Court Opinion

ID: 9513999
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:43:05.772681+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:07.809700
License: Public Domain

SANDSTROM, Justice,
concurring specially.
[¶ 34] To the extent that dicta in Part III C of the majority opinion could be read as suggesting that any consideration, no matter how minimal, would be sufficient to defeat the North Dakota Constitution, art. X, § 18, prohibition on gifts, I disagree.
*517[¶ 35] I respectfully reject the idea that private-contract consideration is the appropriate standard for determining whether or not there has been a gift of public funds. The standard contractual consideration between private parties for a valid contract reflects that it is only persons who are sought to be bound. The North Dakota constitutional limitation on gifts is the action of the people in general to restrain the government actors from gifting public funds or property.
[¶ 36] Under an any-consideration-no-matter-how-minimal standard, a public entity could agree to pay $40,000 for a standard wooden pencil and it would not be a gift. Such cannot be the law. See Adams County Record v. Greater North Dakota Association, 529 N.W.2d 830, 839 (N.D.1995) (VandeWalle, C.J., concurring in the result).
[¶ 37] Dale V. Sandstrom