A~JST~N 11. TEXAS 

JOEIN BEN SHEPPICRD 

A3"cORN~Y n=NsRAL 

February 26, 1953 

Hon. Robert S. Calvert 

Comptroller of Public Accounts 

Capitol Station 

Austin, Texas Opinion No. S-13 

Re: Legality of the same 

person being paid both 

as consulting 'architect 

and as associate architect in connection with 

the Basic Science Building for Southwestern 

Dear Sir: Medical School. 

You have requested an opinion on the following questions: 

"Can the same person act in the capacity of Consulting Architect and also as 

Associate Architect and charge fees therefor in connection with the erection of the 

Basic Science Building for the Southwestern 

Medical School, Dallas, Texas? 

"If you answer the foregoing question 

'in the affirmative; then can the Consulting 

Architect's fees and the associate Architect's fees exceed the amounts;..sbhedfll~d'~in 

the appropriation bill?" 

Section 3 of Article VI, Chapter 499, Acts 52 

nd Legislature 1951, page 1228, at page 1478 provides 

that the State will furnish the architect "a limited 

cons.ulting service consisting of a complete site survey, 

soil analysis, and a program of the work authorizing in 

detail the space requirements and their general arrangements, and the standards& types of construction and 

Desip". This consulting service must be furnished 

the associate architect in order for him to properly 

carry o~ut his duties. 

We have been informed by officials of the 

University of Texas and the State Board of Control that 

thevarIous: State, agencies;:do noit-,havb the:pehsonnel to 
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 2 (S-13) 

furnish architects with this service. Therefore, the 

consulting service required to be furnished by the 

State must be provided by one of the following methods: 

1. The State agency contracts with a q,ualified 

"consulting architect" to conduct the necessary tests, 

and the information obtained is furnished the 'associate 

architect" in charge of the actual construction. 

2. The architect in charge of the actual construction ("associate architect") contracts directly 

with a qualified "consulting architect" to conduct the 

necessary tests, and is reimbursed by the State for the 

expenses so incurred. 

3. If the "associate architect" is q,ualifled 

to conduct the tests, he will do so, and charge the 

State for such services in addition to his regular 

architect fees. 

It has not been questioned that the first and 

second methods constitute an expense authorized by the 

General Appropriation Act. It is noted that such contracts have not been limited by the Legislature. The 

limitation of the amount of architect's fees that may be 

charged refers only to the fees for servicesrendered 

for the following: 

"(A) The necessary conferences, and the 

preparation of preliminary studies. 

"(B) The production of complete architectural, mechanical, and struct,ural drawiw , and specifications, and then proper 

correlation. 

"(C) The General Administration and 

supervision of the work." 

The voucher for the "consulting architect" is 

for services rendered under contract dated July 13, 1951. 

The services rendered under this contract were those 

consulting services which must be furnished by the State 

to the regular architect in charge of construction (the 

"associate Architect"). 

The voucher for the "associate architect" was 

for services rendered ,under the contract dated April 16, 

1952. Since the contracts create an "independent contractor' relationship, Sections 33 and 40 of Article XVI 
_ 

Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 3 (S-13) 

of the Constitution of Texas., prohibiting the payment 

of compensation ,to a person holding at the same time 

more than one.office or position of emolument have no 

application to your question. Att'y Gen. Op. 2671 

(1927) found in the biennial report of the Attorney 

General 1926-1928 at page 406 and Att'y Gen. Op. V-345 

(1947) . We cannot determine any conflicting interests 

in the two contracts,sirice nei@er the %onsultlng 

architect" nor the "associate arghitect" exercise any 

supervision over the other, neither job is subordinate 

to the other, neither job duplicates the other, neither 

is antagonis'tic to the other, peither has 'any power to 

appoint or remove any employee of the other, and neither 

audits the books of the other. Therefore, there is no 

incompatibility in the work of hconsulting architect" 

and "associate architect", Att'y'Gen. Op. V-345 (1947). 

(Copies of such opinions are enclosed.) 

In view of the foregoing it Is our opinion 

that the services to be performed under the existing 

contracts may be performed ,by the same person. If the 

same person acts In the capacity of "consulting architect" and also as "associate architect" the fees that 

may be paid him can exceed the amounts scheduled in 

Section 3 of Article VI, Chapter 499, Acts 52nd Legislature 1951, page 1228, provided the fees for services 

rendered as "assoclate,~architect" do not exceed the 

amounts so scheduled. You are therefore advised that 

you are authorized to issue warrants in payment of the 

two voucher claims enclosed with your request. 

SUMMARY 

Contracts for the:~performance of services as "consulting architect" and "associate architect" in connection with the 

.constr,uction of 'a building for the ~‘Southwestern Medical School of the University 

of Texas may be entered into by the same 

architect. If the same person'acts in 

the capacity of "consulting,architect" and 

also as "associate architect" the fees 

that may be paid him can exceed the amounts 

scheduled in Section 3 of Article VI, Chapter 499, Acts 52nd Legislature, 1951, page 
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 4 (S-13) 

1228, provided the fees for services 

rendered as "associate architect" do not 

exceed the amounts so scheduled. 

APPROVED: 

J. C. Davis, Jr. 

County Affairs Division 

Yours very truly, 

JOHN BEN SHEPPERD 

Attorney General 

Willis E. Gresham 

Reviewer 

Robert S. Trotti 

Flrst Assistant 

Assistant 

John Ben Shepperd 

Attorney General 

JR:am