Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rental Registry topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee rejects bill that would let local governments create rental-property registries

2674438 · March 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Senate Bill 592, which would have permitted cities and counties to adopt residential rental property registries (with a capped fee), failed in committee after opposition from realtors and concerns about property-rights and compliance.

Senate Bill 592 failed in the Commerce and Labor Committee on a recorded vote after testimony and debate.

The bill, sponsored by Senator Wally, would have permitted—on a permissive basis—cities and counties to adopt an ordinance or resolution creating a residential rental property registry (excluding short-term rentals). The sponsor said the registry would provide municipalities a way to notify property owners about emergencies, storm damage and maintenance obligations, and said it was targeted at larger absentee landlords or conglomerate owners buying up neighborhoods.

Senator Wally described the proposed registry form as including the property address, a point of contact name and phone number, and allowed local governments to charge a nominal fee not to exceed $10 per form; failing to submit could trigger a $50 fine after notice and a chance for a hearing. "This bill proposes just a common sense solution to allow more direct and immediate communication between the municipality or county and the owner of the residential rental property," he said.

Addison Russell, representing the realtors, said the association opposed the bill "from a private property rights standpoint" and questioned the effectiveness of similar programs, noting compliance difficulties in Davidson County. The Tennessee Municipal League and other municipal groups were listed as supporters, but the committee heard public opposition from realtors.

After debate and a recorded roll call, the clerk announced the bill failed with six no votes and one aye. The committee minutes show the final tally as 6 no, 1 aye and the bill did not move forward.

— Ending note: The bill was permissive for local governments but failed after concerns about private property registration and compliance were raised.