Senate Ethics Committee opens investigation into Sen. Jason Ellsworth, votes to pursue hearings

The Montana Senate Ethics Committee on Feb. 3 read a formal notice alleging that Sen. Jason Ellsworth potentially violated state ethics and procurement rules in connection with contracts awarded to Agile Analytics LLC and voted to pursue hearings into the matter.

The committee read a notice letter into the record that cites a legislative auditor memorandum dated Jan. 24, 2025 (Ref. Y25-0076) and identifies alleged facts and statutory provisions that form the basis for an investigation. The committee then approved a motion to pursue hearings based on the allegations in the letter.

The notice, read into the record by committee counsel, states that on Jan. 27 the full Senate voted 49-0 to convene the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate whether the senator from Senate District 43 violated or potentially violated provisions of the Montana Code of Ethics, the joint rules of the Legislature, the rules of the Senate, or other law or administrative rule. The letter attaches the legislative auditor’s memorandum as Exhibit 1 and lists the statutes and authorities the committee will consider.

Why it matters: The allegations center on the procurement and structuring of contracts with Agile Analytics, including whether prior personal or business relationships with Agile’s owner, Bryce Eggleston, were disclosed and whether the work was improperly split into multiple contracts to avoid procurement thresholds. The initial contract terms are described in the notice as exceeding $100,000, which, if accurate, would trigger competitive‑bidding or other procurement requirements under state law.

Allegations and legal bases The notice describes alleged facts dated on or about Dec. 10, 2024 through Jan. 24, 2025: that former Senate president and senator Jason Ellsworth executed or caused execution of a consulting contract with Agile Analytics on behalf of the Montana State Senate and the Senate Select Committee on Judicial Oversight and Reform. The letter alleges Ellsworth had a prior personal and professional relationship with Bryce Eggleston, Agile’s president, and that facts creating a conflict of interest or an appearance of impropriety required disclosure prior to award of the contract.

The document alleges the initial Agile contract included payment terms in excess of $100,000 and that the contracts were later bifurcated into two nearly identical agreements with amounts below the $100,000 threshold. The notice cites a statement by Mr. Eggleston that bifurcation was done “for easier subcontracting” and flags potential noncompliance with procurement statute section 18-4-141, Montana Code Annotated (as cited in the notice). The auditor’s report also describes the contracts being processed under an exigency exception after a more modest proposal was apparently abandoned.

The letter frames potential charges including: a failure to disclose a conflict of interest under the legislative ethics provisions cited in the notice; and potential official misconduct under section 45-7-401, MCA, among other possible violations. The notice also references committee rule E10-21(b) and the committee’s adoption of rule E10-30 (01/29/2025) governing respondent duties.

Required response and process Under the committee rule cited in the notice, the respondent must submit an initial response within four legislative days. The notice lists required items: a written response to the allegations, supporting documentation, a witness list with contact information, a list of legislative-branch records germane to the proceedings, and a list of executive-branch records requested for the response. The notice also states that all committee hearings and meetings will be publicly noticed and that the respondent will have an opportunity to cross-examine committee witnesses personally or through counsel.

Committee action Majority Leader McGillivray moved that the committee pursue hearings on the allegations set forth in the notice; the committee took a voice vote, with the chair calling for “aye” or “nay,” and the chair announced the motion carried. The meeting record notes that the letter will be circulated by email to committee members and that the chair and vice chair will sign the notice.

Recusal request and open‑meetings concerns Counsel identified in the transcript as Ms. Mehl moved to recuse “Senator McElvie” from hearing the matter and asked the committee to set aside and vacate a ruling or motion, citing a conflict of interest grounded in materials provided to Mr. Ellsworth that counsel said she had not been provided. The chair declined to recognize the recusal motion from a speaker who was not a committee member. The committee discussed procedural options for entering objections and points of order and counsel and committee counsel agreed to a process where objections, points of order, and motions would be submitted through committee counsel in writing and entered into the record.

Ms. Mehl also raised concerns about open‑government laws, saying the committee’s scheduling and off‑record discussions could implicate Montana open‑meetings law. She cited case names as transcribed in the record and warned that a violation could lead to vacating committee actions; committee members responded that none of the committee had met in quorum outside the public meetings, and the chair noted a process for documenting out‑of‑meeting communications.

Next steps The committee announced a subsequent meeting for Friday at 11:00 a.m. in the same room; the committee said procedural rules will again be on the agenda, and that future items could include subpoenas or other matters necessitating committee action. The notice requires the respondent’s written materials within the time frame stated in the committee rule; the committee’s counsel offered to serve as custodian for objections and motions submitted by counsel for the respondent.

Votes at a glance - Motion to pursue hearings regarding the allegations in the Feb. 3 notice: Mover — Majority Leader McGillivray; outcome — motion carried on a voice vote. Exact roll-call tallies were not recorded in the hearing transcript.

Ending The committee adjourned after confirming logistics for signing and distributing the notice and setting the next meeting. The chair indicated committee counsel would collect objections and procedural filings and that the committee will revisit procedural rules and any necessary orders at the next meeting.