The’ Attorney General. of Texas 

January 25, 1980 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney Genecal 

Honorable Joe Resweber 

Harrk County Attornei 

1001 Preston, Suite 634 

Houston, Texas 77002 

Dear Mr. Besweber: 

Opinion Bo. Mw-12 9 

Re: Whether a govemmenlul Sodi 

may meet in closed session to 

discuss the employment of (iti 

engineering, . architectmu or 

consultant firm. 

You have asked: 

The 

. . 

Can the Commissioners Court, puauant to provisions 

Of article 6252-17, Vernon’s Ann. Civ. St., meet in 

closed session to discuss the employment of an 

engineering, architectural, or consultant firm whose 

professional services are to be provided to the county 

by Specific, written contract? 

Texas’ Open Meetings Act, article 6252-17, V.T.C.S., require; 

. . .._ commlssioners oourtx to meet in sessions which are open to the public. 

Various exceptions to the act permit governmental bodies to close portion,. 

Df meetings. The only exception which is relevant to your inquiry is fzuud 1.7 

section 2(g) of the act. It provides: 

Nothing in thk act shall be construed to req*Are 

governmental bodies to hold meetings open to the 

public in cases involving the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, ~discipline, or 

dismissal of a public officer or employee or to hear 

complaints ap charges egainst such officer or 

em lo ee unless such officer or employeects u 

&i&&ring. (Emphasised). 

By its terms, section 2(g) applies only to discussions involving ofS~ce~*s i;: 

employees. Engineeri,ng,‘~nrchitectural or consultant firms would, however, 

be classified as independent contractors since they would undertake to dit L 

specificpiece of work for the county using their own means end methods 

without submitting themselves to the control of the county in respect to ull 
Honorable Joe Resweber i Page TWO (Nw-129) 

the details of the work. Industrial lndemnity Exchange v. Southard, 160 S.W.ZG 905, SSy 

(Tex. 1942); Restatement (second) of Agency Sg 2, 229 (1957). An independent contractor 

k not an officer a employee. Attorney General Opinions H-1304 (1978); C-307 (1964i; 

V-1527 tl!%Z); V-343, V-303 (1947). 

The Texas Open Meetings Act k required to be liberally coustrued to cfiect Its 

purpose wtiich k to assure that the public has an opportunity to be .informed concr.mii~g 

the transaction of public business. Tovah lnd. Sch. Dist. V. Pecos-Barstow lnd hi. Dis:.. 

466 S.W.2d 377 (Tex. Civ. App. - San Antonio 1971, no writ). Aycordirgiy, vx believe thz’. 

the Open Meetings Act does not permit a governmental body to met; in CIOSCSI s%iur. k. 

dkcum the employment of an independent contractor such as an engineeri:lg, rcchhxtut~i 

or consultant firm. 

We note that our. conclusion k consistent with that of other states w&L IQ 

considered the question. lthok Attorney General Opinion ‘No. S-1116 (1976).(comncizL:. 

may not meet in executive session to discuss financial respohsibility of buil%g 

wntractors’who submitted bids on a project); Olclahoma Attorney General Opinion I+;. 

75L702 (1975) (governmental body may not meet in executive session to dkcun s&&cl: 

of an architect or lawyer or to discuss retention, dkci line or granting of privihzgti’vf 

physician who was found to be an independent contractor. P 

SUMMARY 

A governmental body may-not. meet in closed &ssion ,to dkcum the 

employment of an independent contractor such as an en@tecring, 

architectural or eotwultant ftrm. 

‘~ my-+-g7 

MARK WHITE 

Attorney General of Texas 

JOHN W. FAINTER, JR. 

Fit Assistant Attorney General 

TED L. HARTLEY 

Executive Aasiitant Attorney General 

Prepared by C. R&&t Heath 

Assktant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPlNION COMMITTEE 

C. Robert Heath, Chairman 

p. 414 
Honorable Joe Resweber - Page Three (MW-129) 

David B. Brooks 

*wgygTg 

Rick Gilpin 

Bruce Youngblood