Tennessee House Bill HB1381

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25
• Refer: 2/12/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 13, Chapter 21, relative to municipal rental property registries.

Summary

HB1381 authorizes Tennessee municipalities, including counties with metropolitan government, to create and enforce rental property registries for residential rental dwelling units within their jurisdictions. If a local government adopts such a registry, owners of covered rental properties must register annually and provide basic identifying information about the property, ownership, management contact details, the number of rental units, and verification of compliance with building codes, zoning, and health and safety regulations. The bill also allows municipalities to charge a reasonable administrative fee, impose civil penalties or other legal action for failure to register, and integrate the registry into local code enforcement efforts. It exempts certain owner-occupied properties with fewer than two rental units and properties owned by governmental or quasi-governmental entities. Non-sensitive registry information may be made public, while proprietary or personal information remains confidential. Municipalities that adopt a registry must also submit annual reports to the Department of Economic and Community Development on participation, violations, and effectiveness.

Impact

HB1381 would add a new part to Title 13, Chapter 21 of the Tennessee Code Annotated, giving municipalities express statutory authority to establish rental property registries and to use them as part of local housing and code enforcement. It would affect landlords, property managers, tenants, and local governments by creating new registration, reporting, and compliance obligations in municipalities that choose to adopt a registry. The bill also clarifies that the new local authority supplements, rather than preempts, existing state law and rules.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be framed as a local-government housing and code-enforcement tool rather than a broadly controversial statewide mandate. The bill’s structure suggests support for municipal flexibility and improved housing oversight, while also including confidentiality protections and exemptions that may have been intended to reduce burden on smaller or public entities. No formal vote history or transcript comments are available here to show direct support or opposition.

Contention

The main potential points of contention are likely to be the added compliance burden on rental property owners, the authority for municipalities to inspect registered units, and the possibility of civil penalties for non-registration. Landlords and property owners may view the registry as duplicative or intrusive, while municipalities and housing-code advocates may support it as a way to improve enforcement and housing conditions. Privacy concerns may also arise over what information is public versus confidential, though the bill expressly protects proprietary and personal information.