AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 5; Title 6; Title 7; Title 29; Title 33; Title 38; Title 39; Title 40; Title 41; Title 43; Title 45; Title 50; Title 53; Title 54; Title 63; Title 67; Title 68 and Title 71, relative to the "Pot for Potholes Act."
SB0921, titled the “Pot for Potholes Act,” would create a comprehensive adult-use marijuana regulatory framework in Tennessee. It defines marijuana and related industry terms, authorizes adults age 21 and older to possess, transport, transfer, and cultivate limited amounts of marijuana for personal use, and permits licensed marijuana growers, processors, dispensaries, transporters, testing facilities, and research facilities to operate under state-issued licenses. The bill also allows limited medical administration of marijuana products to minors by parents or guardians, establishes packaging, labeling, advertising, testing, security, and recordkeeping requirements, and directs the Department of Agriculture, with other agencies, to write implementing rules.
The bill would substantially amend Tennessee law across criminal, tax, licensing, corrections, employment, firearms, public assistance, and local-government provisions. It decriminalizes or removes penalties for many marijuana-related activities that are currently prohibited, creates new licensing and regulatory duties for state agencies, imposes a 15% marijuana tax plus potential local sales taxes, and dedicates most marijuana tax revenue to the state highway fund and counties. It also requires review of current marijuana incarceration cases and makes certain people serving marijuana-only sentences eligible for immediate release, while limiting local bans and regulations on marijuana businesses except under specified conditions.
The bill’s framing and structure indicate strong support for legalization, regulation, and market development, with repeated emphasis on agriculture, commerce, consumer safety, and revenue for infrastructure. Because no committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, there is no direct evidence of legislative debate or vote outcomes in the supplied materials. Based on the text alone, the bill is presented in a highly affirmative manner toward legalization and regulatory normalization of cannabis.
The main points of contention are likely to be the legalization of adult-use marijuana, the scope of personal cultivation and possession rights, the preemption of local restrictions, and the immediate release provisions for people incarcerated on marijuana-only offenses. Additional likely disputes include the bill’s tax structure, the authority given to state agencies to regulate banking and licensing, protections for employees and firearm rights, and the treatment of marijuana use in schools, workplaces, and public assistance programs. The bill also appears to favor certain applicants—such as disadvantaged businesses, veteran-owned businesses, and hemp license holders—which could draw debate over fairness and market access.