Attorney Adam Duerk speaks during a meeting of the Senate Ethics Committee on Feb. 3, 2025.
The Senate Ethics Committee could find Sen. Jason Ellsworth violated ethical and criminal misconduct statutes if allegations of waste and abuse are borne out during the course of its investigation.
The committee members at their first official meeting on Feb. 3 adopted a letter laying out the allegations of misconduct against the Hamilton Republican, while his lawyer reminded the senators that Ellsworth maintains the presumption of innocence and accused them of violating due process.
Late last year, then-Senate President Ellsworth signed a $170,100 consulting contract with a business associate to do analysis on a series of judicial reform bills after the current legislative session.
But the methods used to secure the contracts, including originally splitting them into amounts below the limit that would trigger additional oversight by government entities, raised concerns among legislative staff and current Senate GOP leadership.
The Montana State News Bureau first reported on the contract with Bryce Eggleston, through his company Agile Analytics, which was never paid out and has since been canceled.
Senate leadership referred the matter to the Legislative Auditor, who on on Jan. 24 released a report concluded that Ellsworth’s actions to obtain the contract were an abuse of his position of power and wasted government resources.
The report formed the basis for the ethics investigation, laid out in the committee’s letter: That Ellsworth neglected to disclose his relationship with Eggleston, that the originally split contract raised compliance concerns, and that the contract was swiftly approved under exigent circumstances that Ellsworth created.
“Ellsworth knew or should have known of facts and circumstances related to Agile and Mr. Eggleston that could create a conflict of interest or the appearance of impropriety in the award of a contract to a personal friend and former business associate,” the letter states.
If found credible, the allegations could lead to charges of misconduct under the ethical requirements of legislators, and under criminal statute. Ethical misconduct could lead to repercussions from the Senate chamber while criminal misconduct would fall under the jurisdiction of a district court and county attorney.
The ethics committee, with its first official meeting, kicked off a four-day timeline for Ellsworth to respond to the allegations, and provide documents and witness lists.
Ellsworth previously has called the investigation into his actions with the contract a “manufactured controversy,” and a distraction to the Legislature, but he joined his Senate colleagues in a 49-0 vote to convene the seldom-used ethics committee to investigate whether his actions merited punishment or expulsion.
However, his lawyer, Joan Mell, attempted multiple times during Monday’s two ethics committee meetings to dismiss the proceedings, arguing a lack of due process, truncated timelines and inherent biases.
“Every one of you has read the audit report, every one of you has entertained the conclusions of the Legislative Auditor that are replete with erroneous conclusions,” Mell said. “You’ve already violated the most fundamental premise of constitutional due process, and that is a presumption of innocence.”
Mell added that a rift between Ellsworth and current Senate President Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, provided an underlying motive to the investigation; that Senate Majority Leader Tom McGillvray, R-Billings, brought his own bias for having expressed opposition to Ellsworth spending money on bill tracking in an interim committee; and that she was still unclear as to how she could fully participate in the proceedings, without a traditional courtroom setting allowing for depositions and cross examinations.
“It would be my recommendation that this body decide against proceeding down an investigative path and entertain alternative considerations for any concerns about the conduct of former president Ellsworth,” Mell said.
Responding for the ethics committee, attorney Adam Duerk clarified that the committee was not convened in a criminal setting.
“This is not a criminal trial. There is not an accused who stands to lose his or her liberty interests here. This is, first and foremost, a fact-finding mission,” Duerk said. “We need to resolve the issue of facts before we ever get to the issue of a decision about wrongdoing.”
Duerk, hired by Regier to represent the GOP majority and aid the committee, replaced previously hired attorney Matthew Monforton, who the committee’s Democratic members had objected to over partisan statements he’d made, including against Ellsworth.
He said he would take Mell’s remarks to heart and “make sure that the hearing that we have reflects due process.”
Mell raised additional concerns about the committee not following open meeting laws, and said that she would seek to vacate the committee’s work if any such violations occur, and reiterated concerns that she would not be able to meet the committee’s timelines for obtaining documents, records and witness lists.
Among the witnesses listed by the committee are staff with the Legislative Audit Division, Legislative Services Division, Department of Administration — which approved the sole-source contract Ellsworth ultimately entered into — Senate President Regier, Sens. Ken Bogner, Barry Usher and Greg Hertz; Eggleston, and lobbyist Scott Boulanger.
Ellsworth was not on the initial witness list provided by the committee, but Duerk said he could be called after further conversation with Mell.
The bipartisan ethics committee also includes Sens. Forrest Mandeville, R-Columbus; Laura Smith, D-Helena and Chris Pope, D-Bozeman.
The ethics committee will next meet on Feb. 7 11 a.m.