Tennessee Senate Bill SB0053

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/25
• Engrossed: 2/20/25
• Enrolled: 2/20/25
• Passed: 3/10/25
• Chaptered: 3/21/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 29 and Title 9, Chapter 8, relative to the board of claims.

Summary

SB0053 makes a narrow statutory housekeeping change to Tennessee law governing the Board of Claims. The bill amends Title 4, Chapter 29, which lists state boards and commissions subject to periodic review and reauthorization, by removing one existing reference and adding the Board of Claims to a different section of the code that identifies entities created by statute. In practical terms, the measure updates how the Board of Claims is listed in the Tennessee Code without changing the board’s core duties or claims process. The bill is short and technical, and it appears intended to keep the Board of Claims properly aligned within Tennessee’s statutory framework. It takes effect immediately upon becoming law, reflecting a legislative judgment that the update is routine and should be implemented without delay.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 4 and Title 9 by revising the state’s statutory listing of the Board of Claims. It deletes the Board of Claims from one subsection of the state board review/expiration provisions and adds it to another subsection identifying boards created by statute under Title 9, Chapter 8. The practical legal effect is administrative and organizational: it clarifies the Board of Claims’ placement in the code and its relationship to the state’s board-review statutes, but does not appear to alter claim filing rights, jurisdiction, or substantive standards for claims against the state.

Sentiment

The available legislative history shows strong support and little to no opposition. The Senate Government Operations Committee recommended the bill for passage unanimously, with 9 yeas and 0 nays, and there are no recorded committee transcript objections in the provided materials. The bill’s passage and immediate effective date suggest it was viewed as a routine technical correction rather than a controversial policy change.

Contention

There is no notable substantive contention reflected in the provided record. Because the bill is a technical codification update, any discussion would likely have centered on statutory organization and the proper placement of the Board of Claims within Tennessee’s code rather than on policy disagreements. No opposing arguments, amendments, or dissenting votes are shown in the materials provided.