Residents urge Dover Area SD board to address spike in staff resignations, call for leadership change

Multiple residents criticized board leadership during the Dover Area School District special meeting, citing a recent rise in staff departures and urging the board to prioritize student and staff needs.

Andrew Stefanovich, who signed in to speak during the meeting's first public comment period, said staffing instability had affected his family: “Another 1 of my son's teachers is leaving,” he said, and he cited district figures he read aloud: “Since Jan. 0, there have been 63 resignations compared to only 43 last year, 24 admin professional staff compared to only 10 last year, and 39 support staff compared to 33 last year.” Stefanovich added that many departing staff “no longer feel supported within the district” and said some employees “sometimes even feel harassed by members of the board.”

Chuck Benton, a long-time Dover resident and current educator, said he was leaving the district’s staff for another community and asked the board to “be wise in choosing your next leadership,” saying his decision to leave was driven by concerns about board leadership. Doug McGurn told the board he had heard teachers and community members feel they were “not being heard,” and alleged the current leadership had accepted campaign contributions from a political group and was following its guidance.

Maria Wirtz told the board she supports the special leadership election and said, “I do not believe either 1 of these members have had the best interest of our student or staff,” adding that she believes the board president has not followed the recommendations of past or present superintendents. Susan Hamburger said she supported hiring the current interim superintendent permanently and asked the board to “hire the lady, get it over with,” referencing the district’s interim leader.

Speakers framed their remarks as concerns about morale and district stability. Multiple speakers linked administrative and staff departures to board conduct and urged the body to select leaders with experience and a focus on students and staff.

The speakers included residents who said they continue to attend future meetings to monitor board actions. Several public commenters requested clearer communication from the board, including a response to follow-up emails from community members.

The public comment periods took place at the start and near the end of the meeting; members of the public had a total of 30 minutes for the first period (three minutes per speaker) and two minutes per speaker in the second period, as announced at the meeting opening.

The board proceeded with its reorganization and other agenda items after public comment without taking any formal policy action in response to the comments during the meeting.