The chair of the Davis County Commission allegedly threatened to fire a library employee for flying a pride flag in the building, called a former assistant a derogatory name and told others he had the power to control the weather.

These allegations against John Crofts came to light in a monthslong investigation conducted through the Utah law firm Strong & Hanni. The Salt Lake Tribune obtained the investigative report through an open records request.

In interviews with more than two dozen people, the investigation found that Crofts, a Republican, engaged in political favoritism, LGBTQ+ discrimination and other behaviors contributing to a hostile work environment. Attorney Kristin VanOrman wrote in the report that Crofts denied most of the accusations but demonstrated a “clear willingness to change.”

In an email to The Tribune, Crofts said that the wording in some of the complaints reflects ”aspects of conversations that I had,” but the report is “largely inaccurate,” similar to a game of telephone where a statement loses its original meaning and context.

Two weeks after county attorneys met with Crofts to discuss the investigation, the county sent the commissioner a notice that employees had reported experiencing potential retaliation for their presumed involvement in the inquiry. Records show Davis County Chief Deputy Civil Attorney Neal Geddes had specifically warned Crofts against retaliation.

In a Sunday news release, Crofts said the report is “riddled with inaccuracies, exaggerations, omissions, and claims that are plainly untrue.” He told The Tribune he had not retaliated against employees who may have participated in the inquiry.

“Some of the allegations are so preposterous that they would be humorous if this entire process had not consumed substantial taxpayer resources and distracted county government from serving the public,” Crofts said in the release. “All during an active political cycle.”

While the county’s other two commissioners are up for reelection this year, Crofts’ term does not end until January 2029. Crofts said that he believes the investigation was an attempt to challenge his reputation after “making waves at the county with proposed efficiency changes and budget cuts,” which “ruffled feathers of many employees.”

Crofts called the investigation “frivolous and costly” and said the report exonerates him of “any illegal doings whatsoever.” Without specifying what law he may have broken, the investigative report says some of the allegations against Crofts “could be considered actionable in a court of law.”

Hostile work environment allegations

The investigation began in November 2025 and continued for five months, VanOrman wrote in her report. She interviewed current and former Davis County employees along with former co-workers of Crofts who have not worked for the county, amounting to 26 people.

VanOrman said nearly every person she interviewed shared concerns about Croft’s conduct. Most of them feared retaliation, she wrote, so their names were omitted in the report.

Since Crofts was sworn into office in January 2025, several employees left and some are seeking new employment, VanOrman wrote. Interactions with Crofts, she said, played a “significant part” in these workers’ decisions to leave.

Nearly all the witnesses VanOrman spoke with detailed what they considered a hostile work environment, including being yelled at, having their job threatened due to their political affiliation and being publicly accused of criminal and personal misconduct, according to the report.

Crofts has also asked employees about their political and religious affiliations, according to the report, and “expressed his displeasure” if they did not line up with his own preferences.

“Employees are scared of their jobs and fear they will be retaliated against,” VanOrman wrote. “According to a number of witnesses, Commissioner Crofts has publicly stated that ‘employees will learn to fear the commission.’”

In one instance, VanOrman wrote, Crofts allegedly said he would oust one employee because the worker “flies a pride flag at the library and Republicans can’t use the library anymore because of the flag.”

VanOrman also said that Crofts has used his position to advance a “personal vendetta” against County Clerk Brian McKenzie. In one instance, she said, Crofts asked for a legal review of a proposed ordinance, seeking guidance on the implications of giving more power to a clerk who has “demonstrated a pattern of non-transparency and behavior inconsistent with the expectations of collaborative governance.”

“... It is my opinion, Commissioner Crofts has used his political position inappropriately due to this personal animus,” VanOrman wrote in the report. “... This conduct is extremely troubling and is a blatant misuse of county time and resources.”

Political and religious concerns

Employees also told VanOrman that when they met with Crofts, he often asked whom they previously voted for or if they were party delegates. If an employee voted for his opponent during a primary in 2024, Crofts “sought retribution,” and many employees feared their jobs were based on their political affiliation, VanOrman wrote.

