Tennessee Senate Bill SB1085

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 4, Part 9, relative to higher education.

Summary

SB1085 amends Tennessee’s higher education code to revise the definition of a qualifying private postsecondary institution. Under current law, the bill changes Tennessee Code Annotated § 49-4-902(11)(C) so that a private postsecondary institution qualifies if its primary campus is domiciled in Tennessee and it is accredited by, or a candidate for accreditation by, a regional accrediting association. The measure is limited to this definitional change and does not create a new program or appropriation on its face. The practical effect is to broaden or clarify which in-state private colleges and universities may be treated as eligible institutions under Title 49, Chapter 4, Part 9. Because that chapter governs higher education-related state policy and benefits, the revised definition could affect how certain institutions are recognized for state purposes and which students or schools may be able to participate in programs tied to institutional eligibility. The bill takes effect July 1, 2025.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 4, Part 9 by replacing the existing definition of a qualifying private postsecondary institution in § 49-4-902(11)(C). It would require the institution’s primary campus to be domiciled in Tennessee and accredited by, or a candidate for accreditation by, a regional accrediting association. This change may affect eligibility determinations for higher education programs, institutional recognition, and any state benefits or regulatory provisions that rely on that definition.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill. It passed the Senate Education Committee unanimously 8-0 and then advanced from the Senate Finance, Ways and Means Committee by a 9-2 vote, indicating broad support with some reservations at the fiscal committee stage. No committee transcript was provided, so the discussion record does not show detailed arguments, but the votes indicate the bill was viewed positively overall.

Contention

The main point of contention appears to be whether the revised definition should be adopted as written and what institutions it may include or exclude. The 9-2 vote in the Senate Finance, Ways and Means Committee suggests some members had concerns, likely about policy scope, eligibility effects, or downstream fiscal implications for higher education programs. However, the bill text itself is narrow, and no specific objections were recorded in the provided materials.