AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 2; Title 39 and Title 47, relative to campaign finance.
Summary
SB0627 makes a narrow change to Tennessee’s campaign finance law by amending Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 2-10-206(a)(3). The bill replaces a semicolon with language allowing the registry to charge for copies of records, but only up to the registry’s actual cost of producing those copies. In practical terms, it clarifies that any copying fee charged by the campaign finance registry must be limited to cost recovery rather than generating revenue.
The bill is framed as a technical amendment within the state’s election and campaign finance framework, and it takes effect immediately upon becoming law. Because it touches Title 2 and references campaign finance administration, it affects the state’s campaign finance registry and any individuals or entities requesting copies of registry records. The measure appears designed to preserve public access to records while preventing excessive fees.
Impact
The bill amends Tennessee’s campaign finance statutes to expressly cap copying charges at the registry’s actual production cost. This changes the administration of records requests under Title 2 by limiting what the campaign finance registry may charge for copies of its materials, while leaving the underlying disclosure framework intact. It primarily affects the registry and members of the public, candidates, committees, and other parties who seek campaign finance records.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests generally favorable support for the bill, with the Senate State & Local Government Committee recommending passage with amendments by a 6-2 vote. No committee transcript is available, but the vote indicates the measure was viewed positively by a majority of committee members. The absence of recorded discussion suggests the bill may have been treated as a relatively noncontroversial technical or administrative change.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the scope of fees the campaign finance registry may charge for copies of records. Supporters likely favor the bill because it limits charges to actual costs and protects access to public records, while any opposition would likely center on whether the registry should have broader discretion to recover administrative expenses beyond direct copying costs. The committee vote shows some dissent, but no specific objections are documented in the available materials.