S 227 — Local planning
Last action — Scrivener's error corrected
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed House
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill is in committee in the Senate. Introduced January 15, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Next likely step: a committee vote, then a floor vote in the Senate.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
LowHow often bills like it became law.
-
In Committee
Current position in the legislative process.
-
7 sponsors
7 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
A BILL TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-720, RELATING TO ZONING ORDINANCES, SO AS TO DEFINE "CONCURRENCY PROGRAMS"; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-1130, RELATING TO REGULATIONS, SO AS TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO AN ADOPTED CONCURRENCY PROGRAM.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
74 added · 226 removed74 line(s) added, 226 removed.
2025-2026 Bill 227 Text of Previous Version (Mar.(Jan.
12,15, 2026)2025) - South Carolina Legislature Online South Carolina General Assembly126th Session, 2025-2026Bill 227Indicates Matter StrickenIndicates New Matter(Text matches printed bills.
Document has been reformatted to meet World Wide Web specifications.) Indicates Matter Stricken Indicates New Matter Committee ReportA Marchbill 12, 2026TO AMEND S.THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-720, RELATING TO ZONING ORDINANCES, SO AS TO DEFINE "CONCURRENCY PROGRAMS";
227 Introduced by Senators Davis, Kimbrell, Matthews, Turner and Young S.
Printed 3/12/26--S.
Read the first time January 15, 2025 ________ The committee on Senate Labor, Commerce and Industry To whom was referred a Bill (S.
227) to amend the South Carolina Code of Laws by amending Section 6-29-720, relating to zoning ordinances, so as to define "concurrency programs";
and by amending Section, etc., respectfully Report:
That they have duly and carefully considered the same, and recommend that the same do pass with amendment:
Amend the bill, as and if amended, SECTION 1, by striking Section 6-29-720(C)(8) and inserting:
(8) "concurrency programs" in which the governing authority conditions approval of land development activities on public facility and service adequacy.
A concurrency program also may be referred to as an "adequate public facility program." (a) Concurrency programs must ensure public facilities and services necessary to support development are adequate to serve that development, based on reasonable and locally documented level of service standards and proportionate share methodologies.
(b) A governing authority adopting concurrency may require public facility and service contributions sufficient to offset a development's proportionate share impacts on facilities and services and also may accept excess capacity contributions made pursuant to a written agreement with the property owner.
(c) However, under this subsection, the governing authority must take into consideration any contributions made by payment of development impact fees or other instruments for the same impacts on relevant facilities and services.
(d) Local governing authorities and property owners may enter into written proportionate share, cost sharing, or other similar agreements to facilitate exercise of any authority or requirement under this subsection.
(8) "Concurrency programs" condition land development approval on public facility and service adequacy, also referred to as "adequate public facility programs." Such programs shall ensure that growth and infrastructure investment proceed consistently with locally adopted comprehensive plans and shall not be administered to prevent or delay development where proportionate mitigation is available.
(a) Concurrency programs may not condition approval on the availability or adequacy of schools, parks, or libraries and are limited to:
(i) transportation facilities;
(ii) water supply and distribution;
(iii) wastewater collection and treatment;
(iv) stormwater management;
(v) law enforcement;
and (vi) fire protection and emergency medical services.
(b) Facilities are deemed "available" or "adequate" if capacity exists at time of application, is fully funded within the first three years of an adopted capital improvements program or will be provided through a binding agreement under subitem (f).
(c) Level-of-service standards must be objective, applied uniformly to similarly situated development, and reviewed at least every five years.
Standards shall reflect adopted land use policies, may not require facility expansion inconsistent with the comprehensive plan, and may be multimodal or differentiated within designated growth or redevelopment areas.
Failure to meet a standard shall not result in denial if the applicant commits to proportionate share mitigation.
(d) A concurrency program must:
(i) establish clear application review procedures;
(ii) credit developer contributions toward concurrency requirements;
(iii) allow developers to remedy deficiencies through proportionate share contributions or construction of improvements committed in a binding agreement on a schedule concurrent with or prior to the development's impacts;
(iv) provide exemptions or streamlined review for development with minimal facility impacts;
(v) establish an appeals process for concurrency determinations;
and (vi) establish time-limited capacity reservations that expire and revert to available capacity upon failure to demonstrate substantial progress within a defined period.
