By Scott Graber and Lolita Huckaby
The Island News
The city of Beaufort, incorporated in 1711 after a string of Spanish, French and British settlers, is still known for its history, and the preservation of that history has always been a matter of keen interest.
Ironically, thanks to a slow-moving lawsuit that some say personifies the conflict between preservation and progress, local figures Dick Stewart and Graham and George Trask may play a part in making some more history.
In August, 1971 when word got out that the William Elliott House at 1103 Bay Street had been purchased and the new owners intended to demolish the three-storied tabby building which had been renamed “The Anchorage,” some folks were concerned.
In those days, “preservationists” in Beaufort could largely be counted on one hand and most folks believed that demolition of the Anchorage was inevitable, in the name of “progress.”
There was no question that the Elliott house, circa 1770, was historic and the preservationists rallied to get the building protected by adding it to the U.S. Department of Interior’s National Register of Historic Homes.
But Beaufort was still, at that time, “invisible” to the tourism industry, not yet discovered by the waves of visitors who would flock to the area once movies like “The Big Chill” (1983) or “Prince of Tides” (1991) hit the screens and opened the doors to those wanting to see our beauty.
Saved by the yankees
Beaufort’s history was unique in that occupation early in the Civil War left a number of architecturally significant antebellum structures.
But the reality was that these large homes, like the Anchorage, were expensive to maintain and in many minds, expendable.
The downtown business district, primarily the three blocks of Bay Street, for years was likewise static, consisting of small storefronts that sold shoes, ready-to-wear suits, seeds and nails by the pound to a population of city folks, shrimpers, tomato farmers and small-plot African American farmers who lived on Port Royal, Lady’s and St. Helena islands.
The threat to the William Elliott house, which is now the Anchorage 1770 boutique inn, pointed out the value of the Historic Beaufort Foundation which had been formed in 1947 to save the John Mark Verdier House, circa 1804, which had been targeted for demolition.
The Verdier House campaign, as with the Anchorage, wasn’t the first and certainly not the last of community fights to preserve the architecture that made Beaufort special.
Since 1971 there have been other fights — not so much about demolition — but arguments over structural details overseen by the city’s Historic Review Board, using the Beaufort Preservation Manual, prepared by John Milner Associates and adopted by the city in 1979, for guidance.
In the ensuing years, we’ve had relatively few “new” buildings downtown; the former People’s Bank Building at the corner of Bay and Carteret Streets at the foot of the Woods Memorial Bridge, now a condominium/retail shop building; the former Beaufort Bank which is now Panini’s after housing the Breeze Theater; and the former Regions Bank building, built in 1978 at 916 Bay Street which now sits empty with a $5.25 million price tag.
21st Century meeting of the Trasks, Stewart
In 1998, Dick Stewart returned to the Lowcountry, where he had spent some of his high school years, to start a new career with his development firm, 303 Associates, which he now chairs after retiring as chief executive officer in 2022.
One of his first projects was renovation of the Saltus Building at 802 Bay Street, a brick and tabby structure that had sat empty for several years after the Belk department store left the downtown area. The building now houses two popular restaurants, Hearth and Saltus River Grille, which looks out at the Beaufort River.
Also looking at downtown Beaufort real estate for redevelopment were George Trask and his son Graham, whose family began truck farming in the Lowcountry more than 100 years ago and whose residential and commercial real estate interests have grown over the years.
Graham Trask’s most recent commercial project, a two and three-story retail building with a roof-top restaurant to be built between Bay Street and the Waterfront Park, was approved by the city Historic Review Board last year.
To date, no construction has begun and a new barbecue take-out business, Mother Smokin’ Good! BBQ opened this summer in a small building on the site.
The relationship between Stewart, according to court documents filed in his lawsuit, and the Trasks, father and son, were peaceful until 2021 when, again, according to the court documents, the Trasks began to publicly oppose his downtown projects.
Specifically, the Trasks, doing business under various names including West Street Farms, opposed 303’s plans for a new hotel on Scott and Port Republic streets, a three-story parking garage on West Street, and a three-story apartment/retail structure, the Cannon Building, on Charles and Port Republic streets.
Court pleadings
In 2023 Stewart’s holding company, 303 Associates filed suit in the Court of Common Pleas wherein allegations of actual and punitive damages were made, claiming the Trasks had sabotaged plans for the proposed hotel, parking garage and retail/apartment building – The Cannon Building – in the downtown area.
What was interesting about the original complaint was its length – 55 pages with 192 individual paragraphs telling a story of a friendship between Dick Stewart and Graham Trask that would eventually go sour.
That complaint also alleged the Trasks “found a willing accomplice” in Historic Beaufort Foundation’s then-Executive Director, Cynthia Jenkins. While HBF was not named as a party defendant, the documents noted “… it has been used as a pawn by the Trasks …”
Also interesting, and unusual, about the complaint were the graphics of what has come to be called the “Red Menace.”
