2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB3474
HB3474 puts required independent reviews of public pension investment practices on a State Pension Review Board schedule, while retaining the basic three-year and six-year review cycles.
Official caption: Relating to the evaluation and reporting of investment practices and performance of certain public retirement systems.
Official report lists House author(s): Lambert, Bumgarner, Plesa. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- HB3474 puts required independent reviews of public pension investment practices on a State Pension Review Board schedule, while retaining the basic three-year and six-year review cycles.
- The general cycle is every three years for systems with at least $100 million in assets at the preceding evaluation, and every six years for those with at least $30 million but less than $100 million.
- Two additional rules keep the schedule responsive to a system's obligations.
- Independent evaluators must still give the system a substantially completed draft and request its response, then provide the final report with any response to the governing body.
- Signed May 29, 2025, the law took effect September 1, 2025, and required the board to develop the schedule by January 1, 2026.
What does it do?
HB3474 puts required independent reviews of public pension investment practices on a State Pension Review Board schedule, while retaining the basic three-year and six-year review cycles. These reviews examine investment policies, asset allocation, fees, governance and investment-manager oversight; the bill does not change pension benefits or guarantee investment returns. Final law · Underlying review requirements
The general cycle is every three years for systems with at least $100 million in assets at the preceding evaluation, and every six years for those with at least $30 million but less than $100 million. This changes the asset measurement point from the preceding fiscal year’s end to the preceding evaluation.
Two additional rules keep the schedule responsive to a system’s obligations. If a system on the six-year cycle reaches at least $100 million in total pension liability during a fiscal year, its next evaluation is due at the next appropriate deadline determined by the board. Ordinarily, a system stays on its existing cycle unless both assets and total pension liability fall below the applicable minimum. That rule is expressly subject to the statutory exception for systems whose assets are below $30 million at the end of the fiscal year immediately before the next scheduled deadline. Total pension liability is the present value of projected benefit payments attributable to members’ past service, as defined with reference to governmental accounting standards; it is not simply the gap between assets and liabilities.
Independent evaluators must still give the system a substantially completed draft and request its response, then provide the final report with any response to the governing body. The governing body must still send it to the Pension Review Board. HB3474 removes the former separate 30-, 31- and 60-day processing deadlines and the old May 1 timing provision; it does not abolish review or reporting.
Signed May 29, 2025, the law took effect September 1, 2025, and required the board to develop the schedule by January 1, 2026. The board’s guidance, updated December 11, 2025, lists June 1, 2027 for both reporting groups, June 1, 2030 for the three-year group, and June 1, 2033 for both. These dates come from the board’s implementation guidance, not dates written into HB3474 itself. Official history · Board guidance and schedule
What changed along the way?
The introduced bill proposed a different transition based on asset growth and subsequent liability-based cycles, and a first-report deadline of September 1, 2026. The House committee substitute replaced that approach with the preceding-evaluation asset measurement, the six-year system’s $100 million liability trigger, and the rule retaining a cycle until both measures fall below its threshold, subject to the small-system exception. It also supplied the liability and schedule definitions.
Crucially, the substitute removed the proposed September 1, 2026 first-report deadline. That date did not become law. The January 1, 2026 deadline for the board to develop a schedule remained. The House substitute, engrossed, Senate committee and enrolled texts have the same operative policy. No separate amendments are listed; the history records a House substitute and Senate passage without amendments. Introduced bill · House substitute · Text versions · Amendment index
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
Pension trustees, evaluators and the state board gain a common reporting calendar and flexibility to organize draft review and responses. Members and taxpayers may benefit from continued investment oversight even when assets fluctuate, although an evaluation does not ensure better returns. Systems moved to a more frequent cycle can face additional evaluation work and fees. The existing rule allowing an employing governmental entity to pay evaluation costs, with the retirement system paying any remainder, is unchanged.
All three fiscal notes anticipated no significant state fiscal impact. The Texas County and District Retirement System and Texas Municipal Retirement System anticipated no fiscal impact from implementation. Those assessments do not establish that every local plan’s consultant fees will remain unchanged. Final available fiscal note
Review boundary: This explains the enacted thresholds and published schedule, not a determination of an individual plan’s reporting obligation or compliance. A plan should confirm its cycle with the board. The statute’s total-pension-liability definition controls this explanation; the guidance is linked for the schedule, not substituted for the enacted text.
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.