“He would make it clear that they were his enemy, that they would be placed on his hit list, and that he would find a way to get rid of them from their position with Davis County,” VanOrman wrote in the report. “... Crofts would also frequently state publicly that ‘Davis County needs to get rid of the Democrats in the county.’”

No interviewees said they were discriminated against based on their faith, according to the report, but he often brought the subject into the workplace “where it did not belong” by asking employees about their religious affiliations.

At one point, the report said, he also called his former assistant a “celestial r-----,” using a derogatory word for people with intellectual disabilities.

“Time and time again, if Commissioner Crofts was challenged, or if someone took a path that he did not agree with … an attempt to discredit, with the ultimate goal of getting rid of the individual (either by termination or resignation) occurred,” VanOrman wrote in her report. “This practice occurred over and over again throughout numerous divisions of Davis County.”

Defamation and ‘bizarre stories’

Accusations Crofts cast against other county employees were the most concerning allegations VanOrman uncovered, she wrote, because they bring the “greatest potential liability” for the county and Crofts personally.

These “more egregious and legally defamatory statements” included accusations from Crofts that a county official had an affair with a lobbyist and that the Davis County clerk committed election fraud to support Gov. Spencer Cox against challenger Phil Lyman.

Crofts denied he had made any of the defamatory remarks, VanOrman said. She added in the report that she doubted his credibility based on the number of people who said they had heard him make such statements.

Several people, according to the report, had concerns with Crofts’ fitness for duty due to the “bizarre stories” he would tell.

On one occasion, Crofts allegedly told people that he and others hold “certain powers” that allowed them to control the weather and that they were able to divert a tornado away from downtown Salt Lake City.

In another instance, the report details Crofts’ claims he worked with Mossad — Israel’s foreign intelligence agency — and that a Mossad agent had infiltrated the Davis County offices to leave an item behind to let Crofts know “that they had been there and were grateful for his help.”

Crofts has also told employees that he can “look into their souls and tell what their thoughts are,” VanOrmanwrote in the report. She said it did not strike her that such statements were the result of “any form of mental instability.”

“Instead, it became clear that part of Commissioner Crofts’ personality involves telling tall tales,” VanOrman said. “While it is unknown why he engages in this form of conduct, it appears to be an attention-seeking mechanism … in an attempt to either fit in or curry favor with those around him.”

Aftermath

Crofts said in an email to The Tribune that “anyone can make allegations,” and that two attorneys he consulted with called the report a “nothing burger,” because the accusations that “could be considered actionable” were based on unsubstantiated allegations.

“... There was no formal action recommended to be taken against me,” Crofts said. “... That said, I do not want to diminish the fact that several employees did raise concerns and made allegations, which I’ve been reflecting upon deeply on how my statements could have been misconstrued.”

When VanOrman confronted Crofts about the concerns in her report, she said he was “genuinely surprised, contrite and willing to make changes to his conduct.” She added that Crofts “felt terrible” that anyone would feel mistreated by him.

“I believe that he genuinely does not realize that he is doing anything wrong,” VanOrman said in her report. “While that is concerning, it also gives me hope that positive changes can be made.”

She recommended that Crofts undergo training in leadership, management and workplace conduct to help him differentiate appropriate behavior in his authority as a commissioner.

“I am hopeful that he will implement positive changes, obtain recommended training and modify the way he treats others that he works with,” VanOrman wrote. “In my opinion, this is the only way to avoid significant liability exposure in the future.”

After their meeting, public records show, a county attorney reminded Crofts in an email that retaliation toward anyone who Crofts believes may have participated in the investigation could create “serious legal consequences,” and that the county “strongly prohibits” confronting people who participated in the process.

Two weeks later, Davis County Attorney Troy Rawlings told Crofts that the county’s Human Resources Department had received “multiple reports” of potentially retaliatory conduct by Crofts, according to an email with the subject line “FINAL REMINDER.”

Rawlings added that two employees have threatened to resign due to their “unpleasant, and quite possibly, hostile” interactions with Crofts. Such actions may violate laws and county regulations prohibiting retaliation, so the county will not provide Crofts with legal defense if legal action were to be brought against him, Rawlings wrote in the email.

Rawlings directed Crofts to immediately cease retaliatory actions against people the commissioner believed may have participated in the investigation, and refrain from any further behavior that could be construed as threatening.