Tennessee House Bill HB0135

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/25
• Refer: 1/16/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4 and Title 7, Chapter 86, Part 3, relative to the emergency communications board.

Summary

HB0135 revises the membership and operating rules of Tennessee’s emergency communications board. The bill increases the board from nine members to eleven members and changes two of the board’s local-government seats so that there will be two county government representatives appointed by the Senate speaker and two city government representatives appointed by the House speaker. The bill also updates the board’s quorum requirement, lowering the threshold for official action to six or more members. The act is set to take effect on July 1, 2025. In practical terms, the measure is a governance and administrative change aimed at adjusting local representation and making it easier for the board to conduct business.

Impact

HB0135 amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 7-86-302, which governs the composition and quorum of the emergency communications board. It expands the board’s size, reallocates appointment authority for county and city government representatives, and changes the quorum standard for board action. These changes affect the board itself, its appointing authorities, and the administration of emergency communications policy in Tennessee, but do not create new substantive emergency communications duties or funding programs.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or recorded vote information is available, so there is no direct evidence of debate, support, or opposition in the provided materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears procedural and organizational rather than controversial, suggesting a generally neutral or administrative posture.

Contention

The main potential points of contention are the increase in board membership, the shift in local-government representation, and the reduced quorum requirement. Those changes could raise questions about balance of representation between state and local interests, as well as whether a smaller quorum makes board action easier or reduces deliberative safeguards. However, no specific objections or supporters are identified in the available record.