AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ADDING SECTION 6-1-145 SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN ROADSIDE MARKETS OPERATED BY FARMERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS FOR LOCAL ZONING PURPOSES AND ARE EXEMPT FROM CERTAIN LOCAL AND STATE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, AND TO DEFINE NECESSARY TERMS, AMONG OTHER THINGS.
Summary
H. 5097 creates a new section of South Carolina law defining a “roadside market” as a direct-to-consumer sales point on a farmer’s owned or leased farm property, located near a roadway, where the farmer sells products produced on that farm to the public. The bill specifically excludes multivendor farmers’ markets and bars the sale of hemp-based products intended for ingestion at these roadside markets.
The bill’s main legal effect is to prevent counties and municipalities from treating these roadside markets as commercial operations for zoning purposes. It also exempts them from local stormwater regulations, stormwater permitting, and local building code requirements such as permitting, inspection, and construction rules that would otherwise apply to commercial or retail structures. In addition, the bill exempts roadside markets from the South Carolina Surface Water Withdrawal, Permitting Use, and Reporting Act, while preserving the separate requirements of the state’s voluntary Certified Roadside Market program for farms that seek that certification.
Impact
The bill narrows local regulatory authority over a specific type of farm retail activity and creates a statutory exemption from several local and state requirements. It affects zoning, stormwater, building code enforcement, and water-withdrawal permitting laws, while leaving intact the Department of Agriculture’s voluntary roadside market certification program. Local governments are also shielded from liability for occurrences arising from the statutory exemptions.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong bipartisan support and no recorded opposition: the House passed the bill 102-0, the Senate gave it second reading 45-0, and the House later concurred in Senate amendments 93-0. No committee transcript is available, but the unanimous votes suggest broad agreement that the bill supports farm direct-to-consumer sales and reduces regulatory burdens on farmers.
Contention
The main policy tension in the bill is between agricultural promotion and local regulatory control. Supporters appear to favor easing zoning and permitting burdens for farmers selling their own goods directly to consumers, while the bill limits county and municipal authority over land use, stormwater, and building code enforcement. Another point of specificity is the exclusion of multivendor markets and the prohibition on ingestible hemp products, which helps define the bill’s scope and may avoid broader retail or cannabis-related concerns.