These were graphics allegedly circulated by Graham Trask rendering the proposed hotel in red, placing it in the context with existing downtown buildings, showing views of the proposed hotel from Bay Street and from West Street.
The complaint alleged “Abuse of Process, Civil Conspiracy, Intentional Interference with Prospective Contract, Unfair Trade Practices and Malicious Prosecution” as grounds for its plea for damages.
The Trasks responded to this lengthy, graphics-illustrated complaint by outright denials of specific allegations and then asserted their First Amendment rights to comment on, or criticize a development decision.
The Trasks further alleged their speech was protected by a specific South Carolina statute, 6-29-760, giving a neighboring property owner the right to question adjacent land use and zoning.
Graham Trask also alleged this was, in fact, a SLAPP Lawsuit, a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, considered to be chilling of free speech rights which cost defendants thousands of dollars in legal fees.
The Trasks also answered by asserting the “NOERR-Pennington Doctrine” which says those who petition a government agency for assistance are protected by the First Amendment.
These first pleadings, Complaint and Answer, were all filed in 2023, amended in 2026, and for three years numerous lawyers have been wandering through a preliminary phase of litigation called “discovery.”
This “voyage of discovery” gives each party the ability to depose potential witnesses and, importantly, to secure the emails, letters, memoranda and telephone logs that may, or may not, prove their case.
From the beginning Stewart’s attorneys have been seeking emails – especially emails to and from the Historic Beaufort Foundation – to show a conspiracy between the Trasks and HBF.
Core issues
But, in fact, this long and expensive road will have an end — a jury trial. The jury could decide the Trasks abused the legal process. Or the jury could decide what the Trasks allegedly said (and wrote) was, indeed, protected speech.
The core issue in this dispute is scale. While the Trasks claim the proposed Marriott hotel is just too big, 303 Associates claim the “Red Menace” drawings regarding the size of the proposed hotel are “intentionally inaccurate, inflammatory, and false.”
Another issue is whether the Historic Beaufort Foundation was an actor in an alleged conspiracy; although HBF has not been named as a party and will not have to pay any damages in the event that damages are awarded.
And yet another issue will be whether the various lawsuits filed by Graham Trask, six in all, constitute “abuse of process.”
If this case proceeds to trial, and eventually finds itself in the state Supreme Court, there could be an opinion that puts rules in place defining what is acceptable criticism and what is not.
This is called “precedent” by lawyers and becomes, de facto, the law in South Carolina.
Existing precedent in SC
There currently is not a lot of precedent in South Carolina in terms of a developer versus criticism from an agitated community.
One case, Ashton Woods v. Town of Mount Pleasant, did touch on these issues, especially the question of free speech.
In 2019, a developer, Ashton Woods, was constructing town houses along Ben Sawyer Boulevard in Mt. Pleasant. Residents passing the site noticed the new buildings were designed with elevated foundations causing them to tower over the neighboring buildings.
These neighbors argued these structures violated the town’s height limitations and following an outcry, town council issued a stop work order. As a result of this order Woods sued the Town of Mt. Pleasant.
After the filing of the pleadings, Woods immediately subpoenaed private communications and emails from his agitated opponents, especially representatives of the “Save Shem Creek” organization, which had spoken out at public meetings.
The subpoenas were criticized by both residents and town officials as intimidation meant to stifle public participation and a violation of First Amendment rights.
Although Woods v Town of Mt. Pleasant was settled before going to trial, Mount Pleasant used this case to lobby the General Assembly to pass anti-SLAPP legislation to prevent developers from using subpoenas to silence public opposition.
And while the proposed anti-SLAPP legislation passed in the S.C. House, it is now stalled in the S.C. Senate.
The impact of this litigation
This decision will likely be a tough one for a jury because free speech is venerated in this country and particularly timely with all the ongoing development and redevelopment taking place along the Coast, changing the urban and the adjacent rural landscapes as we speak.
Until now people have walked into council chambers or appeared in front of zoning boards voicing their anger, or misgivings, about the proposed condos, or the townhomes, without any thought of personal repercussions.
But this case between Stewart and Trask could result in an appellate decision that erects guidelines, guardrails for future speech. Or a decision that will reinforce free speech in these cases.
Scott Graber is a lawyer, novelist, veteran columnist and longtime resident of Port Royal. He can be reached at cscottgraber@gmail.com.
Lolita Huckaby Watson is a community volunteer and newspaper columnist. In her former role as a reporter with The Beaufort Gazette, The Savannah Morning News, Bluffton Today and Beaufort Today, she prided herself in trying to stay neutral and unbiased. As a columnist, these are her opinions. Her goal is to be factual but opinionated, based on her own observations. Feel free to contact her at bftbay@gmail.com.