(e) A governing authority may require sufficient contributions to offset a development's proportionate share of facility impacts, based on documented impacts, reduced by developer-provided capacity, and applied consistently to similarly situated projects.
No development may be required to fund pre-existing deficiencies beyond its proportionate share or to pay twice for the same impact on the same facility;
all prior impact fees or other contributions addressing the same impacts must be credited.
A proportionate share contribution satisfies concurrency only if the relevant improvement is included in the adopted capital improvements program and scheduled for completion concurrent with or prior to the development's impacts, or if the developer's contribution together with other committed funding is sufficient to fully fund the improvement on that schedule.
(f) Governing authorities, property owners, and other governmental entities may enter into written agreements providing for phased improvements, reimbursement mechanisms, capacity credits, or excess capacity contributions, subject to the following:
(i) An agreement is a mechanism for achieving concurrency, not a substitute for it.
Show all 58 changed lines (18 more)
The governing authority must make a written finding that required improvements will be completed concurrently with or prior to the impacts they serve;
(ii) The agreement shall correlate each development phase with the infrastructure necessary to serve it.
No certificate of occupancy for a given phase may be issued unless the serving infrastructure is complete or contractually secured;
(iii) Where the agreement relies on future developer construction, the developer shall provide a performance bond, letter of credit, or equivalent security sufficient to complete the committed improvements;
(iv) Capacity credits may be granted only for improvements constructed and accepted, or for which full funding is secured under item (3);
and (v) Agreements shall be recorded in county deed records and run with the land, binding all successors.
Material default suspends further development approvals until cured or the agreement is renegotiated consistent with this section.
(g) If a facility fails to meet adopted standards for more than thirty-six consecutive months, the governing authority shall amend its capital improvements program to fund corrections, revise the applicable standard, or adopt a temporary moratorium under applicable state law.
Failure to act does not require automatic denial where mitigation is available.
(h) A concurrency program may not interfere with development approvals within the jurisdiction of another local government, as provided in Section 6-29-330.
(i) A concurrency program adopted in compliance with this subsection is presumed to be a valid exercise of police power and not an unconstitutional taking or equal protection violation.
This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence that the program, as applied, denies all economically viable use, is arbitrary or capricious, discriminates against similarly situated properties without rational basis, or operates as a de facto moratorium by systematically denying approvals where proportionate mitigation has been offered.
(j) A development in which at least fifty percent of units are deed-restricted at or below eighty percent of area median income, or that receives federal, state, or local affordable housing financing, is exempt from concurrency requirements, subject to applicable building codes, life-safety standards, and utility connection obligations.
Renumber sections to conform.
Amend title to conform.
THOMAS DAVIS for Committee.
_______ A bill TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-720, RELATING TO ZONING ORDINANCES, SO AS TO DEFINE "CONCURRENCY PROGRAMS";
----XX---- This web page was last updated on MarchJanuary 12,15, 20262025 at 03:0904:55 PM
Show all 58 changed rows (18 more)
Action History
-
Scrivener's error corrected
-
Amended
-
Committee report: Favorable with amendment Labor, Commerce and Industry
-
Referred to Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry
-
Introduced and read first time
Sponsors
- Senator Tom Davis · Primary
- Senator Josh Kimbrell · Primary
- Senator Ross Turner · Primary
- Jr. Senator Tom Young · Primary
- Senator Lawrence K. "Larry" Grooms · Primary
- Senator George E. "Chip" Campsen III · Primary
- Senator Margie Bright Matthews · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →7 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 163 not signed on
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (163)
163 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 163 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does S 227 do?
- A BILL TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-720, RELATING TO ZONING ORDINANCES, SO AS TO DEFINE "CONCURRENCY PROGRAMS"; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 6-29-1130, RELATING TO REGULATIONS, SO AS TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO AN ADOPTED CONCURRENCY PROGRAM.
- Who sponsors S 227?
- S 227 is sponsored by Senator Tom Davis, Senator Josh Kimbrell, Senator Ross Turner, Senator Tom Young, Jr., Senator Lawrence K. "Larry" Grooms, Senator George E. "Chip" Campsen III, and Senator Margie Bright Matthews.
- What is the current status of S 227?
- This bill is in committee in the Senate. Introduced January 15, 2025. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
- Where can I track S 227?
- Track S 227 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on S 227
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of S 227
Last checked for changes about 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →