Tennessee House Bill HB0079

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/8/25
• Refer: 1/16/25
• Refer: 3/19/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 6 and Title 67, Chapter 6, relative to courthouse square revitalization.

Summary

HB0079 creates the “Courthouse Square Revitalization Act” and establishes a new framework for municipalities to designate courthouse square revitalization zones in county-seat cities and towns with populations of 30,000 or less. A municipality may draw zone boundaries by ordinance or resolution, apply to the Department of Finance and Administration for approval, and, if certified, receive a share of state sales and use tax revenue generated within the zone. The bill limits the number of projects that may be selected statewide to six, with no more than two from each grand division, and allows the department to adjust proposed boundaries if they are broader than what is reasonably integral to the courthouse square. The revenue distributed under the act must be used exclusively to maintain and improve the viability of the courthouse square, including through infrastructure, marketing, and related revitalization efforts. The bill also authorizes municipalities to make loans or grants to county governments or other public or private entities for those purposes. The Department of Revenue and the Department of Finance and Administration are authorized to adopt rules to implement the program. In addition to creating the new program, the bill amends the state sales tax allocation statute to direct revenue under Title 67, Chapter 6 into the new courthouse square revitalization structure. It also preserves revenue-sharing for municipalities that were already receiving allocations under the earlier Courthouse Square Revitalization Pilot Project Act of 2005 as of June 1, 2015, while expressly excluding certain sales tax revenues dedicated to education and other preexisting allocations from being redirected. The general sentiment reflected in the available legislative history is favorable. The House Cities & Counties Subcommittee voted 7-0 to recommend passage, indicating broad support at the subcommittee level. No committee transcript is available, so there is no recorded debate in the provided materials, but the unanimous vote suggests the bill was viewed as a targeted local economic development and downtown revitalization measure. The main points of potential contention are the use of state sales tax revenue for local redevelopment, the discretion given to state agencies to approve, certify, and potentially narrow proposed zones, and the cap on the number of projects that can be selected. Another possible issue is the bill’s preferential structure for smaller county-seat municipalities, which may raise questions about geographic fairness or competition among communities seeking designation. However, no explicit opposition is reflected in the provided record.

Impact

The bill would add a new chapter to Title 6 establishing a state-authorized courthouse square revitalization program and would amend Title 67, Chapter 6 to require certain state sales and use tax revenue to be allocated to approved revitalization zones. It would affect municipalities that are county seats in counties of 30,000 or fewer residents, along with the Department of Finance and Administration, the Department of Revenue, and the Comptroller in administering and overseeing the program. It also preserves existing allocations for municipalities already participating in the prior pilot project and protects certain education-related sales tax revenues from redirection.

Sentiment

The available voting history indicates strong support, with the House Cities & Counties Subcommittee recommending passage by a 7-0 vote. No committee transcript is provided, so there is no direct record of debate, amendments, or objections. Based on the vote and the bill’s targeted redevelopment purpose, the overall sentiment appears positive and noncontroversial in the available materials.

Contention

Potential areas of contention include the diversion of state sales tax revenue to local courthouse square projects, the state’s authority to approve or reduce proposed zone boundaries, and the limit of six total projects statewide with no more than two per grand division. Some stakeholders could also question whether the program favors smaller county-seat municipalities over larger or non-county-seat communities. The provided record does not identify any specific opponents or disputed amendments, so these concerns are inferred from the bill’s structure rather than from recorded debate.