Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Higher Education Events topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Higher education subcommittee pauses debate on bill limiting local zoning for college events

House Higher Education Subcommittee · April 28, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The House higher education subcommittee heard hours of testimony for and against Senate Bill 832, which would bar some local zoning restrictions on events held on public college and university property; after testimony from The Citadel and neighborhood residents the panel voted 7–2 to adjourn debate so parties can negotiate locally.

The House higher education subcommittee on Thursday paused action on a bill that would restrict local governments from using zoning rules to block events on public college and university campuses.

Representative Wendell Gilliard, a Charleston-area lawmaker who served on that city’s council, told the committee the dispute between the Citadel and nearby neighborhoods should be resolved locally rather than by a state mandate. "The solution is definitely at the local level," he said, warning that the bill could increase demands on Charleston police and strain neighborhood‑government relationships.

The bill’s sponsor and staff described a narrower change: Macy, the committee staff presenter, said the measure would exempt campus events from local land‑use approval while preserving enforcement of building codes, fire safety, health and traffic laws. "It exempts campuses from certain state local restrictions so the campuses are not subject to section 53‑1‑10," Macy said, adding the bill is intended to protect institutions’ ability to use facilities built with state or donor funds.

Jonathan Hoffman, vice president for communications and marketing at The Citadel, told the committee the college supported the legislation after a local zoning decision in Charleston curtailed uses that had been in place for decades. "Our concern…and a concern we believe is shared by others is that significant amounts of money have been spent in building the facility…and then turned around and say you can no longer use it for a purpose that it had been intended for," Hoffman said, describing a case in which the college lost the ability to host certain events at a facility it had long operated.

Residents who live near campus pushed back. Anthony McKnight, a senior and West Side neighborhood association member, said events have caused parking loss that affects disabled residents and raised safety worries: "Where am I gonna park?" he asked, urging the committee to consider residents’ quality-of-life concerns. Audrey Lisbon, speaking for neighborhood residents, identified the measure as Senate Bill 832 and said it would "significantly weaken local decision making" and risk traffic congestion, overflow parking and strain on emergency services.

Members pressed university witnesses for specifics. Hoffman said the zoning action in Charleston that prompted the bill related to a proposal for a series of concerts and to a zoning board’s restrictions that effectively removed a previously permitted use; he also described permitting delays and obstacles to campus construction and repaving that had delayed projects funded with legislative appropriations.

Several legislators urged all parties to negotiate. Representative Chris Huff said he preferred a local compromise but acknowledged the committee’s role in protecting state investments in campuses. Chairwoman Shannon Erickson said she had heard from all sides and lamented poor communication between the college, city officials and neighborhood groups.

Rather than move the bill forward, the subcommittee voted 7–2 to adjourn debate on SB 832 so neighborhood groups, city officials and campus leaders can continue talks. No final vote on the bill occurred at the hearing.

Next steps: The committee left the bill open to return later after local discussions; proponents and opponents were urged to resume meetings and report back to the committee.