Ezel / AG Opinions / TX
TX JM-486 April 25, 1986

Was a Texas county's janitorial-services contract exempt from competitive bidding as a personal-services contract?

Short answer: It depended on the contract. JM-486 said the exemption applied if a specific individual had to perform the janitorial work, but not if a person or company merely had to supply workers to do it.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1986. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Texas law, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1986
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: This is an official Texas Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority in Texas courts but are not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. The opinion dates from 1986; verify current statutes and case law before relying on it.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official AG opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original AG opinion (PDF)

Texas AG Opinion JM-486: Janitorial Contract Bidding

Plain-English summary

Terry County asked whether a janitorial-services contract qualified as personal services and therefore fell outside the county competitive-bidding requirements. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

JM-486 said the answer was a fact question turning on the particular contract. It drew the line this way: "If the contract . . . requires a specific person to perform janitorial services, it is a contract for personal services." Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

By contrast, if the contract merely required a person or corporation to provide workers who would perform janitorial services, the opinion said it was not a personal-services contract. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Were all janitorial contracts exempt from bidding?

No. JM-486 said the classification depended on the nature of the contract. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

What made the contract personal services?

The contract had to require a specific person to perform the work personally. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

What if a company could assign any employees to clean the buildings?

JM-486 said a contract that merely required a person or corporation to provide workers was not a personal-services contract. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

Background and statutory framework

Article 2368a.5 generally required competitive bidding before a county purchased items under a contract requiring more than $5,000, while section 4(4) exempted a contract for personal services. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

The opinion relied on Van Zandt's distinction between services and personal services. It said a claimant asserting personal services had to perform the services personally, while employees could render services for an employer. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

Citations and references

  • article 2368a.5, sections 3(a) and 4(4), V.T.C.S.
  • Corbin v. Collin County Commissioners' Court, 651 S.W.2d 55, 56 (Tex. App. - Dallas 1983, no writ)
  • Van Zandt v. Fort Worth Press, 359 S.W.2d 893 (Tex. 1962)
  • Attorney General Opinions MW-344 (1981) and MW-530 (1982)

Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0486.pdf

Source

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF via OCR. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

The Attorney General of Texas

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General

April 25, 1986

Honorable G. Dwayne Pruitt
Terry County Attorney
Courthouse
Brownfield, Texas 79316

Opinion No. JM-486

Re: Whether a janitorial service contract is exempt from the competitive bidding requirements of article 2368a.5, V.T.C.S.

Dear Mr. Pruitt:

You ask whether a contract for janitorial services is a contract for personal services for purposes of article 2368a.5, V.T.C.S. Before a county may purchase items under a contract that will require an expenditure of more than $5,000, the commissioners court must comply with certain competitive bidding requirements. V.T.C.S. art. 2368a.5, § 3(a). A contract for "a personal service," however, is exempt from the competitive bidding requirements. Id. § 4(4).

In several instances this office has determined as a matter of law that a contract was or was not a contract for personal services for purposes of county purchasing. See Attorney General Opinions MW-344 (1981); MW-530 (1982). The question of whether a contract for janitorial services is a contract for personal services, however, is a fact question that depends on the nature of a particular contract. See Corbin v. Collin County Commissioners' Court, 651 S.W.2d 55, 56 (Tex. App. - Dallas 1983, no writ). We cannot answer fact questions in the opinion process, but we can set out guidelines for you to use in determining whether the contract in question is a contract for personal services.

In construing the phrase "personal services" for the purposes of another statute, the Texas Supreme Court concluded that "services" and "personal services" are not coextensive. Van Zandt v. Fort Worth Press, 359 S.W.2d 893 (Tex. 1962). Someone who claims to have rendered "personal services" must have performed the services himself. The claimant's employees, in contrast, may have rendered "services." If the contract you ask about requires a specific person to perform janitorial services, it is a contract for personal services. If the contract merely requires a person or a corporation to provide persons who will perform janitorial services, it is not a contract for personal services.

SUMMARY

The question of whether a contract for janitorial services is a contract for personal services for purposes of article 2368a.5, V.T.C.S., is a fact question. If a specific person is required to perform the services, it is a contract for personal services. If the contract merely requires that someone perform janitorial services, it is not a contract for personal services.

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

JACK HIGHTOWER
First Assistant Attorney General

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

ROBERT GRAY
Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Sarah Woelk
Assistant Attorney General

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1986 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Texas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.