Tennessee Senate Bill SB1073

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25
• Chaptered: 4/28/25
• Passed: 4/28/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 10 and Title 49, Chapter 6, relative to special education.

Summary

SB1073 amends Tennessee’s special education law to require local education agencies (LEAs) to give parents or guardians more advance notice before an individualized education program (IEP) team meeting. Under the bill, the LEA must notify the parent or guardian at least 10 calendar days before the meeting, unless both sides agree to meet sooner under state board rules. The bill is intended to ensure families have enough time to prepare and participate in the IEP process. The bill also requires LEAs to provide key documents before the meeting. At least 48 hours in advance, the LEA must give the parent or guardian a copy of the student’s evaluation report that will be used to determine special education eligibility or develop the draft IEP. If the LEA prepares a draft IEP before the meeting, it must also provide that draft at least 48 hours ahead of time unless the parent or guardian waives that right in writing more than 48 hours before the meeting.

Impact

The bill changes Tennessee Code Annotated Title 49, Chapter 10, and affects LEAs, parents and guardians of students receiving or being considered for special education services, and the IEP process generally. It creates statutory notice and document-disclosure requirements that LEAs must follow before IEP meetings, and it ties the timing of those requirements to state board of education rules where parents and LEAs mutually agree to meet earlier. The act takes effect immediately upon becoming law.

Sentiment

The available legislative history suggests broad support for the bill. It passed the Senate Education Committee unanimously, 8-0, with a recommendation for passage and amendment. No committee transcript or recorded floor debate is provided, but the unanimous committee vote and final enactment indicate a generally favorable view of the measure as a procedural protection for families in special education.

Contention

No major opposition is reflected in the provided materials. The only apparent points of flexibility are the exceptions allowing an earlier meeting by mutual agreement and allowing a parent or guardian to decline the draft IEP in writing. Those provisions suggest the bill was designed to balance parent access and preparation time with LEA scheduling needs, but no specific controversy or opposing arguments are documented in the record provided.