By ZACH LAIRD, InDepthNH.org
LONDONDERRY — The findings of two investigations against fired Town Manager Shaun Mulholland have been released. While the first one found no wrong-doing, the second found evidence that he interfered with the investigations, and engaged in retaliation, unprofessional and disrespectful conduct and lack of candor to the Town Council.
Mulholland was officially terminated as the Town Manager during the Sept. 21 council meeting following multiple investigations, and quickly replaced with Police Chief Kim Bernard as acting town manager. Councilor Dan Bouchard, who was implicated in one of the investigations for “improperly interfering in Town operations,” was found innocent of those claims and pushed back against the findings of the Vrountas report. He said Mulholland was still under investigation when the Council voted abruptly to terminate his employment.
“They had a meeting on Monday, which Chairman (Ron) Dunn knew I could not attend, and I asked if I could Zoom in, and he denied me access by Zooming in, he told me there’d be no vote. I find it interesting that they voted; I was not aware of any vote that was going to take place. Chairman Dunn said there’d be no vote taken at the meeting,” Bouchard said.
Neither Mulholland nor Dunn responded for comment.
Bouchard continued that he was out of town on Tuesday afternoon and did not see the latest press release or report detailing the findings. He reiterated he knew nothing was there of substance in the first report but hadn’t read the second.
The Town received an anonymous complaint on Jan. 6, regarding Mulholland’s conduct. After the Town Council authorized an investigation, Attorney Eric Maher conducted it and provided it to the Town Council in June.
The complaint alleges that Bouchard improperly participated in Town staff matters, that Mulholland used Bouchard’s presence to intimidate employees, that Mulholland created a hostile work environment, and that Mulholland rewarded favored employees with significant wage increases while treating others adversely.
Included in the investigation were compensation records for non-bargaining unit employees, relevant Town Charter and policy provisions, and interviews with Town officials and employees.
According to the Maher report: based on that review, the evidence did not substantiate the allegations set forth in the complaint.
“First, the evidence did not establish that Bouchard attended regular staff meetings or otherwise improperly interfered in Town administration. Instead, the evidence showed that Bouchard attended two issue-specific working groups – the Traffic Management Working Group and the ECC Working Group – and that his participation in those settings was limited and within the permissible confines with the Town Charter. Witness accounts did not show that Bouchard directed employees, interfered with administrative duties, or otherwise engaged in conduct constituting a violation of the Town Charter,” the report stated.
It noted that the evidence did not substantiate the allegation that Mulholland used Bouchard to intimidate employees, and also that the evidence “did not substantiate that Mulholland created a hostile work environment as that term is legally defined nor under the Town’s policies.”
Then, in March, the Town received another anonymous complaint about Mulholland’s conduct. This time, the Town Council retained Attorney Christopher Vrountas to conduct a subsequent investigation, which was provided to the council in October.
The Vrountas report states the investigation concerned various allegations, such as: that the Town Manager created a hostile work environment, that he bullied employees, that he used dishonesty, humiliation and other tactics to intimidate and manipulate people, that he is working to influence the outcome of an investigation, and that he retaliated against employees he viewed as threats.
“The investigation revealed no credible information that Mulholland intimidated, threatened, or otherwise engaged in unwelcome offensive conduct or comments on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin, religion, age, gender identity or another other protected characteristic, in violation of the Town’s policy against harassment (Title VI, Ch. V) or applicable Law,” the Vrountas report said.
However, it continued that the allegations concerning retaliation are supported by evidence providing probable cause to sustain. It added: “There is substantial evidence to sustain the allegations of unprofessional and disrespectful conduct such as bullying and intimidation, dishonesty/lack of candor, interference, and other related conduct violating Town Charter and policy, including conflict of interest and recusal standards.”
The Town Council voted to disclose the full contents of both the Maher report and the Vrountas report which are available londonderrynh.gov/investigation.
The Vrountas report determined there was evidence to sustain allegations that Mulholland:
- Improperly interfered with and failed to recuse himself from both the Maher investigation and his own investigation;
- “Took repeated steps to interfere with, obstruct, and undermine” his own investigation, including by sending an email to Town department heads describing the investigation as a “scam” and instructing the department heads not to comply, despite knowing that the Town Council had authorized the investigation; and
- Interfered with the Town’s response to the Public Employee Labor Relations Board (PELRB) complaint, failing to recuse himself as required and instead putting his own interest in defending his personal conduct ahead of the Town’s interests in resolving the complaint.