PRB education committee weighs new training rules, voter suspension and online tools to improve trustee compliance

Jasmine Loomis, the Pension Review Board’s education communication specialist, told the PRB education committee that staff have drafted three statutory ideas and two nonstatutory measures aimed at improving compliance with mandatory education and training (MET) for trustees and system administrators.

"They deserve to have those who manage pension fund money and who make benefit decisions, fully understand their fiduciary duties, and have the appropriate skills to carry out these duties," Loomis said, explaining the rationale for exploring both legal and administrative changes to increase training compliance.

Staff described three possible statutory changes: (1) authorize systems to adopt an education or noncompliance policy and provide PRB guidance and sample policies; (2) suspend a trustee’s voting rights while they remain noncompliant with MET requirements, to be restored on reaching compliance; and (3) require completion of core MET training prior to beginning service on a board. Loomis told the committee staff also examined a range of nonstatutory options, including promoting an individual course approval application (ICAA) and updating the online portal to simplify reporting and display noncompliant trustees on a dashboard.

Committee members raised practical and legal concerns about each approach. Roy Rodriguez, a committee member, said orientation for new trustees could be a first step and supported limiting voting until core training is finished rather than imposing a full pre-service training mandate. "Somebody making these decisions really in a vacuum without any training could be dangerous," Rodriguez said.

Staff and several members noted stakeholder feedback was mixed. In an April 9 virtual session, 19 attendees from 14 retirement systems discussed three proposed statutory changes and two administrative ideas. Loomis said stakeholders generally supported better tools and clearer guidance—particularly the portal improvements and wider promotion of the ICAA—but opposed automatic voting suspensions for noncompliant trustees because smaller systems could struggle to fill board seats.

The committee heard specifics about current rules and timing: trustees must complete seven hours of core training within their first year of service (they may complete up to six months early), continuing education hours are required annually, reporting to PRB is annual and the training-reporting cycle can leave trustees temporarily labeled noncompliant before training submissions are processed.

Loomis described two portal features intended to reduce reporting friction: administrators will be able to enter training directly into the portal—removing the need to submit PDFs—and a noncompliant section on the dashboard will show which trustees are currently flagged so systems can address issues before an annual list is published.

On publication, staff proposed posting an annual list of trustees and administrators labeled noncompliant after the PRB’s annual compliance report is presented. Stakeholders asked that systems be notified and given time to correct records before public posting; staff said the PRB would follow existing report-notification and enforcement timelines used for other agency reports.

No formal policy changes or votes on statutory language were taken at the committee meeting. Loomis said staff will revise the draft act with the committee’s suggestions and circulate a feedback document to stakeholders, then present potential statutory recommendations and nonstatutory changes to the full PRB at the July board meeting. The committee confirmed the next full Pension Review Board meeting is scheduled for July 23, 2026, at 10 a.m. in the William B. Clements Building, Room 402.

The committee approved the minutes of the prior meeting by motion at the start of the session; no other formal actions were recorded.