agreement with this construction of the Amendment. I express no opinion as to whether the Department of Corrections could qualify as a bidder or not because they did not even attempt to bid on the purchase here in question. I would affirm.