Tennessee House Bill HB2111

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/2/26
• Refer: 2/5/26
• Refer: 3/3/26
• Refer: 3/11/26
• Refer: 4/15/26
• Engrossed: 4/20/26
• Enrolled: 4/30/26
• Passed: 5/19/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 41, relative to corrections.

Summary

HB2111 creates the State Families of Incarcerated Individuals Advisory Board within Tennessee law. The board is made up of nine members, all of whom must be family members of currently or formerly incarcerated people, with appointments split among the governor, the speaker of the senate, and the speaker of the house. Members are appointed from each grand division, serve staggered terms, may be reappointed, and can be removed for cause by the appointing authority. The board is given an advisory role focused on improving communication between the Department of Correction and families, strengthening family reunification, and supporting reentry and community reintegration. It must meet at least quarterly, hold public-comment opportunities at its first three meetings in different grand divisions, then meet in Nashville with department and contractor staff to discuss concerns and review policies. After that process, the board must issue recommendations to legislative leaders and the commissioner of correction. The bill also requires the department and correctional contractors to cooperate with the board and adds the board to the state boards and commissions statute for administrative purposes.

Impact

The bill adds a new part to Title 41 governing corrections and amends Title 4, Chapter 29 to place the new advisory board within the state’s list of boards and commissions. It does not change sentencing, incarceration eligibility, or inmate rights directly, but it creates a formal statewide advisory structure that can influence Department of Correction policies, contractor practices, and legislative oversight related to family communication, reunification, and reentry. The board members serve without compensation, though they are reimbursed for travel expenses.

Sentiment

The available voting history shows strong and consistent support for the bill at every stage, with unanimous or near-unanimous committee approvals and overwhelming floor passage. The bill appears to have been viewed as a constructive corrections-policy measure, especially because it centers the perspectives of families affected by incarceration and emphasizes communication and reentry. No committee transcript objections were provided, and the recorded votes suggest broad bipartisan agreement.

Contention

No major opposition is evident in the provided record. The only potentially sensitive issues are structural and operational: the bill creates an autonomous board, requires cooperation from the Department of Correction and contractors, and mandates public meetings and public-ballot voting, which may raise administrative or workload concerns. Any debate would likely have centered on how much influence an advisory board of family members should have over correctional policy, but the vote history does not show significant contention.