Investigation reveals Bryce Eggleston's lack of qualifications for Agile Analytics contract

In a session marked by scrutiny and inquiry, the Montana Legislature's Senate Ethics Committee convened on March 14, 2025, to delve into the qualifications and actions of Mr. Bryce Eggleston, a figure at the center of a controversial contract dispute. The atmosphere was charged as committee members sought clarity on Eggleston's involvement in judicial reform and the legitimacy of his submitted invoices.

The meeting unfolded with a focus on Eggleston's sworn statements, which revealed a troubling lack of experience in judicial reform. When questioned about his qualifications, Eggleston admitted to having none, a revelation that raised eyebrows among committee members. "Did I read that correctly? Yes," confirmed a witness, underscoring the gravity of the admission.

As the investigation progressed, it became evident that Eggleston had submitted invoices totaling over $88,000 for work he had not performed. The timeline of events was particularly telling; invoices dated December 26, 2024, were submitted before any work had begun on the Agile Analytics contract. A subsequent invoice from January 10, 2025, claimed payment for data gathering and analysis prep, yet Eggleston's own statements indicated that no such work had been completed prior to billing.

The committee's inquiry also highlighted the investigative efforts of the legislative auditor's office, which conducted interviews with key witnesses and reviewed relevant documents. Their findings suggested that critical information regarding Agile Analytics had not been disclosed to those involved in the contract process. "This was not actually an audit. This was just an investigation," clarified one official, emphasizing the nature of their work.

As the session drew to a close, the implications of Eggleston's actions loomed large. The committee's findings could lead to significant consequences, not only for Eggleston but also for the integrity of the contracting process within the Montana government. With questions still lingering about transparency and accountability, the committee's next steps will be closely watched by both lawmakers and the public alike.