Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Hunting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill limiting municipal control over hunting-related firearm discharge after debate
Summary
The Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee advanced House Bill 20 17 as amended after debate and testimony from Sweetwater’s city attorney, who warned the measure would remove cities’ authority to regulate discharge of firearms within city limits. The vote was 8–4 with two members present not voting.
The House Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee voted to advance House Bill 20 17 as amended after hearing testimony and debate over whether the state should preempt local rules that restrict the discharge of firearms within municipal boundaries.
Representative Grylls, the bill’s sponsor, told the committee the legislation "prohibits local governments from regulating the means of taking wildlife within inside the city limits" and was intended to clarify lawful hunting practices. Opponents, including John Cleveland, city attorney for Sweetwater, said the measure would strip cities of public-safety tools they have used for decades.
Cleveland urged members to reject the bill and described a December 2024 incident in Sweetwater in which duck hunters shot on private property within the city roughly 153 feet from a high school parking lot. He told the committee, "House bill 20 17 destroys the only meaningful state law that protects schools, playgrounds, churches and parks and other places where people routinely gather in Tennessee cities from the discharge of firearms."
Members asked whether state hunting rules and criminal statutes would adequately protect schools and other gathering places if local ordinances were preempted. Cleveland argued the TWRA’s mandate covers game protection, not municipal public-safety enforcement, and noted that the TWRA’s 100-yard rule does not apply on private property.
After a motion for the previous question, the clerk reported the count as "8 ayes, 4 nays, 2 present not voting," and the chair announced the bill "as amended moves on to calendar and rules." The committee record shows that HB 20 17 was advanced by that tally.
