Oklahoma House Bill HB1335

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/4/25

Caption

Public retirement systems; Oklahoma Pension Legislation Actuarial Analysis Act; definition; term; retirement benefit increase; Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System; Oklahoma Police Pension and Retirement System; Uniform Retirement System for Justices and Judges; Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System; Teachers' Retirement System of Oklahoma; Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System; limitation; funded ratio; conditions; offset; amount; codification; effective dates.

Summary

HB1335 would authorize cost-of-living style retirement benefit increases for retirees and beneficiaries in six Oklahoma public retirement systems: the Firefighters Pension and Retirement System, Police Pension and Retirement System, Uniform Retirement System for Justices and Judges, Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System, Teachers’ Retirement System of Oklahoma, and Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System. The bill sets the increase at 4% if the system’s funded ratio would remain at least 80% after the increase is granted; if not, the increase would be limited to 2%. The measure applies beginning November 1, 2025. The bill also includes special adjustment language for certain firefighter retirees receiving benefits under Section 49-101 of Title 11, specifying per-year-of-service dollar amounts tied to prior benefit adjustment provisions, and it provides offsets so that some retirees who are already eligible for increases under repealed or related statutes do not receive duplicative benefit growth. Each affected retirement board would be responsible for determining whether the system meets the 80% funded-ratio threshold before granting the larger increase.

Impact

HB1335 would amend or create provisions in multiple titles of Oklahoma law governing public retirement systems, adding new sections for each affected system and establishing a uniform funded-ratio test for benefit increases. It would directly affect retirees and beneficiaries in the named systems, while also imposing actuarial conditions on the boards of trustees that administer those systems. Because the bill ties increases to the systems’ funded status, it would require annual valuation data and board determinations before the higher 4% increase could be paid.

Sentiment

The available materials suggest generally favorable treatment of the bill as a retirement benefit enhancement for public retirees, but with a strong fiscal caution built into the proposal. The actuarial note describes the measure as a fiscal bill and frames the increases as conditional on the systems remaining adequately funded, indicating an effort to balance retiree benefits with solvency concerns. No committee debate or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or support beyond the bill text and actuarial analysis.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the cost and actuarial impact of increasing benefits for multiple public retirement systems, especially the question of whether each system can sustain a 4% increase while staying at or above an 80% funded ratio. Another likely issue is the fairness of applying different treatment depending on funded status, since retirees in weaker systems would receive only 2% rather than 4%. The offset provisions for prior statutory increases may also draw attention because they limit stacking of benefits and could affect how much some retirees actually receive.