[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-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",[32,76],{"_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":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6089706,"mediaKeyId","2871950-adb6d06f1a079ba47e74d61c310348ae","parentId",2871950,"title","Committee hears split testimony on bill to allow alcohol sales at large municipal performing-arts and convention complexes","audioSeconds",124,"startMs",2315000,"endMs",2439000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2871950-adb6d06f1a079ba47e74d61c310348ae&start=2315&end=2439","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2871950-adb6d06f1a079ba47e74d61c310348ae/thumbnail_2315000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6089706/South-Carolina/Committee-hears-split-testimony-on-bill-to-allow-alcohol-sales-at-large-municipal-performing-arts-and-convention-complexes","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089706-d8cf613171f7bcab6c975cd37170e512/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149587&Signature=n18MQNMxxDXHQVspJXiqUV08JpHD4l4Df64xsT-TNX~BjO9H5bysOgW-D4-kHaNBYbVqAaUh2nTUh3x-7cfX-MdXPUVnq0RAhUKTHSjVLRgTMA-X9MUXj4W0VCNNpJclDhYZafgsmaBo7YV7KWu2ek2XRwq17~JFFj2YgPEMJW6C8joe1BNGD--ggIbVxy~XLTU-HZTbLHxmzRQ9ZSNufNh~sJQ4y6pIqS1RSNGS0YcjLF8oca-EahwZoimzah3TiuBvtuRcWYLVLcTQXL97XX6E5epftVnpwvqqM-X~Xf74LCTHoDkNsd~56EknHR7DpYaJ4V-pDLiChxXbHfFueQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","South Carolina Legislature","date","2025-04-03T00:00:00Z","article","The House General Laws Committee on April 3 took testimony on Bill 4000, which would amend the state code to permit on-site alcohol sales at qualifying municipally owned performing-arts and convention complexes. Supporters said the measure would create parity for large public venues; opponents warned it would worsen alcohol-related harms.

Representative Mark Smith, identified in committee as the bill\u0000s sponsor, said the proposal was largely tailored to add the Charleston Gaillard Center as an eligible municipally owned venue but would apply statewide to similarly sized facilities. \"All we're doing is creating no matter what your position is on alcohol... let's just create an unfettered open fair marketplace,\" Smith said, arguing the change would help facilities that need new revenue streams to maintain large venues.

Bill details and thresholds: The bill defines a \"performing arts and convention complex\" as a municipally owned facility with at least 1,600 seats in the performance hall and at least 12,000 square feet of meeting/exhibition space, and that engages in tourism promotion. The bill would allow specified beer, wine and liquor service on the premises for complexes that meet those criteria.

Public-safety concerns: Laura Hudson, executive director of the South Carolina Crime Victims Council, opposed the bill and cited state alcohol-related harms in testimony. \"We're number 1, number 2 in in DUI fatalities,\" Hudson told the committee, and she noted the state has roughly \"14,000 off off premise and on premise licenses\" and a strong statistical link, in her view, between alcohol availability and highway deaths. \"People drive to these complexes. They go to events. They drink. They get in their cars, and they drive home, and they are a menace on the highway,\" she said.

Committee members pressed sponsors on server training, liability and public-safety safeguards. Representative McCravey said she would be \"concerned\" about over-service and victims; Representative Locke asked who operates the Gaillard and whether the governing entity is a nonprofit. Sponsor Smith said the Charleston facility is operated by the local visitors bureau (CVB) and that the bill requires the license-holder to be a nonprofit corporation that operates the complex. Smith also noted that prior liquor-liability and server-training matters had been discussed in earlier committee work and suggested existing requirements and insurance mechanisms address some concerns.

Geographic scope and examples: Smith named the Charleston Gaillard Center and the North Charleston Performing Arts Complex as examples of municipally owned facilities that meet the bill\u0000s size and tourism criteria. Several members said they needed more time to review whether other venues would qualify and whether the definition was sufficiently narrow to avoid unintended consequences (for example, smaller theaters or meeting halls that should not be included).

