🔥 Open Letter to the people of Newmarket, NH

From:

Jeffrey T. Clay – Resident, Litigant, and Witness to Government Misconduct

TO THE CITIZENS OF NEWMARKET: YOU DESERVE TO KNOW WHAT YOUR OFFICIALS HAVE DONE

This is my formal public rebuke of the individuals who, according to the documents, emails, transcripts, and filings in my possession, have:

• misled the courts
• violated RSA 91-A
• withheld or concealed public records
• made false statements about who approved a settlement
• covered up illegal email “voting” with no minutes
• and are now trying to collect attorney fees based on the results of their own wrongdoing

This letter names them directly.
The public needs to know.

🔥 WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? LET’S NAME THEM

1. Town Manager Steven Fournier

According to DTC’s filings, Steven Fournier allegedly “approved” the settlement agreement on behalf of the Town.

But the public record shows:

• No Town Council vote ever occurred.
• No public meeting was held.
• No minutes exist (because, in my opinion, the discussion was intentionally concealed).
• No lawful authority exists empowering him to bind the Town to such an agreement.

Yet these false premises were represented to Judge Schulman and repeated by the New Hampshire Supreme Court.
Those misrepresentations form the basis of the attorney-fee request now being pursued.

2. The DTC Attorneys: John Ratigan, Christopher Hawkins, and Briana Matuszko

John Ratigan
Ratigan admitted in court that the Town Council “voted” through email—explicitly forbidden under RSA 91-A.
No meeting.
No notice.
No minutes.

Christopher Hawkins
Hawkins argued repeatedly that:
• no responsive public records existed,
• the Town Manager approved the agreement, and
• everything was handled “appropriately.”

The evidence contradicts this.

Briana Matuszko
Matuszko prepared filings that—again, in my opinion—relied on false and misleading claims regarding:
• settlement approval
• the existence of records
• the legality of email “meetings”
• the “authority” of the Town Manager

Their litigation strategy depended on the absence of minutes, the absence of records, and a narrative that fell apart once documents came to light.

3. The Newmarket Town Council (Collectively)

Councilors engaged in:

• secret, illegal email deliberations
• undocumented discussions
• voting without a meeting
• and completely failed to create or maintain minutes

Instead of complying with RSA 91-A, they avoided creating minutes and then used the absence of minutes to argue “no responsive records exist.”

💥 CONCEALING MINUTES IS NOT A MISTAKE — IT IS A CRIME

Under New Hampshire law, intentionally failing to create required minutes—or concealing, altering, or suppressing them—is potentially criminal.

Relevant Criminal Statutes:

RSA 641:7 – Tampering with Public Records
A person commits a crime if they:
• knowingly destroy, conceal, or remove any public record.

RSA 641:3 – Unsworn Falsification
Covers false statements, false representations, and misleading submissions.

RSA 91-A:2 – Meeting Requirements
Requires noticed meetings, public deliberations, and minutes for ALL meetings and ALL decisions.

RSA 643:1 – Official Oppression
A public official commits this crime by knowingly violating the rights of others—including the public’s right to transparency.

🔥 EVIDENCE OF CONCEALMENT

1. Emails show settlement discussions occurred.
2. Ratigan admitted “voting” took place.
3. No minutes exist documenting this vote or discussion.
4. DTC repeatedly argued “no responsive records exist.”
5. The lack of minutes was weaponized.

🔥 THE ATTORNEY FEES THEY SEEK ARE THE FRUIT OF THIS MISCONDUCT

Steven Fournier, the Newmarket Town Council, and DTC attorneys Ratigan, Hawkins, and Matuszko are seeking attorney fees obtained through their own violations of law.

They:

• hid minutes
• withheld records
• misled the court
• misused the absence of required records
• and litigated using factual claims that were untrue

⚖️ CRIMINAL ALLEGATIONS ARE ALREADY BEFORE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

Criminal allegations have been submitted naming:

• Town Manager Steven Fournier
• DTC attorneys Ratigan, Hawkins, and Matuszko
• The Newmarket Town Council

These include:

• Tampering with public records (RSA 641:7)
• False statements (RSA 641:3)
• Improper influence (RSA 640)
• Obstruction (RSA 642)
• Official oppression (RSA 643)
• Multiple RSA 91-A violations

📢 FINAL MESSAGE TO NEWMARKET RESIDENTS

Your government concealed minutes.
Your officials misled the court.
Your attorneys weaponized secrecy.
And now they want attorney fees.

I will continue to expose every violation, every misrepresentation, and every concealed record—because the public deserves the truth.

Sunlight is coming.
Names are named.
And accountability is overdue.