Tennessee House Bill HB0254

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/21/25
• Refer: 2/3/25
• Refer: 3/17/25
• Chaptered: 4/29/25
• Passed: 4/29/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 4, Chapter 3, Part 7, relative to the local government planning advisory committee.

Summary

HB0254 updates Tennessee’s statutory list of state boards and commissions to reflect the local government planning advisory committee created in Tennessee Code Annotated § 4-3-727. The bill removes an outdated reference from the list of entities scheduled for repeal or review under Title 4, Chapter 29, and adds the committee to the list of entities that are expressly continued in law. In practical terms, the measure is a housekeeping bill that aligns the state’s administrative code with the existence of the advisory committee. The bill does not create a new program, change local zoning authority, or alter planning policy directly. Instead, it preserves the legal status of the local government planning advisory committee within the state’s framework for boards and commissions, ensuring the committee remains recognized as an active entity under state law. It takes effect immediately upon becoming law.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 4, Chapter 3, Part 7 by deleting the local government planning advisory committee from the list of entities subject to repeal and adding it to the list of entities continued by statute. This affects the committee’s legal standing and ensures it remains an authorized state-created advisory body. The practical impact is limited to state administrative law and the operation of the committee itself, with no direct change to private rights or local land-use rules.

Sentiment

The available legislative history shows broad support and no recorded opposition. The House Government Operations Committee recommended passage unanimously, and the House passed the bill on a consent calendar with 94 yeas and 0 nays. The lack of committee debate or recorded dissent suggests the bill was viewed as a routine technical correction rather than a controversial policy change.

Contention

There is no notable contention reflected in the available materials. Because the bill is a technical update to statutory references for a planning advisory committee, any discussion would likely have centered on administrative cleanup and ensuring the committee’s continued existence in law. No opposing arguments, amendments, or disputed policy issues are shown in the committee or floor record.