[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":-5,"_68":69,"_70":-5,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6412662,"mediaKeyId","2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4","parentId",2505618,"title","Votes at a glance: House Commerce Committee (March 1) — key committee actions and tallies","audioSeconds",3892,"startMs",1143000,"endMs",5035000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4&start=1143&end=5035","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4/thumbnail_1143000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6412662/Votes-at-a-glance-House-Commerce-Committee-March-1-key-committee-actions-and-tallies","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6412662-25b12a1196cfd4f8c222735952a278ca/orig.mp4?Expires=1770923272&Signature=gkp4avvJGFF5lGj0Ucjw6aU4UBiUpEQLpi4SetKKYSrc0aCQ0tlEH41vu~YVIgvMcFyIaKE~82afMQBmXiKULz47p3p9TPOsTTcc6Z~bSEosHRR-ZNTRr31z3azes32psiSQxMHxvwaLgi8tvrSmaPC9JiNx~FKb3eA-KH7yWBLB6uk-cPTi6IAvv7vFXS~opTS1WZq8sBde3GUqIyPq-OVYdhp-IOW5lie4gyH42rrYif5QQQ~kaNU3ShX~8D1xmyPmPGvcqLd4uX~Zog7snbRYAxGjlvOSd6AnhmEqX86R7wYZ6w1Tmdz0aeeh0D8slppOpyrzBBQ82E~4PHz65Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","TN State Legislature","date","2025-03-05T00:00:00Z","article","The Tennessee House Commerce Committee took the following formal actions during its March 1 meeting. This roundup lists each bill or nomination acted on in committee, the committee outcome and the vote tally where recorded.

Votes at a glance

- John Hyde — Reappointment to the Tennessee Public Utility Commission (House joint resolution/nomination): Approved by committee, tally 22 ayes, 0 nos. The committee reported the nomination onward (reported to Calendar and Rules for consideration). (Transcript: reappointment presentation and vote.)

- House Bill 683 — Enhanced armed-guard license (amendment 004376 attached): Passed 22 ayes, 0 nos; advanced to Government Operations. (Sponsor: Leader Lambeth.)

- House Bill 871 — Developer access to buyers’ condominium deposits (amendment 3950 attached): Passed 19 ayes, 4 nos; advanced to Calendar and Rules. (Sponsor: Chairman Rutter.)

- House Bill 378 (HB 3 78) — Reserve officers serving as security guards (amendment 3848 attached): Passed 21 ayes, 0 noes; advanced to Calendar and Rules. (Sponsor: Representative McCallman.)

- House Bill 561 — Utility district and comptroller measures (emergency operating loans, TBOR contested-case streamlining, bond issuance): Passed 21 ayes, 0 noes; advanced to Calendar and Rules. (Sponsor: Representative Caplan.)

- House Bill 11 43 — Cleanup consolidating renewable/clean energy lists: Passed 18 ayes, 0 nos; advanced to Calendar and Rules. (Sponsor: Chairman Boyd.)

- House Bill 4 21 — Utility commissioner continuing education adjustment (amendment 3624 attached): Passed 16 ayes, 0 nos; advanced to Finance. (Sponsor: Speaker Pro Tem Marsh.)

- House Bill 4 12 — Propane industry reference cleanup (removes obsolete national association reference): Passed 16 ayes, 0 nos; advanced to Calendar and Rules. (Sponsor: Representative Lynn.)

- House Bill 11 54 — Self-storage operator authority (treat continued use as acceptance of lease revisions; eviction of tenants living in units): Passed 17 ayes, 0 nos; advanced to Calendar and Rules. (Sponsor: Representative Lynn.)

- House Bill 378, 561, 378 and others noted above were sent forward with unanimous or near-unanimous committee support except where noted.

Rolled or postponed for further work

- House Bill 713 (cemetery regulation cleanup): Rolled one week for sponsors and stakeholders to resolve conflicting amendments (noted as late amendment 4464). (Sponsor: Representative Alexander.)

- House Bill 1384 (Paystub Protection Act): Rolled one week for clarifications on mandatory vs. request-triggered employer duties and independent contractor coverage. (Sponsor: Representative Harris.)

Other committee actions

- House Bill 1342 — Process for removing improperly filed UCC liens against public officials: The committee approved the bill; it will be referred to Judiciary. (Sponsor: Representative Lynn.)

Notes on tallies and records: The committee clerk recorded the vote tallies cited above where the transcript shows a clerk report. Several items were approved with unanimous recorded tallies; others (for example HB 871) recorded a non-unanimous vote. Where a numerical tally was not read aloud in the transcript, the result (approved/rolled) is noted without a numeric tally.

