Below Is an AI generated summary of the 6/22/2026 anonymous complaint released in todays Town Press Release Press Release: October 28, 2026 Release of Investigative Reports – Town Manager Shaun Mulholland
Summary of the Investigation Letter, 6/22/2026
Source: June 22, 2026 Summary Letter of Investigation for Anonymous Complaint 2000528691 (PDF), 17 pages
An independent investigation examined an anonymous ethics complaint filed against Town Manager Shaun Mulholland and Town Councilor Daniel Bouchard in Londonderry. The inquiry evaluated whether Bouchard improperly participated in staff matters, if Mulholland leveraged Bouchard’s presence to intimidate personnel, and whether Mulholland established a hostile work environment or distributed favoritism-based wage increases. Following a thorough review of town calendars, compensation files, performance evaluations, and employee interviews, the investigator concluded that the evidence did not substantiate any of the allegations. Instead, the findings indicated that workplace friction stemmed from regular disagreements regarding management approaches and the pace of administrative changes rather than charter violations or unlawful conduct.
Executive summary
The document is a confidential investigative report prepared by attorney Eric A. Maher of Donahue, Tucker & Ciandella, PLLC, for the Town of Londonderry’s legal counsel. It examines an anonymous ethics complaint filed on January 6, 2026, concerning Town Manager Shaun Mulholland and Town Councilor Daniel Bouchard.
The investigation concluded that none of the allegations was substantiated by the evidence reviewed. The investigator found insufficient evidence of improper councilor involvement in town administration, deliberate intimidation of employees, a hostile work environment, favoritism in salary increases, or inappropriate treatment of employees behind their backs.
The report does acknowledge that employees held differing views about Mulholland’s management style, communication, and pace of organizational change. However, it concludes that the evidence more strongly reflected disagreements over management and policy than proven misconduct or violations of the Town Charter.
June 22, 2026 Summary Letter of Investigation for Anonymous Complaint 2000528691 (PDF).pdf
1. What the complaint alleged
The anonymous complainant raised six allegations:
- Improper staff-meeting attendance: Mulholland invited Councilor Bouchard to meetings intended for town staff.
- Intimidation: Mulholland used Bouchard’s presence to intimidate employees and discourage dissent.
- Interference in town operations: Bouchard improperly participated in administrative matters, contrary to the Town Charter.
- Hostile work environment: Mulholland’s conduct created a hostile workplace.
- Favoritism in pay: Mulholland gave substantial raises to employees who supported him while denying comparable increases to others.
- Inappropriate treatment of employees: Mulholland shunned employees or talked about them behind their backs.
The complainant’s broader concern was that employees who disagreed with management were marginalized, while employees who supported management were rewarded.
2. Findings on each allegation
The investigator marked the first five allegations as unsubstantiated. The sixth was also not corroborated by the interviews.
A. Inviting Bouchard to staff meetings
Unsubstantiated
The investigation found no evidence that Bouchard attended regular department-head meetings. He attended two issue-specific groups: the Traffic Management Working Group and the Emergency Communications Center (ECC) Working Group. The investigator concluded that these meetings served planning and advisory functions, and that Bouchard’s participation was limited and consistent with the Town Charter.
B. Using Bouchard to intimidate employees
Unsubstantiated
Some employees thought Bouchard’s presence at the ECC meetings could make others uncomfortable. However, the investigator found no sufficient evidence that his attendance was intended to intimidate staff or actually prevented employees from speaking up. Employees voiced objections to the proposed merger of police and fire dispatch operations, and the proposal was eventually put on hold over cost and feasibility concerns.
C. Bouchard interfering in town operations
Unsubstantiated
The report found no evidence that Bouchard directed employees, ordered administrative actions, influenced personnel decisions, or interfered with employees’ duties. His limited involvement in the two working groups did not establish a violation of the Charter’s restrictions on councilor interference in town administration.
D. Creating a hostile work environment
Unsubstantiated
Employees expressed concerns about Mulholland’s direct, rigid, demanding, or sometimes dismissive management style. Nevertheless, the investigation found no corroborated evidence of threats, retaliation, or conduct meeting the report’s definition of a legally hostile work environment. It also found no allegation that the conduct was based on a protected characteristic, such as race, sex, age, or disability.
E. Favoritism in salary increases
Unsubstantiated
The investigator reviewed compensation adjustments for employees outside collective bargaining units, along with personnel evaluations and interviews. The evidence indicated that increases were related to market-rate concerns or expanded job responsibilities, rather than demonstrated favoritism. Several employees had evidence that their pay was below market, and recipients had favorable evaluations under previous town managers.
F. Shunning employees or talking behind their backs
Not corroborated
No employee interviewed reported feeling shunned by Mulholland or hearing him speak inappropriately about an employee behind that person’s back. Some employees discussed performance concerns with him, but those conversations were described as appropriate management activities.
June 22, 2026 Summary Letter of Investigation for Anonymous Complaint 2000528691 (PDF).pdf
3. How the investigation was conducted
The report says the investigator reviewed:
- The anonymous complaint and Town calendar records.
- Compensation records for non-union employees.
- Employee performance evaluations.
- Relevant Town Charter provisions and Town policies.
- Interviews with town officials, department heads, employees, and the subjects of the complaint.
The legal framework focused primarily on the Town Charter and the Town’s Code of Conduct. The investigator also considered the Town’s harassment policy but concluded that the complaint did not allege conduct based on a protected characteristic.
An important detail: the Code of Conduct cited in the report was adopted on February 9, 2026, after the complaint was filed. The investigator used it as an analytical framework for expected workplace conduct, rather than treating its specific provisions as rules already in effect when the alleged events occurred.
June 22, 2026 Summary Letter of Investigation for Anonymous Complaint 2000528691 (PDF).pdf
4. Important qualifications
The report’s conclusion should be understood in context.
- “Unsubstantiated” does not necessarily mean that every concern was false. It means the investigator concluded that the available evidence did not establish the alleged misconduct.
- The report acknowledges workplace tension. Some employees criticized Mulholland’s communication style, rigidity, and response to differing opinions. Others described him as receptive to alternative views when supported by information and data.
- The investigation did not endorse every management decision. The investigator expressly declined to assess the wisdom of Mulholland’s initiatives, the reasonableness of his expectations, or the merits of his management style.
- The salary review had a defined scope. It focused on employees who could receive discretionary mid-year adjustments outside collective bargaining agreements. The report’s conclusion was that the reviewed evidence did not demonstrate favoritism.
5. Bottom line
The letter closes by stating that the allegations could not be substantiated after reviewing the evidence and interviewing the relevant individuals.
In practical terms, the report supports the position that the complaint did not establish a violation of the Town Charter or sufficient evidence of the alleged workplace misconduct. It attributes the underlying disputes primarily to differences over management approach, policy direction, and organizational change.
The report is an investigator’s assessment, not necessarily a separate ruling by a court or the Town Council. It also does not establish that every workplace concern was resolved or that every management practice was ideal.
June 22, 2026 Summary Letter of Investigation for Anonymous Complaint 2000528691 (PDF)
Related Posts:
Town Manager Firing Information Page