Tennessee House Bill HB1217

Tennessee 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/31/23
• Refer: 2/22/23
• Refer: 2/28/23
• Refer: 3/15/23
• Engrossed: 3/21/23
• Enrolled: 4/25/23
• Passed: 5/11/23
• Chaptered: 5/24/23

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 9 and Title 49, relative to capital projects.

Impact

The amendments proposed in HB1217 modify the requirements surrounding the management of capital projects at public universities, particularly related to costs exceeding certain thresholds. Specifically, capital projects costing over one million dollars will require the approval of the state building commission. Additionally, projects that do not utilize state funds but exceed ten million dollars must establish a transparent disclosure process, reinforcing accountability and oversight while allowing flexibility for smaller projects without extensive bureaucratic hurdles.

Summary

House Bill 1217, also known as the Capital Projects Amendment Act, seeks to amend various sections of the Tennessee Code Annotated, specifically tackling how capital projects are planned and funded at public institutions of higher education. The bill primarily allows the University of Tennessee to approve and supervise its capital projects if they are fully funded by donations or revenue from self-supporting auxiliary projects. This provision aims to streamline the capital project approval process and empower the university with more autonomy in managing its facilities and infrastructure.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB1217 appears largely positive among institutions advocating for greater control over their capital projects. Supporters argue that the bill promotes institutional autonomy and allows the University of Tennessee to react swiftly to developmental needs without unnecessary delays caused by extensive state approvals. However, there are underlying concerns about transparency and the long-term implications of shifting some approval powers away from state oversight, which some stakeholders see as a potential reduction in public accountability.

Contention

A notable point of contention revolves around the balance between institutional autonomy and state oversight. Critics of the bill worry that reducing the level of state scrutiny on capital projects could lead to a lack of accountability. Since the bill allows for significant capital improvements without state funding oversight, concerns arise on whether this could lead to mismanagement of funds or projects that may not align with broader state educational goals. Therefore, achieving a balance between enabling institutions to flourish while ensuring responsible governance is a focal point in the discussions surrounding this legislation.