— Compiled from the House Commerce Committee transcript for March 1, including roll calls and clerk tallies.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Commerce Committee\tMar 5, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of votes and formal actions taken during the March 1 House Commerce Committee meeting, including committee reports, confirmations and items rolled for further work.","taxTitle","taxId",0,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":-5,"_68":69,"_70":-5,"_71":72,"_73":72},6412685,"Committee rolls Paystub Protection Act after members seek clarifications on scope and enforcement",685,3585000,4270000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4&start=3585&end=4270","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4/thumbnail_3585000.jpg","/articles/6412685/Committee-rolls-Paystub-Protection-Act-after-members-seek-clarifications-on-scope-and-enforcement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6412685-4f5342de382aca7f9228ea5bce375da0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770923272&Signature=Zz5oPJVjRt2zTLhd1nNo2cD~JoIM0nn5Rn2IuWRwgzCLQpiMvUj9nbEumv5OY7-bPwQdvWMrMxwaIScDWCWsetfCmcs9xQK1BDxWiFJG4TNZwir5dHMste9uKr2woVsnTBSluvV4brMCncsbnsvAjiXaxZkaDtktgGSU3Q1olwn6ObHwCopJEhRhNXr6aIEcAjhqnKcXNEl09ZuGuih95117DsAVVZXgcissNYNqU5LBTts3J0qCqBbIIARvLJda8ZHEzskzPQw25Db38gY-9MvZEWDrd2s1oMdXVNT~-sglUARQTHFPbQxKxpooj9u1nWvZ2aVHxVVMLKIct8NodA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Harris proposed House Bill 1384, the Paystub Protection Act, to require employers to provide employees a written or electronic statement of earnings and deductions for each pay period. The bill and an amendment were the subject of extended committee discussion before the sponsor agreed to a one‑week roll.

Under the amendment presented, employers must provide a pay statement within 20 days of the employee’s pay date; if an employee files a complaint with the Department of Labor, the employer would have an additional 10 days to produce the statement. The amendment also clarified that a private cause of action would not arise from a violation of the statute, meaning that civil lawsuits would not be created by this measure.

Representative Harris described the amendment: “An employee shall provide to an employee… a statement of the employee’s earnings and deductions for each pay period within 20 days of the employee’s pay date,” she said, while adding the bill provides a window to avoid immediate penalties and to limit litigation exposure.

Committee members pressed on several points: whether the obligation is mandatory or only triggered on request, how the statute treats small employers who pay by check and historically do not provide stubs, and whether independent contractors are covered. Legal staff reviewed the bill language and said the draft defines “employee” as a natural person who performs services for an employer for valuable consideration and does not distinguish independent contractors; enforcement is driven by employee complaints to the department.

Chair and committee members expressed a desire to refine the bill’s language so that employers are not exposed to unintended penalties when employees do not request statements, while preserving worker access to pay information. The sponsor agreed to let the committee work with legal services and stakeholders; the chair rolled HB 1384 for one week for revisions.

Next steps: HB 1384 was rolled one week to allow clarifying amendments on employer obligations, the definition of “employee,” and the enforcement trigger.

— Article compiled from remarks by Representative Harris, legal counsel and committee discussion recorded in the House Commerce Committee transcript.","Representative Harris’ Paystub Protection Act, which would require employers to provide pay statements within 20 days (and allows an additional 10 days after a department inquiry), was rolled one week for clarifying language about when statements must be provided and how independent contractors and enforcement will be handled.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":-5,"_68":69,"_70":-5,"_71":72,"_73":72},6412711,"Committee advances bill letting condo developers use up to 10% of buyers’ deposits for construction, with surety protections",993,1778000,2771000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4&start=1778&end=2771","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4/thumbnail_1778000.jpg","/articles/6412711/Committee-advances-bill-letting-condo-developers-use-up-to-10-of-buyers-deposits-for-construction-with-surety-protections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6412711-f43acf78bb8b20e700db6dc05e1c2757/orig.mp4?Expires=1770923272&Signature=ffvjuUypwXIY05AyDUyyHRaH0MIKkG9O-ISE1~Jr6hRBVwAmV9sFfu3E2-Ed6Lyime8RwAIhLiaZjo220f-KtBk5r2n2fgn1kC5iVXSA1muRhKABjZjv3Mcv75Ay~mR16wsICSMVuNqYUPBY6uKVzfL5VpZND2Uk-s5Vh0RFWgw4WoCh6IBiZVT4g7yx1As3pwDw978gbMLwanZNmrLSfiKqs3dnwt-IekIorj1E5xHR0hOK-HOXcrrlLlmleiGujgvOiEBK26F~kx6ij10xVX85kx8ypX1yV6gof7Yw1lS5dWTQTLqARngEvzwJ3m8rCqdRapil1HyWqOmz9mgFUA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Commerce Committee on Monday voted to advance House Bill 871, amended to set conditions under which residential condominium developers may access a portion of buyers' deposits for construction costs.

Chairman Rutter, the bill sponsor, described the measure as allowing a developer to use a portion of a buyer’s deposit for actual construction expenses provided protections are in place. “This bill would allow residential condo developers to, use a portion of the buyer's deposit for construction cost,” Rutter said. “To ensure full transparency, buyers must provide written acknowledgment by acknowledging this provision in the contract.”

Under the language presented to the committee, a deposit up to 10% of the purchase price may be held in an escrow account and a developer may access that portion if it is secured by a surety bond or letter of credit. The sponsor said a portion exceeding 10% could be placed in a separate escrow account and used only for actual construction costs.

