The summit, Friday in Austin, brought together public-sector technology leaders and industry partners for sessions on cybersecurity, AI, data governance, digital service delivery and modernization. The panel, moderated by Texas Department of Transportation CIO Anh Selissen, focused on how agencies can tie legislative appropriations requests to agency missions, avoid common mistakes and communicate value to decision-makers.
Lisa Craven, deputy comptroller at the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, said the next legislative session will look different from the past two. Those sessions began with large cash carry-forward balances, but the next session is expected to have less discretionary funding available.
“We’re still seeing continued economic growth in Texas, just at a much more moderated pace,” Craven said. “That’s just going to mean the Legislature will have to have a more constrained appropriation approach.”
Craven said Texas remains in stronger financial shape than many other states, with a full rainy day fund, a growing economy and balanced budgets. But she said agencies should expect more competition for limited funds.
For vendors, that means technology projects may face more scrutiny of cost, timing and business justification.
Cybersecurity and legacy system modernization are expected to remain areas of focus, but panelists said projects will need to be tied to risk, service impact and agency priorities. Brittney Booth Paylor, chief of staff and chief public affairs officer for the Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR), said the agency and Texas Cyber Command (TXCC) will use the Prioritization of Cybersecurity and Legacy Systems report to help rank state agency cybersecurity, legacy system and modernization projects for lawmakers.
“Appropriators are going to need tools to prioritize more than ever, and they’re bombarded with so many requests,” Paylor said.
The report is confidential, and agencies are not required to submit projects for consideration, but Paylor said the process still matters because DIR must submit a report regardless of participation and lawmakers may later ask why a project was not ranked or prioritized.
Panelists said agencies should also make sure their technology requests align with their broader legislative funding requests. The message for vendors was clear: Helping an agency shape a project is not just a technical exercise. It also requires understanding how that project will be explained to budget writers, legislative staff and elected officials.
Craven said agencies should use plain language when describing technology needs because lawmakers are focused on how a project affects constituents, state operations and public services. She said agencies should be realistic in what they ask for and flexible enough to phase projects if full funding is not available.
“I always recommend that you use plain language when you’re speaking to the Legislature,” Craven said. “They are not IT experts, they don’t understand the stuff the way that you do.”
Panelists said vendors can help agencies by providing defensible cost estimates, market context, phased implementation plans and examples of similar work that was completed on time and on budget.
Paylor said lawmakers are likely to ask where project cost estimates came from. She said documentation such as quotes, bids or rough order-of-magnitude estimates can help agencies explain the basis for their requests. She also said vendors can help explain rising technology costs, particularly in a budget cycle where agencies may be seeking new funding while facing higher prices.
“I think right now one of the things that vendors can really help with is helping to explain the increased cost of technology that we are all facing,” Paylor said.
But panelists also warned vendors against moving too far ahead of the agencies they hope to support.
Craven said vendors should work with agencies on their priorities rather than going to the Legislature to tell lawmakers what an agency needs. Paylor said vendors should be careful not to create the perception of a “vendor bill,” noting that agencies must still follow procurement and contracting requirements.
Selissen added that vendors should not work with technical staff and then go around agency IT leadership to an executive director.
“The worst thing you can do as a vendor is to go talk to the technical team and then jump over your CIO’s head and go directly to an executive director,” Selissen said.
JW Galloway, director of public affairs for TXCC, said communication between agencies and vendors will be important as the state continues building its cybersecurity approach. Galloway described a collaborative role for Cyber Command, saying the organization wants to preserve agency autonomy while working with agencies as a team.
AI is also expected to draw attention during the legislative session, although enthusiasm for the technology might be more muted this time around. Panelists said lawmakers are interested in potential efficiencies, but they also expect questions around risk, security, customer service, human oversight and workforce impact.
Craven said the Legislature appears to be taking a measured approach to AI, weighing possible benefits against concerns. Paylor said agencies will need to explain how the technology affects Texans’ experience with government services. Galloway said the issue may be polarized, with some legislative offices embracing AI and others avoiding it.
“I think as a former legislative staffer, I can speak on saying there are two sides within the Legislature right now,” Galloway said. “There’s not a lot of middle ground, there’s anti-AI and pro-AI.”
Panelists also cautioned against overstating AI savings. Craven said some uses may improve employee workflows in ways that are difficult to capture in formal performance metrics. She also warned that claims about efficiency could prompt questions about reducing staff.
For vendors, the discussion pointed to a session in which agency alignment, pricing discipline and clear communication may matter as much as technical capability. Projects tied to cybersecurity, modernization and AI may continue to attract attention, but panelists said they will need to be explained in terms lawmakers can evaluate: risk, cost, timing and impact on Texans.
*The Texas Digital Government Summit is hosted by Government Technology, the sister publication of Industry Insider — Texas. Both are part of e.Republic.
This story originally appeared in Industry Insider — Texas, which is part of e.Republic, Government Technology’s parent company.
