Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Residents assail abrupt termination of longtime Gloucester County administrator at public comment
Loading...
Summary
Dozens of residents used the Board of Supervisors’ public-comment period on April 7 to criticize the abrupt termination of county administrator Carol Steele, calling for transparency, an accounting of costs, and respect for process.
At Monday’s Gloucester County Board of Supervisors meeting, more than a dozen residents used the public-comment period to demand answers about the board's recent termination of county administrator Carol Steele and to call for transparent explanations of the decision and its fiscal impact.
Michael Hedrick opened several of the comments with a blunt rebuke: "This board has managed to make a real mess in just 3 months," he said, calling the firing "shameless" and warning that the action will harm the county’s reputation and budget. Multiple speakers echoed those themes and said Steele — a longtime county employee — deserved a dignified transition. "She deserved far better treatment than what she experienced at your hands last week," said Leon Arsenovic, who praised Steele’s decades of service and work on parks and community amenities.
Pam Garner told the board the termination was not "just a personnel action" but a disruptive governance choice that "undermines public trust," and asked for a documented rationale, any performance reviews, and an accounting of potential costs to taxpayers. Sarah Jane Troxell pressed the board specifically on cost estimates, citing typical finder’s fees for executive searches (25–35% of first-year salary) and asking how the county plans to cover any increased costs resulting from a search for a new administrator.
Several speakers submitted written comments or voicemails that raised similar concerns, asking the board to explain the timing, process and financial consequences. Jonathan Hargis noted the board’s 4–3 vote on the termination and said that differing perspectives among supervisors "underscore the importance of clear communication." A voicemail played for the board labeled the termination "a profound injustice" and urged the board to provide accountability.
County leaders did not provide a detailed financial accounting during the public-comment period; the board moved from public comment into a scheduled public hearing on a separate agenda item. Commenters asked the board to publish any permissible clarification about the rationale for the termination and to provide an accounting of taxpayer exposure for severance, recruitment and related costs.
Next steps: Speakers asked for a public explanation and documentation about the termination process. The board did not provide a public financial estimate during the meeting; commenters said they expected further information and transparency from supervisors.
