ICMA Ethics Complaint Regarding Newmarket Town Manager Steve Fournier

ICMA Ethics Complaint Regarding Newmarket Town Manager Steve Fournier: FORMAL ICMA ETHICS COMPLAINT

TO: ICMA Ethics Committee / Camilla Posthill Conners, Ethics Senior Program Manager

COMPLAINANT: Jeffrey Thomas Clay

RESPONDENT: Steve Fournier, Town Manager, Newmarket, New Hampshire

DATE: June 24, 2026

I. Standing of Complainant
The Complainant, Jeffrey Thomas Clay, is a non-member possessing direct, first-hand knowledge of systemic ethical and statutory violations committed by Respondent Steve Fournier.

II. Statement of Alleged Conduct and Ethical Violations
Count 1: Violation of Tenet 3 (Integrity, Honesty, and Compliance with Criminal Statutes)
Tenet 3 states: "Demonstrate by personal example the highest standards of ethical conduct and integrity in all public and professional relationships... Members shall comply with the laws, rules, and regulations of their jurisdictions."

The Alleged Conduct: Respondent Steve Fournier actively engaged in a calculated pattern of bad-faith deception, evidence tampering, and false swearing explicitly designed to mislead judicial and administrative bodies and impair the availability of evidence.

Pre-Litigation Falsification of Records: On August 28, 2023, after receiving explicit written notice of imminent civil rights litigation regarding RSA 91-A violations, the Respondent issued an official statutory denial letter. In this official government record, he falsely asserted that no Town Council deliberations occurred, no approval vote took place, and no public emails existed relating to the transaction. This constitutes a direct violation of NH RSA 641:3 (Falsification of Government Records) and NH RSA 642:1 (Obstruction of Government Administration).

Felony False Swearing under Oath: On September 26, 2023, the Respondent executed a sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury and submitted it directly to the Rockingham County Superior Court, swearing that no discussions, non-meetings, emails, or approval records existed among a quorum of the Town Council. This sworn statement directly influenced the court's early staging and is flatly contradicted by his own counsel’s subsequent admissions that a rolling quorum of the Council had explicitly debated and authorized the contract via private email. This conduct directly violates NH RSA 641:2 (False Swearing, a Class B Felony).

Coordinated Multi-Forum Fraud: The Respondent permitted his legal team to systematically mutate the factual record depending on the forum. He allowed counsel to tell the Superior Court that “The Newmarket Town Council did not approve the Settlement Agreement,” while concurrently telling the Ombudsman that “the settlement decision... was... the product of the Town Council email responses” and “it is not accurate that the Town Council did not approve”.

Count 2: Violation of Tenet 5 (Transparency and Criminal Pretext)
Tenet 5 states: "Recognize that official acts, programs, and expenditures should be open to public scrutiny and that the member should encourage public awareness of local government operations."

The Alleged Conduct: The Respondent systematically engineered operational opacity, transforming simple civil infractions into criminal concealments under NH RSA 638:1.

Weaponizing Void Privilege: The Respondent used false assertions of "attorney-client privilege" as a criminal pretext to hide the physical existence of documents from the Right-to-Know Ombudsman. Because this privilege was deployed to intentionally conceal an un-noticed rolling quorum vote from the public, the privilege was void ab initio under the Crime-Fraud Exception Doctrine.

Form Over Substance Deception: The Respondent repeatedly utilized the deliberate absence of official public meeting minutes to falsely imply to tribunals that no official municipal actions or deliberations had occurred, despite knowing that substantive public decision-making had been entirely completed via asynchronous email networks.

Count 3: Violation of Tenet 12 (Public Trust, Official Oppression, and Financial Conversion)
Tenet 12 states: "Public office is a public trust. A member shall not use public office, position, or resources for personal or political gain, or to shield oneself or others from accountability."

The Alleged Conduct: The Respondent structurally abused his administrative power and misallocated public taxpayer funds to insulate municipal officials from statutory accountability and target a pro se citizen.

Official Oppression: The Respondent and collective members of the Town Council knowingly refrained from performing their mandatory statutory duties under RSA 91-A and RSA 41:6 regarding record preservation. They deployed public funds to pay private lawyers to systematically strip a citizen of his state constitutional right to transparency, constituting Official Oppression under NH RSA 643:1.

Theft by Deception via Fraudulent Enforcement: Having successfully obtained civil orders and fee awards ($29,197.07) through the submission of the aforementioned false affidavits and mutated appellate briefs, the Respondent authorized a series of Writs of Execution and Exemplifications of Judgment to seize the Complainant's personal funds and place a lien on real estate. This represents a distinct financial crime under NH RSA 637:4 (Theft by Deception) by attempting to convert a citizen's property through a false impression reinforced before a judge.

Extrajudicial Loop and State-Level Collusion: To permanently shield himself from criminal liability, the Respondent's legal team engaged in ex-parte backchannel contact with Associate Attorney General Thomas P. Velardi on November 23, 2025, resulting in a sweeping, un-investigated declination letter issued 24 hours later. The Respondent immediately weaponized this collusive DOJ letter as an exhibit in court to force immediate financial extraction of funds from the Complainant.

III. Index of Substantiating Documentation
The Complainant submits the following direct evidence, indexed by formal dockets and municipal admissions:

Exhibit A: Respondent's Statutory Denial Letter (August 28, 2023)
The negative record issued by Steve Fournier falsely denying the existence of any responsive settlement records or Council communications.

Exhibit B: Sworn Affidavit of Steve Fournier (September 26, 2023)
Submitted to the Rockingham County Superior Court containing statements challenged as felony False Swearing under NH RSA 641:2.

Exhibit C: Inconsistent Corporate Counsel Admissions
(Ombudsman Docket RKO 2023-024 / Superior Court Docket No. 218-2023-CV-01356)
The explicit record text demonstrating that the Town's own legal counsel flatly dismantled Fournier's affidavit by admitting the emails existed, included the Town Manager, and formed the "settlement decision".

Exhibit D: Writs of Execution and Financial Billing Records
Documenting the $29,197.07 financial extraction targeting the Complainant's personal property based on the tainted judgments.

IV. Conclusion
The operational conduct of Town Manager Steve Fournier represents an absolute abdication of the professional ethics demanded of an ICMA member. This is a documented record of an administrator utilizing shifting narratives, deceptive framing, fraudulent court filings, and state-level extrajudicial collusion to suppress public transparency and escape accountability for criminal acts. The Complainant requests an immediate and exhaustive disciplinary review by the ICMA Ethics Committee.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/

Jeffrey Thomas Clay

603-534-1963

jeffreytclay@gmail.com