Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (2026)
Local tax levy - Special transportation tax levy and fund
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) For each LEA there shall be levied for current operation and maintenance not more than one (1) school tax for all grades included in the LEA. Each LEA shall place in one (1) separate school fund all school revenues for current school operation purposes received from the state, county and other political subdivisions, if any. However, any county in which only one (1) pupil transportation system is operated, and that has within its borders a city or special district operating a system of public schools and which county in the current school year operates a system of public school transportation, may levy a special tax to cover that portion of the total cost of the public school transportation system that is in excess of the state funds generated for student transportation of the county. The proceeds of the special transportation tax levy shall be set up in a special account to be known as the public school pupil transportation fund and shall be disbursed on order of the county board for public school transportation services only. Any county that elects to operate a public transportation fund may elect to apportion transportation funds for public school transportation service to a city or special district operating a system of public schools within the county. This election must be approved by the county legislative body and shall remain in effect until specifically rescinded. Apportionment shall thereafter be made without further approval. All school funds for current operation and maintenance purposes collected by any county, except the funds raised by any local special student transportation tax levy as authorized in this subsection (a), shall be apportioned by the county trustee among the LEAs in the county on the basis of the WFTEADA maintained by each, during the current school year. For the purposes of making the apportionment of local school funds as set forth in this subsection (a), and in defining the WFTEADA for the current school year, the county director of schools and the county trustee shall be guided by the following procedure:
- (1) The county director of schools shall recertify to the county trustee at the end of the first quarter of the current fiscal year the WFTEADA during the preceding school year;
- (2) During each of the first and second quarters of the current school year, the county trustee shall use the WFTEADA figure for the preceding school year as recertified to the county trustee by the county director of schools in making the tentative apportionments of the school funds as provided for in this subsection (a) during the first and second quarters of the current school year;
- (3) Before the end of the third quarter of the current school year, the county director of schools shall certify to the county trustee the best estimate the county director of schools can make of the WFTEADA in the schools of the LEAs in the county, during the current school year; and upon this best estimate, the county trustee shall make the tentative apportionments of school funds for the third quarter of the current school year;
- (4) As early as possible before the close of the current school year, the county director of schools shall certify to the county trustee the correct WFTEADA for the entire current school year; and
- (5) Thereupon, the county trustee shall apportion the entire amount of county school funds for the current school year in keeping with this subsection (a), on the basis of the correct total WFTEADA during the current school year in the LEAs, making adjustments as may be necessary on account of the tentative apportionments made to the LEAs during the first three (3) quarters of the current school year.
- (b)
- (1) The state school funds distributed under part 1 of this chapter to a county for county schools shall be paid to the county trustee in the amounts as certified under the authority of the commissioner.
- (2) Such funds for an LEA other than a county LEA shall be distributed directly to the treasurer or proper fiscal agent of the LEA in the amounts as certified under the authority of the commissioner.
- (3) The county trustee shall be properly bonded as now provided by law; the treasurer or fiscal agent of LEAs, other than a county LEA, shall be bonded in an amount, in the manner and in the form and be conditioned as prescribed by law for county trustees. Immediately upon receipt of a properly executed bond, the office of the county clerk shall notify the commissioner.
- (c) Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, including any requirement of this section, any interest earned on funds that have previously been apportioned to the LEAs within the county is not subject to apportionment.
Amended by 2022 Tenn. Acts, ch. 966, s 15, eff. 7/1/2023.
Amended by 2013 Tenn. Acts, ch. 315, s 19, eff. 4/29/2013.
Acts 1977, ch. 289, § 12; 1981, ch. 357, § 1; T.C.A., § 49-614; Acts 1987, ch. 21, § 1; 1992, ch. 783, § 1; 1994, ch. 899, § 1; 2001, ch. 284, § 10.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2022 · leading case: City of Athens Bd. Of Educ. v. McMinn Cnty., Tennessee, 467 S.W.3d 458 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014).
City of Athens Bd. Of Educ. v. McMinn Cnty., Tennessee, 467 S.W.3d 458 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (a) (2013) mandates that “[a]ll school funds for current operation and maintenance purposes collected by any county .”
