Tennessee House Bill HB2663

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/17/26
• Refer: 3/23/26
• Refer: 3/30/26
• Refer: 4/15/26
• Engrossed: 4/20/26
• Enrolled: 4/28/26
• Passed: 5/21/26
• Chaptered: 5/27/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Chapter 553 of the Acts of 1903; and any other acts amendatory thereto, relative to funding road and street maintenance within the City of Tullahoma.

Summary

HB2663 is a private act affecting the City of Tullahoma, Tennessee. It amends the city’s governing private act to require that, beginning with fiscal year 2025-2026, 3.8% of each annual operating budget be appropriated for maintenance of streets and roads within the city limits. The measure also sets a floor for that funding, requiring at least $1.5 million annually for road and street maintenance. The bill is narrowly tailored to Tullahoma rather than applying statewide. It creates a specific budgetary obligation for the city’s legislative body and ties the requirement to the city’s annual operating budget process. The act includes a severability clause and is contingent on approval by a two-thirds vote of Tullahoma’s legislative body, with the local approval or rejection to be certified to the secretary of state. If approved locally, the funding mandate becomes effective for all purposes as provided in the act.

Impact

The bill amends Chapter 553 of the Acts of 1903 and related amendatory acts governing Tullahoma, adding a new section that directs a fixed share of the city’s budget to street and road maintenance. Its practical effect is to constrain local budget discretion by earmarking municipal funds for infrastructure upkeep and establishing a minimum annual appropriation. The act does not alter general state law for other municipalities, but it changes the legal obligations of Tullahoma’s governing body if locally approved.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been received very favorably and without recorded opposition. It advanced unanimously through the House Private Acts Committee, the House State & Local Government Committee, and on the floor, including consent calendar passage and a final motion to adopt. The voting history suggests broad support for the measure as a local infrastructure funding requirement.

Contention

There is little visible contention in the available record. No committee transcripts are provided, and every recorded vote was unanimous, indicating no formal opposition in committee or on the floor. The only potential point of discussion implied by the bill’s structure is the balance between ensuring dedicated road funding and limiting Tullahoma’s budget flexibility, but no member objections or disputes are documented in the materials provided.