Committee action and next steps: The committee ran out of time before completing debate on Bill 4000 and other agenda items. The chair said the committee will reconvene Tuesday to continue consideration.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Judiciary Committee -- Judiciary General Laws Subcommittee April 3, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The House General Laws Committee heard testimony April 3 on Bill 4000, which would permit on-site alcohol sales at municipally owned performing-arts and convention complexes that meet specified size and tourism criteria.","taxTitle","Judiciary, Standing, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, South Carolina","taxId",17507,"location","South Carolina","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6089710,"House General Laws panel delays debate on bill to dismiss pending unlawful-possession charges",2137,115000,2252000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2871950-adb6d06f1a079ba47e74d61c310348ae&start=115&end=2252","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2871950-adb6d06f1a079ba47e74d61c310348ae/thumbnail_115000.jpg","/articles/6089710/South-Carolina/House-General-Laws-panel-delays-debate-on-bill-to-dismiss-pending-unlawful-possession-charges","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089710-0a275e1a652edf63ef25d6308912e8c4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149587&Signature=ZnCkNoCskHuvNPICvJllshON7m0fsw~qtkG548E0olt~H~QknXneGXROoB5UmxAC8c6lkprs8z-KUYJSlofwwHT2M4yvI1D0qcfORbyF2lcj~osh-4QV8M-33Rks3Q4jnMoSii0iepZp~yl6jtn1j4QhXTOb3h8cX9fsmUT1nKXbrUpqEUJ5kvhvM-2KF-52oN97GMatrB2GjQtcwhopOy6brVJqY~wNdCeVIcL1FTG-9-lnJzjTJHVWTZMP~xtG-~RgBZb-3lv-n5K3k8D0NhQOJFy6MxLdo-KihjwdO1a4YzyMT5uCDd1mCd366~rLGYvya6GMSBjs4uvQ-Jshuw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House General Laws Committee on April 3 heard extended testimony on Senate Bill 136, a measure to require dismissal of pending charges for unlawful possession of a firearm or handgun when the possession occurred before the state\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000 constitutional carry law. Committee members heard from law enforcement representatives who opposed a broad dismissal and from the bill sponsor who said the measure corrects an unintended gap.

Senator Tedder, the bill\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000 sponsor, explained the bill\u0000would extend the expungement/dismissal remedy created when the legislature enacted constitutional carry so that people with pending charges — not only those already convicted before the law changed — would be eligible. \"We passed the constitutional carry, to protect second amendment rights in South Carolina... we allow them that, that, expungement,\" Tedder said, urging the committee the fix is one of fairness for people whose cases remained pending when the law changed.

Why it matters: The bill touches criminal records, prosecutors\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000 discretion, and victims' safety; committee members pressed whether dismissing gun-possession counts could weaken bail decisions or lead to unintended releases.

Law enforcement opposition: JJ Jones, who identified himself as representing chiefs of police and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Officers Association, said he understood the bill\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000 association's position but ultimately opposed the measure. \"I cannot go to bed at night knowing I didn't stand up to do the right thing,\" Jones said, arguing that dismissals could let dangerous people back into the community.

Sally Foster, director of the South Carolina Sheriffs' Association, told the committee the word \"unlawful\" matters to her members. \"Again, unlawful is unlawful, and that I feel like that diminished my guys' previous law enforcement work,\" Foster said, thanking the sponsor for amendments but urging caution.

Scope and safeguards described by sponsor: Tedder said the bill has been amended to address prosecutors' and law enforcement concerns. He and other senators added language to make clear the bill applies only to the unlawful-possession count and does not automatically dismiss other criminal charges arising from the same stop or investigation. The measure also includes language intended to bar a dismissal under the new section from serving as a basis for civil liability, Tedder said.

Committee concerns and legal process: Committee members asked whether dismissing a pending possession count could create grounds to seek reduced bond or immediate release. Tedder and others replied that defendants have the right to file motions to reconsider bond and that judges would have discretion to consider violent-prior conduct or other pending charges. Committee members repeatedly pressed whether the changes could produce \"loopholes\" for defendants represented by skilled attorneys and noted solicitors' offices still had discretion in prosecutions.

Context and prior legislative history: Tedder told the committee the Senate and House previously passed a related bill last year; the governor vetoed it and the Senate subsequently overrode that veto, but time ran out before final action in the House. The sponsor and witnesses said there are an estimated \"2 to 300\" pending unlawful-carrying charges across the state that the bill would affect.

Committee action: With questions unresolved and additional testimony expected, a member moved to adjourn further debate until next week; the motion carried and the committee scheduled further consideration at a subsequent meeting.

Next steps: The committee will reconvene to continue discussion; no final vote on the merits was taken on April 3.

","The House General Laws Committee on April 3 heard extended testimony on Senate Bill 136, a measure to require dismissal of pending charges for unlawful possession of a firearm or handgun when the possession occurred before the state\u0000constitutional-carry law took effect.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears split testimony on bill to allow alcohol sales at large municipal performing-arts and convention complexes

House General Laws panel delays debate on bill to dismiss pending unlawful-possession charges