Beaufort council shifts $1.2M in TIF funds away from parking project toward Waterfront Park
By Delayna Earley
The Island News
The Beaufort City Council voted Tuesday night, May 12, to redirect more than $1.2 million in proposed Tax Increment Financing expenditures toward redevelopment of Henry C. Chambers Waterfront Park, underscoring the growing urgency city leaders and residents placed on restoring one of Beaufort’s most recognizable public spaces.
The amendment came during council’s broader FY2027 budget discussions and followed an extended debate over whether the city should continue prioritizing administrative facility upgrades and land acquisition projects while the future of Waterfront Park remains unresolved.
Councilman Josh Scallate introduced the amendment, arguing the city’s existing list of capital projects had effectively filled its “plate” and that Waterfront Park should now become Beaufort’s top redevelopment priority.
“We owe it to the community to be as best prepared as possible with the funding that we do have now,” Scallate said during the discussion.
Waterfront becomes the priority
Throughout the discussion, Scallate repeatedly argued the city’s “plate is full” with existing capital projects and that Waterfront Park should now become Beaufort’s primary infrastructure and redevelopment focus.
“With the Waterfront Park in front of us, our plate is full,” Scallate said.
Scallate described Waterfront Park as the city’s “crown jewel” and argued the city should avoid placing unnecessary financial hurdles in front of the redevelopment effort.
The debate Tuesday night also built on conversations already taking place within Beaufort’s Waterfront Advisory Committee regarding how the city will ultimately fund redevelopment of Henry C. Chambers Waterfront Park.
Earlier this month, committee members voiced support for rebuilding the failing relieving platform largely in its current form while acknowledging major funding questions remain surrounding the multi-million-dollar project. Engineers told the committee the design and permitting process alone could take at least 18 months.
Scallate had already begun publicly exploring whether Beaufort’s existing Boundary Street Tax Increment Financing district could potentially help finance portions of the waterfront redevelopment effort.
He said he had contacted City Attorney Benjamin T. Coppage seeking clarification on whether South Carolina law would allow TIF revenues generated within the Boundary Street redevelopment district to be used for projects outside the district itself if city council determines the project provides a direct economic benefit to the redevelopment area.
Scallate pointed to language in state law and the city’s existing Boundary Street redevelopment plans, arguing Waterfront Park generates direct economic and tourism benefits for the district and therefore qualifies as an appropriate use of TIF funding.
During the discussion, Scallate cited Placer.ai data previously provided to the city showing roughly 80 percent of visitors to downtown Beaufort also visited Waterfront Park.
Scallate also warned the city could not assume future state or federal funding would materialize and argued Beaufort needed to prepare now for engineering, design and permitting costs associated with the project.
Several residents echoed those concerns throughout the meeting.
ResidentvMike Markham told council the waterfront serves as Beaufort’s defining attraction and should take precedence over less urgent expenditures.
“When you have a roof leak at home, everything stops when there’s an emergency,” Markham said. “The emergency we have is the Waterfront Park.”
“People come here for the Henry Chambers Waterfront Park,” Markham added. “If they see nothing else, they see that.”
Resident Graham Trask, whose family owns property within the TIF2 district, also praised Scallate during public comment for trying to identify alternatives to the proposed vehicle fee through budget reductions and reprioritizing projects.
“Kudos to Councilman Scallate for identifying and really trying to identify some areas where the budget can be more efficient,” Graham Trask said.
Debate over parking, city projects
Much of the debate centered around a proposed $1 million City Hall parking land acquisition project that several residents and council members questioned prioritizing while Waterfront Park redevelopment remains unresolved.
For several speakers, the proposed parking acquisition became symbolic of a broader concern that the city was continuing to pursue optional capital projects while asking residents to absorb additional fees and while Waterfront Park remained partially closed and facing major future costs.
During public comment, resident Paul Trask argued the city does not have a meaningful downtown parking shortage and urged council to redirect the money toward Waterfront Park instead.
“We don’t need a parking lot. Everyone finds a parking space here. There’s no problem,” Paul Trask said before urging council to redirect the TIF money toward Waterfront Park instead.
Earlier in the meeting, residents and council members openly discussed possible ways to offset the proposed vehicle fee and free additional money for Waterfront Park, including delaying consultant contracts, reducing legal spending, staggering police hiring timelines and eliminating the proposed City Hall parking acquisition project.
Scallate repeatedly argued the city’s current list of capital projects had already filled its “plate” and that Waterfront Park should now become Beaufort’s top financial priority.
At one point during the discussion, Scallate revised and narrowed his original proposal after concerns were raised about removing funding tied to Fire Station 1 renovations and operational needs.
Under the final amendment approved Tuesday night, council voted to remove proposed TIF expenditures including $173,175 for IT switch upgrades at City Hall and the Police Department/Court Complex, $45,000 for City Hall lighting upgrades, $30,000 for City Hall safety camera upgrades and $1 million for City Hall parking land acquisition and design.
The total redirected amount equals $1,248,175.
Legal questions remain
City Manager Scott Marshall cautioned council that legal clarification is still needed from the city attorney regarding some of the proposed uses.
“I’m not sure I’m comfortable,” Marshall said during the discussion, adding that legal guidance could ultimately require the amendment to be revisited before second reading.
Marshall also defended several of the projects removed from the TIF plan, particularly proposed City Hall parking improvements and Fire Station 1 renovations.
According to Marshall, the parking project is tied in part to security recommendations from a Homeland Security assessment advising the city to remove some parking spaces immediately adjacent to the municipal complex.
He also described Fire Station 1 renovations as necessary due to aging infrastructure, leaking roofs and operational limitations involving the city’s ladder truck.
Scallate also argued some projects already proposed for TIF funding, including Fire Station 1 renovations, were themselves located outside the originally defined TIF district boundaries, meaning the city would already need to navigate similar legal questions regardless of whether Waterfront Park funding was included.
Despite those unresolved legal questions, council ultimately moved forward with the amendment Tuesday night after Marshall noted the city could still reverse or revise the decision before second reading if legal review later determined the TIF funds could not be used for Waterfront Park redevelopment.
That procedural flexibility, combined with growing support from residents urging council to prioritize Waterfront Park over administrative projects and parking expansion, appeared to help build momentum behind the amendment before the final vote.
Councilman Neil Lipsitz ultimately cast the lone dissenting vote. Throughout the discussion, Lipsitz repeatedly expressed concern about reallocating the money before receiving legal clarification regarding whether the TIF funds could legally be used for Waterfront Park redevelopment. He also questioned removing planned capital expenditures before identifying clearer long-term funding strategies and operational alternatives.
Meanwhile, the remaining council members appeared increasingly persuaded by arguments that Waterfront Park represented the city’s most immediate long-term infrastructure challenge and that the amendment could still be revisited before second reading if legal concerns ultimately prevented the funds from being used as proposed. Public support for prioritizing Waterfront Park over parking expansion and administrative upgrades also appeared to influence the direction of the discussion as the meeting progressed.
Council approves amendment
The amendment ultimately passed on a 4-1 vote, with Lipsitz casting the lone dissenting vote.
However, city staff indicated the matter is likely to return before second reading of the budget once additional legal guidance regarding TIF usage is received.
Second reading of the FY2027 budget is scheduled for June 9.
Delayna Earley, who joined The Island News in 2022, formerly worked as a photojournalist for The Island Packet/The Beaufort Gazette, as well as newspapers in Indiana and Virginia. She can be reached at delayna.theislandnews@gmail.com.