Oak Ridge City Schs. v. Anderson Cnty., 677 S.W.2d 468 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1984). “The threshold question on this appeal is whether or not a county is required under T.C.A. § 49-3-315 to apportion to a city school system located within its boundaries funds in its school budget received from the Tennessee Valley Authority in lieu of taxes.”
Kina Crider v. The Cnty. of Henry, Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). “-3- As to the allocation theory, summary judgment is granted as a matter of law pursuant to the plain language of TCA 49-3-315, and the opinion of the Court of Appeals in .”
Crider v. Cnty. of Henry, 295 S.W.3d 269 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “As to the allocation theory, summary judgment is granted as a matter of law pursuant to the plain language of T.C.A. § 49-3-315, and the opinion of the Court of Appeals in .”
Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. City of Tullahoma, 574 S.W.3d 832 (2019). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (a) (2013). The City denied liability and challenged the County's interpretation of the distribution statute.”
Blount Cnty. Bd. Of Educ. v. City Of Maryville, Tennessee (2017). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (a) (“Each LEA shall place in one (1) separate school fund all school revenues for current school operation purposes received from the state, county and other political subdivisions .”
Dyersburg Bd. of Educ. v. Dyer Cnty. Comm'n, 776 S.W.2d 129 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989). “40 found due under T.C.A. § 49-3-315 (Supp.1988). Dyer County sold its hospital and used proceeds from the sale to establish the Hospital Proceeds Fund.”
Sullivan Cnty., Tennessee v. The City Of Bristol, Tennessee (2017). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (a) (“Each LEA shall place in one (1) separate school fund all school revenues for current school operation purposes received from the state, county and other political subdivisions .”
Bradley Cnty. Sch. Sys. By & Through The Bradley Cnty. Bd. Of Educ. v. The City Of Cleveland, Tennessee (2017). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (a) (“Each LEA shall place in one (1) separate school fund all school revenues for current school operation purposes received from the state, county and other political subdivisions .”
Washington Cnty. Sch. Sys. By & Through The Washington Cnty. Bd. Of Educ. v. The City Of Johnson City, Tennessee (2017). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (a) (“Each LEA shall place in one (1) separate school fund all school revenues for current school operation purposes received from the state, county and other political subdivisions .”
The City of Humboldt v. J.R. McKnight (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). “The distribution of state funds is governed by Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-314 , and such funds are distributed directly to the local education agencies or local school systems.”
Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. City of Tullahoma (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “6 Tennessee Code Annotated section 49-3-315(a) (2016) provides in pertinent part: For each LEA [local education agency] there shall be levied for current operation and maintenance not more than one (1) school tax for all grades included in the LEA. Each LEA shall place in one…”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315(a) — 5 cases
City of Athens Bd. Of Educ. v. McMinn Cnty., Tennessee, 467 S.W.3d 458 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315 (a) (2013) mandates that “[a]ll school funds for current operation and maintenance purposes collected by any county .”
Kina Crider v. The Cnty. of Henry, Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). “-3- As to the allocation theory, summary judgment is granted as a matter of law pursuant to the plain language of TCA 49-3-315, and the opinion of the Court of Appeals in .”
Crider v. Cnty. of Henry, 295 S.W.3d 269 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “As to the allocation theory, summary judgment is granted as a matter of law pursuant to the plain language of T.C.A. § 49-3-315, and the opinion of the Court of Appeals in .”
Coffee Cnty. Bd. of Educ. v. City of Tullahoma (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). “6 Tennessee Code Annotated section 49-3-315(a) (2016) provides in pertinent part: For each LEA [local education agency] there shall be levied for current operation and maintenance not more than one (1) school tax for all grades included in the LEA. Each LEA shall place in one…”
Dyersburg Bd. of Educ. v. Dyer Cnty. Comm'n, 776 S.W.2d 129 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1989). “40 found due under T.C.A. § 49-3-315 (Supp.1988). Dyer County sold its hospital and used proceeds from the sale to establish the Hospital Proceeds Fund.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-3-315(b) — 1 case
Kina Crider v. The Cnty. of Henry, Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). “-3- As to the allocation theory, summary judgment is granted as a matter of law pursuant to the plain language of TCA 49-3-315, and the opinion of the Court of Appeals in .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.