BILL ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 869

By: Lalani

Delivery of Government Efficiency

Committee Report (Substituted)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

State agencies can face significant challenges in attracting, hiring, and retaining highly qualified technology professionals, particularly in competitive markets such as the Austin metropolitan area. These challenges are exacerbated by statutory requirements under the Government Code that subject agencies to prescribed job classifications and descriptions outlined in the state auditor's position classification plan. Although these classifications and descriptions are updated to reflect the evolution of various professional fields, the rapid advancement of the technology industry threatens to outpace the state's current job descriptions for technology positions. As a result, state agencies may be limited in their ability to compete with private sector opportunities that offer more modern and flexible job descriptions aligned with current industry standards. This misalignment can create difficulties in hiring and retaining critical technology talent needed for the effective operation of state government.

The goal of C.S.H.B. 869 is to help state agencies attract and retain highly qualified technology professionals by modernizing information technology job classifications and descriptions to reflect current industry standards and ensure competitiveness with the private sector. The bill seeks to do so by requiring the state's classification officer to review the position classification plan for state information technology positions at least once every two years and consult with and consider recommendations from the Department of Information Resources during each review.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.

ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 869 amends the Government Code to require the classification officer in the State Auditor's Office to review the information technology positions in the position classification plan at least once every two years and make any applicable changes to the plan to ensure the following:

· the position titles, classifications, and descriptions of work for information technology positions align closely with comparable information technology position titles, classifications, and descriptions of work in the private sector; and

· the job description for each information technology position incorporates competency‑based language that emphasizes the skills and knowledge needed to successfully accomplish the responsibilities of the position rather than degree and certification requirements.

The bill requires the classification officer to consult with and consider any recommendations made by the Department of Information Resources (DIR) during such a review and to prepare and submit, not later than October 1, 2026, to the governor and each member of the legislature a written report that includes a summary of the initial review conducted and any revisions made to the information technology positions in the position classification plan.

EFFECTIVE DATE

September 1, 2025.

COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE

While C.S.H.B. 869 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.

C.S.H.B. 869 changes the frequency with which the classification officer is required to review the information technology positions in the position classification plan from periodically, as in the introduced, to at least once every two years. The substitute includes a requirement absent from the introduced for the classification officer to consult with and consider any recommendations made by DIR during the review.