Committee members asked repeated questions about how the bill interacts with lenders and mortgage financing. The sponsor clarified the bill governs the contractual relationship between buyer and developer and does not change the legal requirements imposed by lenders: “This does not affect that relationship. What this is doing is affecting the deposit the buyer who's depositing the funds with the builder,” the sponsor said, and added that evidence of accessible equity could help developers secure construction financing.

Members also raised consumer-protection concerns about the risk to buyers if a project fails after a developer has used deposit funds. Representative Clemons and others pressed the sponsor on whether the surety mechanism would reliably return funds to purchasers. Proponents said the surety requirement provides stronger protection than relying on an insolvent developer’s ability to repay individuals directly.

After debate the committee adopted an amendment (drafting code 3950) and voted 19–4 to send HB 871, as amended, to Calendar and Rules.

Votes and next steps: HB 871 passed the Commerce Committee 19 ayes, 4 nos and will go to Calendar and Rules for further consideration.

— Article compiled from remarks by Chairman Rutter, Representative Hardaway and committee proceedings recorded in the House Commerce Committee transcript.","House Bill 871, amended in committee, allows developers to access up to 10% of buyers' deposits for actual construction costs if secured by a surety (bond or letter of credit); it passed the Commerce Committee and moves to calendar and rules after a 19–4 vote.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":-5,"_68":69,"_70":-5,"_71":72,"_73":72},6412742,"Tennessee committee backs new ‘enhanced’ armed-guard license, sends bill to government operations",283,1456000,1739000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4&start=1456&end=1739","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2505618-cebc3702ed2dd162de9b5f1b2311d1f4/thumbnail_1456000.jpg","/articles/6412742/Tennessee-committee-backs-new-enhanced-armed-guard-license-sends-bill-to-government-operations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6412742-cacf73b0adf068508475be23c5be423b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770923272&Signature=cpCX717Cj4MDCeSPcvHqQAwzzKPgjC16XTd9Fi6zdguExlyzCXaJw39NkzGekCqp4sGMmaeTJ6y5UJgH6QsYsYFW8AVSSmr~6RTlcEeWPZduJGlcGdZp~cRy4ItwS6Ld7llaX22XXD55n9RnlltrmaDzte2jWtXqnkkCgEZu6E8eOLcj5xNULeL9kncnXiPPMy2Kosz1Q2ePILAqLtF2ll0mwByKCQaZ~dDbo6bTwFmJ0T653Rnflwz65WUlh9fkL9SgBeJs42MSftWVsizWZotxVjpKjcdvYYg5n~kALrZcuPK~zaOj9KA3Z--LyU8Y2IlbBA2BAvCgt1R8JyfUfw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Commerce Committee on Monday advanced House Bill 683, creating a new “enhanced” armed-guard license that requires higher background checks and expanded firearms qualification and training, the committee chair announced.

The bill creates a tiered license for armed security personnel intended to distinguish highly trained, prior military or law-enforcement candidates from those who hold only the existing armed-guard credential. “This creates an enhanced armed guard license where those individuals would be prior military, prior law enforcement, extensive training,” Leader Lambeth said during his presentation. “So that if someone is hiring an armed guard, they know that that individual is well trained and can actually defend their person or property.”

Leader Lambeth told the committee the measure would require firearms qualification for shotguns and rifles in addition to the pistol qualifications already required for armed guards. “Armed guards are currently allowed to carry shotguns, but they are not required to qualify on those shotguns,” he said. “This bill would allow them to still continue to carry shotguns or rifles … but they would have to qualify on those on a regular basis.”

Committee members described the bill as addressing a perceived training gap and enabling employers and institutions to distinguish higher-qualified security staff. The sponsor said the license would be available to those who meet enhanced requirements and that a fee, similar but slightly higher than the existing armed-guard fee, would apply. Leader Lambeth noted some implementation details would be set in agency rules.

The committee attached an amendment (drafting code 004376) that traveled with the bill. Following questions and discussion, the committee voted 22–0 to send HB 683, as amended, to the Government Operations committee.

Votes and next steps: HB 683 passed the Commerce Committee 22 ayes, 0 nos and will move to Government Operations for further consideration.

Context: Committee members said the change responds to stakeholder feedback that current Tennessee licensing does not differentiate between minimally trained armed guards and those with prior military or law-enforcement experience and recurring firearms training. The bill, as presented, focuses on licensing and training standards; enforcement, rulemaking and fee specifics will be determined in subsequent administrative rulemaking if the bill advances.

— Article compiled from remarks by Leader Lambeth and committee proceedings recorded in the House Commerce Committee transcript.","The House Commerce Committee voted unanimously to advance a bill creating an enhanced armed-guard license with higher training and background standards and qualification requirements for long guns; the measure is headed to Government Operations.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: House Commerce Committee (March 1) — key committee actions and tallies

Committee rolls Paystub Protection Act after members seek clarifications on scope and enforcement

Committee advances bill letting condo developers use up to 10% of buyers’ deposits for construction, with surety protections

Tennessee committee backs new ‘enhanced’ armed-guard license, sends bill to government operations