Tennessee House Bill HB0307

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/26/25
• Refer: 4/2/25
• Chaptered: 4/29/25
• Passed: 4/29/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 5, relative to constitutional officer duties.

Impact

The amendments proposed by HB 0307 have significant implications for how county governments operate in Tennessee. By clearly delineating the responsibilities of constitutional officers, the bill seeks to improve accountability and operational efficiency within county administrations. This could lead to more streamlined processes for services provided to residents, as the defined roles may reduce overlaps and clarify responsibilities among different offices, enhancing the effectiveness of county governance.

Summary

House Bill 0307 aims to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 5, regarding the duties of constitutional officers within county jurisdictions. This bill defines the specific roles and responsibilities of key county officials, including sheriffs, county clerks, and assessors of property. It provides clarity on what constitutes the duties of these officers, particularly emphasizing the law enforcement responsibilities of the sheriff and the administrative tasks of other officers such as collection of taxes and maintaining public records.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 0307 seems to be generally supportive among legislators who recognize the necessity of well-defined roles in governmental operations. However, there are concerns from certain advocacy groups who fear that limiting or rigidly defining these duties could restrain flexibility in responding to local needs effectively. Overall, the bill appears to reflect a need for modernization in local governance structures while ensuring that key services are maintained.

Contention

Debate surrounding HB 0307 primarily focuses on the balance between maintaining efficient governance and allowing local discretion in broadening the scope of duties for county officials. Some argue that strictly adhering to defined roles might impede innovative solutions that local officials could implement based on unique community needs. Conversely, proponents claim that clearer definitions will prevent confusion and enable commissioners to be held accountable for essential duties.