Judges: DAN MORALES, Attorney General of Texas
Filed Date: 4/20/1992
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/6/2016
Honorable Mike Moncrief Chairman General Issues Subcommittee Texas State Senate P. O. Box 12068, Capitol Station Austin, Texas 78711-2068
Re: Whether services of auctioneers are "professional services" for purposes of laws governing the awarding of contracts by cities and counties, and related questions (RQ-152)
Dear Senator Moncrief:
You have requested an opinion from this office regarding competitive bidding requirements affecting municipalities, as codified in Local government Code section 252.021. That section provides in pertinent part the following:
(a) Before a municipality with 50,000 or more inhabitants may enter into a contract that requires an expenditure of more than $10,000 from one or more municipal funds, the municipality must comply with the procedure prescribed by this chapter for competitive sealed bidding or competitive sealed proposals.
The legal department of the City of Fort worth maintains that a contract between the city and an auctioneering company for services rendered within the statutory amount must be awarded in accordance with this statute. You have requested our opinion as to whether such services would instead be exempt from the competitive bidding requirements as professional services under Local Government Code section 252.022(a)(4), providing that chapter 252 does not apply to certain expenditures, including "a procurement for personal or professional services."
This office has recognized in previous opinions that "professional services" may encompass more than the services of physicians, attorneys, or others traditionally regarded as "professionals."1 See Attorney General Opinions
In your case, the city of Fort Worth has made a determination, based upon its understanding of the law and facts that the auctioneering services at issue are not professional services and must therefore be procured through competitive bidding. We find nothing in the law that would preclude such a decision. More importantly, the city could have decided to competitively bid the contract for auctioneering services even if it had come to the opposite conclusion regarding the nature of the services. Section
In conclusion, we believe that a municipality has discretion in the first instance to determine whether particular services, other than those covered by article 664-4, V.T.C.S., are professional services for purposes of exemption from competitive bidding requirements under Local Government Code section 252.022. Moreover, we emphasize that Local Government Code chapter 252 serves to require municipalities to competitively bid most procurement contracts; it does not bar municipalities from competitively bidding even those projects that might conceivably be exempt from chapter 252.
Very truly yours,
DAN MORALES Attorney General of Texas
WILL PRYOR First Assistant Attorney General
MARY KELLER Deputy Assistant Attorney General
RENEA HICKS Special Assistant Attorney General
MADELEINE B. JOHNSON Chair, Opinion Committee
Prepared by Faith S. Steinberg Assistant Attorney General