Tennessee House approves bill narrowing eminent-domain use by housing authorities

The Tennessee House of Representatives passed Senate Bill 480 on third and final consideration, a measure supporters called the Tennessee Property Rights Protection Act that narrows how housing authorities and community development agencies may use eminent domain.

Chairman Hulsey, sponsor of the substitute bill, said, "This is called the Tennessee Property Rights Protection Act." He explained that under current law a housing authority or community development agency can designate a "blighted area" and acquire the whole area, but the bill changes the term to "blighted property" so "only those pieces of property can be taken." The bill passed after debate and a recorded vote.

Why it matters: Supporters framed the bill as protecting private property owners from wide eminent-domain takings that could capture many properties that are not blighted, while critics warned the change could limit tools used for urban renewal. Chairman Hulsey described cases where attempts had been made to take large stretches of property — he cited an example where up to about 2,500 homes were targeted — and said the bill prevents taking property that is not individually blighted. Representative Clemens pressed the sponsor on whether the change would impair urban renewal plans; Hulsey and the sponsor said agencies retain other tools to acquire property but may not seize non-blighted parcels by eminent domain.

Support and opposition: Representative Fritz voiced support at the microphone, praising the bill as a defense of private property rights. Members who raised concerns asked how the change would interact with statutory authority for urban renewal and whether the bill would unintentionally hamstring redevelopment efforts; the sponsor said it would not remove the ability to pursue urban renewal through means other than eminent domain of non-blighted property.

Formal action: Chairman Hulsey moved passage of the substitute (conforming to Senate Bill 480) and the House voted to pass the bill on third reading. The clerk recorded the tally as 81 yes, 11 no. The presiding officer declared the bill passed.

Looking ahead: The measure received passage in the House and will proceed as provided by legislative process. Members cited prior local controversies as the impetus for the language change.