Senate Ethics Committee reviews draft report on Sen. Jason Ellsworth's contracts, presses staff for stricter factual citations

The Senate Ethics Committee met March 14, 2025, to review a draft report of findings related to contracts Senator Jason Ellsworth signed in late 2024 and to give staff direction on edits before the report goes to the full Senate. Committee counsel read findings that Ellsworth had presented two contracts on Dec. 26, 2024, totaling $170,100 and that an invoice for $7,087.50 was later approved for payment; the report ties those facts to section 2-2-112 of the Montana Code Annotated.

Committee members focused the session on ensuring the report remained factual rather than conclusory. "Our job here is the findings of fact," said Senator Smith, urging staff to insert direct citations to witness testimony and exhibits for statements that could read as legal conclusions. Several members asked that references to earlier litigation and auditor findings be condensed to exhibit citations rather than narrated at length unless directly relevant to the narrow conflict-of-interest charge the committee is tasked to resolve.

Mr. Carroll, counsel to the committee, read draft findings that on 12/26/2024 Senator Ellsworth submitted two contracts and invoices for $170,100 due on receipt and that by 12/31/2024 a revised single contract was signed as president of the Senate. The draft also records that on 01/10/2025 Mr. Eggleston submitted an invoice for $7,087.50 and that Senator Ellsworth approved payment on 01/14/2025 (Exhibit 22). The draft cites testimony from Angie Carter, Jared Coles, and Director Diane Giles and references exhibits including FTC materials and a legislative auditor report.

Members pressed staff to avoid presenting conclusions as committee findings. For example, a paragraph stating the bifurcation of contracts created "an appearance of impropriety" prompted requests to rephrase or to attach direct testimony supporting that claim. Mr. Carroll said the draft had attempted to distill a large record but agreed to add more direct quotes and exhibit citations where committee members requested them. Special counsel warned against "fact bargaining" but said counsel would provide a tracked-changes draft and preserve direct testimony that is clearly supported by the record.

The committee also discussed procurement rules and the Department of Administration (DOA) delegation limits, noting that splitting contracts into amounts under DOA thresholds raised factual questions to be presented clearly. Senators requested the report include the DOA delegation provisions and, where available, the specific contract amounts so readers can see what procurement thresholds applied.

On timing and process, the draft includes a one-page timeline of events: federal court findings of a financial relationship in 2014; Ellsworth's elections and service as president; select committee discussions in November and December 2024; the December 26 contracts and subsequent contract activity; the invoice and payment approval in January 2025; and sworn statements and adjudicatory hearings in March 2025. Committee members asked staff to clarify in the timeline which called witnesses actually testified and to note witnesses who were called but did not testify.

Committee members debated whether to record in the report that the contract was terminated and that no payments were made. Counsel and Mr. Carroll said exhibits in the record (including exhibits referenced in testimony) document a termination and referenced correspondence about cancellation; the committee's primary focus, they said, remains whether there was a disclosure obligation and an undisclosed conflict of interest.

The chair directed staff to produce a revised tracked-changes draft incorporating the committee's edits, to anchor contested statements with direct testimony or exhibit citations, and to circulate the revision for review. The committee adjourned and scheduled a reconvening at 11:00 a.m. the following day to consider adoption of the report.

The matter will return to the full Senate only if the committee adopts a final report; the draft left a blank vote box and signature lines for committee adoption.