Beaufort County Council directs staff to pursue revised SIB agreement while keeping fallback to replace Mackay Creek span

Beaufort County Council voted 8‑3 on Tuesday to direct county staff to prepare amended agreement language and resubmit a revised proposal to the State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) while retaining a fallback plan to replace the Mackay Creek eastbound span on U.S. 278.

The action follows a presentation by county staff detailing six options developed with the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT), and a debrief after the SIB’s unanimous decision to reject the county’s revised joint proposal with the Town of Hilton Head.

County presenter Mike Moore summarized the SIB debrief: “we did get a unanimous decision from the CIB to reject the proposal,” and said the board cited several concerns, including a revised funding sequence that conflicted with the intergovernmental agreement (IGA), the town’s contribution as a land dedication rather than cash, and an absence of a detailed construction timeline. Moore said the SIB also viewed the county as not having clearly outlined a strategy for covering cost overruns.

County engineer Jared Fralix walked council through the technical options the county and DOT presented in February. He said the three‑lane “lifeline” option was the only scheme that originally fit within roughly $300 million available at that time, but that DOT later updated a cost estimate for a like‑for‑like two‑lane replacement of the eastbound Mackay Creek span to about $90 million (up from prior estimates of roughly $50–75 million for repair or reconstruction). Fralix described what the county is now calling “Option 1” (the February option 6): a DOT‑led replacement of the deficient eastbound span, with an option for the county to pay incremental costs to add a third lane.

Fralix said DOT estimates a 24–30 month construction window for the replacement, with most work off alignment and night tie‑in work to limit daytime disruptions. He also said DOT has provided a 30‑day clock to the county to produce a revised agreement if it wants the SIB to reconsider the larger corridor proposal; the SIB itself allowed 60–90 days for a resubmission.

Town of Hilton Head officials urged the county to continue negotiating with the SIB while preserving the fallback. In remarks to council, a Hilton Head elected official said, “don’t give up on that yet. Option 1 can be your fallback position.” Mayor (Town of Hilton Head) also pressed that, if the county proceeds with a narrower DOT replacement, a meaningful portion of the county’s remaining transportation referendum funds should be returned to Hilton Head for corridor intersection and safety work. “We are behind the 8 ball,” the mayor said, warning that remaining referendum funds are diminishing.

State Senator Ben Davis (Senator Davis) briefed the council on the legislative and contractual context. He noted the original IGA and SIB application reference the 278 corridor and do not rigidly require the six‑lane monolithic structure that alarmed some residents. He detailed the funding picture available under the larger plan: about $120 million from the SIB plus county and DOT resources, and warned council that choosing the narrower Option 1 could forfeit SIB funding if resubmission fails. “If you choose option 1 and send back $120 million to the SIB, they’ll spend it somewhere else in the state,” Davis said, and urged the council to weigh the loss of state funding against the risks of prolonged negotiations.

After questions from council members about utilities (the PSD pipe), right‑of‑way, NEPA and how impact fees and the $80 million transportation referendum funds would be used, Council member Passamane moved to adopt Option 2 (to continue negotiations and submit amendments to the IGA and related documents to the SIB). Council member Cunningham seconded the motion. A roll call followed: Passamane, Cunningham, McGowan, Glover, Bartholomew, Lawson, Dawson and Vice Chair Tabernick voted yes; Reeds, Brown and Chair Howard voted no. The motion passed 8‑3.

The council’s motion directs county administration to prepare a single county resolution and proposed IGA amendments for submission; staff said a revised package will be ready for review in advance of the next county council meeting the week after Memorial Day. Senator Davis and county staff said they would work to present the revised materials to the SIB within the time frame SCDOT Secretary Powell had set.

The decision leaves two parallel tracks: an immediate DOT‑led replacement of the Mackay Creek eastbound span (the fallback) that DOT said it will proceed with if no SIB agreement is reached, and continued county negotiation with the SIB to restore or preserve broader corridor funding, design scope and construction sequencing. Council members and town officials also emphasized the need to preserve funds for Hilton Head corridor safety and intersection improvements if the county pursues the narrower replacement.

Next steps identified by council include drafting the amended resolution and IGA language for Tuesday’s council packet, working with the town of Hilton Head on scope and allocation questions, and submitting a revised package to the SIB within the deadline set by DOT and the SIB. Staff said they will report back to council on estimated incremental costs if the county elects to add a third lane to the Mackay Creek replacement and on relocation or utility impacts tied to Pinckney Island access and the PSD pipe.