My friend, colleague and longtime Lowcountry journalist, Richard Brooks, delivers the goods on Beaufort's "parking problem" - a problem, in this writer's opinion, which has only just begun.  - Mark Shaffer

By Richard Brooks, special to Lowcountry Weekly

Note: The following statement was delivered to the Beaufort City Council on Tuesday, March 9. The council voted to increase parking fees from 50 cents to $1 an hour and increase fines from $3 to $10. A decision to extend enforcement hours from 6 to 9 p.m. was delayed.

Mayor and council:

Unfortunately, when we get past the concept and arrive at the details, any ordinance is probably inevitable. So I suppose new parking regulations are a done deal. But let me offer a few philosophical observations to keep y’all up at night after you do what you’re going to do anyway.

First, after who-knows-how-many years of talking about it I still don’t believe there is, or ever was, a parking problem downtown. There’s a perceived parking problem. And then there are meetings to talk about the so-called parking problem. And the “parking problem” has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The problem is we can’t shut up about parking. When an issue is framed as a problem, the natural tendency is not to leave well enough alone but to solve the problem. You feel obligated to do something. But anything you do is going to make somebody unhappy. I don’t envy you. But I’m not going to give you a break, either. You could have done nothing. Or better yet, you could have considered free parking – which is a valid model for downtown revitalization. Greenville, Spartanburg and Pendleton in the Upstate, Georgetown on the coast and Bluffton right here in Beaufort all made free parking a part of their downtown rejuvenation programs. The customer-friendly idea is to bring people downtown and encourage them to stay a while, take in some historic or natural sights, walk in the park and maybe even spend some money. I don’t think you even considered the free-parking option. If you did, it wasn’t for long.

Secondly, you should think about the unintended consequences of creating a law enforcement revenue stream. It’s simply bad public policy. The purpose of law enforcement is safety, not revenue. Your ordinance creates a whole new criminal class – downtown visitors. And your private law enforcement arm is ruthlessly vigilant for two reasons: Paying itself; and paying you enough so you let it keep paying itself. And you are on a path of no return. You already have a long-term contract with the parking mercenaries and you’re already financially committed to buying the appropriate toys: Credit card scanner meters and kiosks and cell-phone alerts and such – none of which contributes to policing the city – preventing and solving real crimes against people and property. Instead, it creates resentment toward law enforcement. It begs the question: “Don’t you guys have anything better to do. Go catch some crooks.” I realize the Lanier people aren’t sworn police officers, but they’re enforcing your law on your behalf and you have to explain that fine distinction to the public. Then the public can resent you, too.

Thirdly and finally, I’m still wondering how this revenue stream arrived at the doorstep of the Redevelopment Commission. If I understand correctly, most downtown parking revenue will fund the commission’s efforts to revitalize Uptown, Boundary Street, Bladen Street and other areas that are not downtown. Downtown merchants who support this are cutting their own throats: creating new competition for themselves, discouraging their own customers from shopping downtown, and effectively encouraging their customers to go somewhere else. This is effectively robbing Peter to pay Paul – and Paul has free parking.

This all adds up to customer aggravation. Whatever it costs to park downtown, I’ll probably pay it. But I’ll be aggravated. When the meter expires, I’ll pay the fine. But I’ll be aggravated. And eventually, people just avoid aggravation. So, all other things being equal, visiting downtown or not might be based on the path of least aggravation.

Richard Brooks doesn't live or work or own a business downtown, but spends a lot of time there anyway.