COLUMBIA — Candidates for the job to lead South Carolina’s land preservation agency included people with years of experience in forestry, environmental policy and natural resources, according to applications obtained by The Post and Courier.

Instead, the S.C. Conservation Bank board chose a former lawmaker who oversaw the agency’s budget — a nomination now under scrutiny in the state Senate.

Confirming former state Rep. Mike Pitts to lead the bank has become so contentious that a committee voted to advance his nomination to the Senate floor Thursday without a seal of approval that’s traditionally almost automatic at Statehouse hearings.


“It was pretty glaring that there were many of the folks in that stack who had qualifications that I think would better suit them to a job like that than he has,” said State Sen. Thomas McElveen, D-Sumter, who reviewed the applications. “I’m sure he’s qualified to do a lot of good things, I just don’t think leading a multi-million dollar state agency, the Conservation Bank, is one of them.”

A review of resumes for agency director showed the Conservation Bank passed over an utility employee with decades of experience in forestry, including for about six years at the S.C. Forestry Commission. That applicant had a master’s degree in forest resource management from Clemson University.

Another applicant has spent more than two decades at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, most recently advising on environmental issues affecting local governments.

Other applicants had worked at a land trust and a conservancy, and had experience in accounting, grant applications or real estate. Names of the applicants were redacted from the copies.

Instead, the bank’s board picked Pitts, a Laurens Republican and retired Greenville police officer, and formally nominated him as soon as he left the Legislature in January.

The bulk of Pitts’ conservation-related experience appears to stem from his time leading a budget subcommittee that determined the Conservation Bank’s funding and his background as an avid hunter. He testified that he is passionate about improving the Conservation Bank.

Pitts was president of the National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucus, a group that advocates for hunting, angling, recreational shooting and trapping. He has been a member of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, a nonprofit that works to “ensure the future of elk, other wildlife, their habitat and our hunting heritage.”

South Carolina law states that the Conservation Bank’s executive director “must possess experience in the areas of natural resources, land development, forestry, finance, land conservation, real estate, or law.”

During an unusually combative Senate Agriculture Committee confirmation hearing Thursday, the board’s vice chairman Michael McShane admitted that he personally wanted the next executive director of the Conservation Bank to be someone who could repair a once-damaged relationship with the Legislature.

Lawmakers had stripped away funding from the agency over the years and considered closing it last year when audits found accounting problems.

“In Mike McShane’s view, the No. 1 priority for the director was to regain the trust of the General Assembly in order for dedicated funding to come back to the Conservation Bank,” McShane said, referring to himself in the third person.

“So, I mean, his No. 1 qualification would be his ability to lobby the General Assembly?” Sen. Dick Harpootlian, D-Columbia, responded. “Is that what you’re telling me?”

“The search committee did a broad, thorough job to make recommendations to the board in the best interest of Conservation Bank,” McShane said.

The bank board voted unanimously to hire Pitts, leading Harpootlian to question their competency.

The testy hearing is uncharacteristic for the Legislature, where former lawmakers are often confirmed for state positions with few questions asked, and is expected to linger when the full Senate votes.

The debate over Pitts’ nomination dragged on for hours, with the former lawmaker interrogated about his record in the Legislature last year. Senators accused him of casting votes on issues related to the Conservation Bank after he was approached about taking over as executive director.

Harpootlian presented evidence that Pitts recused himself from a vote on a budget-related issue with the Conservation Bank in March 2018. And Pitts confirmed that he’d already been approached about leading the agency at that point.

But after that, legislative records show Pitts continued to vote on other bills related to the Conservation Bank. That included a vote against a proposal that would have banned state lawmakers from serving as director until they’ve been out of office for more than a year.

The proposal was eventually removed by negotiators for the House and Senate, allowing Pitts to apply for the job.

“You voted against that amendment. You did not recuse yourself,” Harpootlian said, confronting Pitts with the vote tally. “Isn’t that correct?”

Pitts agreed the documents showed him voting against the bill. But he suggested it could be a mistake with the record or an issue with the electronic voting machines that lawmakers use in the House.

https://www.postandcourier.com/polit...b26b49bc0.html