Livestock board pays officer $200K at resignation

Only six months after giving its then-executive officer Christian Mackay a poor performance evaluation, the Montana Board of Livestock paid him $204,294 when he resigned.

This expenditure came at a time when the board has been struggling to gain an understanding of the Department of Livestock’s finances and considering fee increases for producers.

Mackay’s salary was $40.51 per hour when he resigned as DOL executive director Sept. 21.

His final payout included $14,774 in accumulated personal leave, two years of salary paid over two years that came to $168,520 and a transition period payment of $21,000.

Proposed livestock inspection fee has dairy farmers worried

The DOL also paid $4,200 in payroll taxes for Mackay.

“Christian was available to help me look for documents I might need so I would not drop the ball during the transition,” said Dr. Marty Zaluski, Montana state veterinarian and interim DOL executive officer. “We lost (Brands Administrator John) Grainger the same day so Christian was really helpful.”

One trade-off for spending department funds on Mackay is not funding increased salaries for current employees.

Salaries for DOL employees average far below market rates in other states, so the Board of Livestock is considering increasing salaries to 80 percent of market rates.

Such a salary increase would throw the DOL budget more than $400,000 into the red, according to Centralized Services administrator George Harris’ estimates at the Dec. 18 BOL meeting.

On the face of this issue, the BOL made a shortsighted budget decision.

Livestock board moves to tighten oversight over agency

But a deeper look reveals the BOL was backed into a corner, facing difficult choices no matter which escape route the volunteer members chose.

When the 2015 Montana Legislature threatened to take the Department of Livestock’s budget away until management could gain an understanding of where department funding was being spent and devise a balanced budget, calls for the board to remove Mackay increased.

Legislators finally relented and reinstated the department’s general fund before the end of the 2015 session.

When the terms of two BOL members ended and Gov. Steve Bullock appointed Nina Baucus and Lila Taylor to the board, staunch support for Mackay eroded.

Board members began to investigate the procedure for removing Mackay from his position, only to discover potentially litigious discrepancies in his employment contract.

Mackay’s original employment contract declared he was exempt from any grievance procedure because he was a head of a state agency. Essentially, the contract stated, Mackay worked at the pleasure of the Board of Livestock so he could be removed at any time for any reason or no reason.

But the BOL policy manual was murky at best on this issue. At least two attorneys advised the board that this clause in Mackay’s contract violated state law and Mackay could sue the Department of Livestock if the board fired him without cause.

State livestock department leaders resign

The BOL, not the governor, supervises the DOL executive officer. Unless an employee is hired according to an explicit agency policy that exempts the employee’s right to a grievance procedure, state law dictates that supervisors must show cause if they decide to terminate an employee.

The BOL could not document cause because the board had not evaluated Mackay’s performance even though agency policy required annual reviews.

So the BOL reviewed Mackay’s performance last March, mostly giving him poor to failing marks in 10 categories.

Calls for Mackay’s removal became louder and more insistent.

Attorneys advised that a single performance evaluation was not enough; Mackay could challenge a decision to remove him from his position and would probably win in court.

BOL members had three choices: Fire Mackay and spend unknown amounts of money to defend their decision; continue to employ Mackay for at least another year so they could evaluate his performance while deflecting intense pressure from the industry the department serves; or reach a settlement with Mackay so he would voluntarily resign.

The board chose to negotiate a settlement so the department could move toward a balanced budget and better management instead of bogging down in the blame-game.

“We agreed not to disclose the negotiated agreement, but both parties agreed that it was the right resolution,” said vice-chair of the BOL and finance committee chairman, John Scully.

During the search for a new executive officer, the BOL edited the department policy manual to clarify the executive officer’s employee rights.

The new executive officer will work at the pleasure of the BOL and will not have the privilege of a grievance procedure. The board will be allowed to hire or fire the executive officer at any time.

Mike Honeycutt assumed his responsibilities as DOL executive officer Feb. 1.