Tennessee Senate Bill SB0972

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, relative to special education.

Summary

SB0972 would require local education agencies (LEAs) and public charter schools, upon a parent’s request, to install and maintain video camera surveillance systems in special education classrooms. The bill also requires continuous monitoring of students, teachers, and staff while special education or related services are being provided, but only if the parent of every student who may be monitored gives written consent. The measure is aimed at promoting student safety in self-contained special education settings. The bill sets limits on access to the recordings: photographs and video footage may be viewed only by the parent of a student featured in the recording, and only to the extent allowed by state and federal privacy laws, including Tennessee’s public records exemption and the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Local school boards and charter school governing bodies must adopt policies implementing the law, including how long recordings must be retained. The bill defines key terms such as “parent,” “special education classroom,” and “student,” and applies to pre-K through grade 12 special education settings.

Impact

This bill would add a new section to Tennessee Code Annotated Title 49 governing special education surveillance in classrooms. It would impose a new operational duty on LEAs and public charter schools to install, maintain, and potentially use video monitoring equipment in qualifying special education classrooms when requested by a parent and when all required consents are obtained. It would also require local policy adoption and retention rules for recordings, while interacting with existing privacy protections under state law and FERPA.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be framed as a student-safety initiative rather than a punitive or regulatory overhaul. Its structure suggests an attempt to balance parental oversight with privacy protections for students and staff. Because no committee transcripts or vote history were provided, there is no documented public sentiment in the supplied materials beyond the bill’s protective intent.

Contention

The main points of contention are likely to be privacy, consent, and implementation burden. The bill requires written consent from the parents of every student who may be monitored, which could make use of the system difficult in shared special education settings. Privacy concerns also arise because the bill authorizes recording of students, teachers, and staff, while limiting access to footage under FERPA and state privacy law. School districts and charter schools may also object to the cost and administrative burden of installing equipment, maintaining recordings, and adopting local policies.