AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 12; Title 54 and Title 55, relative to transportation.
Summary
SB2288 amends Tennessee transportation law to clarify that the term “fee or charge” includes a toll. It also creates a new restriction on certain existing transportation facilities at Tennessee’s border with another state. Beginning July 1, 2026, if a border facility on the state highway system or interstate/national defense highway system adds one or more new vehicle travel lanes, or converts an HOV lane into a high-occupancy user fee lane, the facility would fall within the bill’s new rule.
In practical terms, the bill appears aimed at limiting or regulating tolling and lane-conversion projects on border-area highways, especially where expansion or HOV-to-toll-lane changes occur after the effective date. The measure amends Title 54 of the Tennessee Code, which governs highways and transportation, and may affect state transportation planners, highway authorities, and any public-private or interstate projects involving tolls or managed lanes.
Impact
The bill would change Tennessee Code Annotated § 54-3-103 to expressly include tolls within the definition of “fee or charge,” and would add a new subdivision to § 54-3-104(b) addressing certain border transportation facilities. Its legal effect is to tighten statutory language around toll-related charges and to impose a specific condition on existing border highway facilities that expand lanes or convert HOV lanes to high-occupancy user fee lanes on or after July 1, 2026. The affected parties are state transportation agencies, local or regional highway authorities, and any entities involved in toll lane or managed lane development on qualifying border routes.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill faced significant opposition in committee and did not advance, failing in the Senate Transportation and Safety Committee by a 1-5 vote. With no committee transcript available, the record indicates a generally unfavorable reception among committee members, likely reflecting concern about the bill’s restrictions on transportation projects or tolling authority. The lack of recorded supportive discussion limits the ability to identify broader advocacy, but the vote outcome points to weak legislative support at that stage.
Contention
The main point of contention appears to be the bill’s treatment of tolls and managed lanes on border-area highways. Opponents likely objected to limiting future lane additions or HOV-to-user-fee conversions at facilities on the state’s borders, which could constrain transportation financing or congestion-management strategies. Supporters, by contrast, likely viewed the measure as a way to prevent tolling expansion or preserve access on existing highway facilities. The committee vote shows the issue was divisive, but no transcript is available to attribute specific arguments to individual members or stakeholders.