Guest Opinion | Leeds Citizens Oppose Their Former Mayor, Bill Hoster, for County Commission Seat
Editor’s Note: The following guest opinion piece was submitted by Leeds residents Martha Ham and Susan Savage. The views expressed are those of the authors. References to lawsuits and legal claims are based on publicly filed court documents containing allegations that have not been adjudicated by a court.
By Martha Ham and Susan Savage, Leeds residents
Hoster is challenging incumbent County Commissioner Gil Almquist in the Republican Primary on June 23, 2026
Bill Hoster, candidate for the Washington County Commission, has held only one elected position that we know of. He was Mayor of Leeds. Mr. Hoster frequently points to his four-year term as Mayor of Leeds as evidence of his qualifications for higher office. As residents who closely followed town government during that period, we have a hard time squaring our experience of his leadership with his claim.
Background
Mr. Hoster took office in January 2022. Like many newly elected officials, he faced the challenges of learning municipal government and public administration. Residents, council members, and staff initially extended considerable goodwill and support as he assumed the role.
Less than halfway through his mayoral term, Mr. Hoster revealed his interest in state and national politics by entering the race for Utah’s Second Congressional District following U.S. Representative Chris Stewart’s resignation. Celeste Malloy was elected and Mr. Hoster finished the remainder of his term. Rather than seek re-election as Mayor of Leeds, Mr. Hoster has chose to run for Seat A of the Washington County Commission.
As his mayoral tenure progressed, public disagreements became increasingly visible. Town meetings grew more contentious and divisions within the community deepened. A growing number of critics contended that important decisions were sometimes made without sufficient collaboration or adherence to established process. We realize his supporters may view those events differently.
What is not in dispute is that Leeds experienced a period of significant conflict during Mr. Hoster’s administration. Many residents believe that conflict affected public trust, strained relationships within town government, and hindered the community’s ability to address important issues.
As a voter, considering the two candidates for Washington County Commission Seat A, examining not only the candidate’s campaign promises but also their record in public office could be valuable in making your choice. The following issues highlight concerns raised by residents during Mr. Hoster’s tenure as mayor.
Irregularities with Governance
Municipalities the size of Leeds are required by state law to annually complete a Financial Review following agreed upon procedures. Contrary to state law, Mr. Hoster did not perform or conclude this review for the fiscal year 2025 (July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025) nor complete the review within the 180-day mandated timeframe. The town sought compliance and oversaw completion of the review after Mr. Hoster left office.
The overdue review revealed 9 categorical concerns referred to as exceptions. The belated review earned the town the low score of 40 out of 395 points on the Fraud Risk Assessment. This placed the town in the category of “high risk for fraud to occur.” There is no evidence that fraud took place; it is a score that indicates that the management style left the town with alarming exposure and lacking in protection. Also of note was a “limited use of purchase orders or obtaining appropriate bids over $1,000 as required by town policy.”
Mr. Hoster publicly made statements which indicated he was not versed on the town’s Policies and Procedures manual that was most recently amended just months before he took office. As a result, he didn’t hire, onboard, supervise, or terminate employees based on established employee policy. This lack of knowledge and compliance with procedure is coming back to haunt Leeds in a pending lawsuit stemming from the manner in which Mr. Hoster fired an employee.
As Mayor of Leeds, Mr. Hoster spent far beyond the annual budgeted figure for the city’s legal fund during his last 6 months in office. Leeds has been left with two major lawsuits and almost no money in the upwardly revised legal budget to finish the last 6 months of fiscal year 2026.
Misrepresentation of Facebook Page as Official Town Communication
The Leeds Town Facebook page appeared to be the town’s official social media site. The page launched on March 2, 2024, with the message:
“Welcome to the official Facebook page for the Town of Leeds. This page will contain only business from the Town of Leeds.Thank you for joining and being a part of the wonderful Town of Leeds.”
By late 2024, the tone of our page had shifted dramatically.
Without notifying the town clerk, Mr. Hoster changed the password and took exclusive control. While early posts focused on town business, the content soon veered into political messaging aligned with Mr. Hoster’s personal views. Residents questioned why the mayor was using what appeared to be an official town page to promote his own agenda. A new tagline appeared on the page:
“The Official Mayoral Messaging Page from the Mayor of Leeds.”
From there, the posts grew increasingly personal. Mr. Hoster used the page to air grievances about council members and residents who disagreed with him. He even posted a campaign ad and endorsement for his wife who was running for office.
Public criticism intensified. As the 2025 election approached, Mr. Hoster abruptly stopped posting and did not even share the results of the local election. After he left office in January 2026, the page vanished entirely.
Only then did residents learn the truth. The page had never belonged to the town at all. It was registered privately to Bill Hoster, who had used the town seal, a photo of Town Hall, and the title “Leeds Town” without authorization—giving citizens the false impression that they were receiving official government communication.
Using Town Resources to Retaliate Against Critics
During his tenure as mayor, Mr. Hoster repeatedly used the power of his office and taxpayer dollars to pursue felony charges against Leeds residents who questioned or challenged his leadership. According to town records and witness accounts, Mr. Hoster drew from the Leeds Town budget for legal services to initiate these prosecutions, often without the knowledge or consent of the Town Council.
Specific instances:
Publicly making unfounded criminal allegations against a sitting councilwoman and a candidate for town council
In the run up to the 2025 Leeds town council elections, tensions began to escalate between Mayor Hoster and two residents involved in civic affairs, Councilwoman Danielle Stirling and council candidate Doris McNally.
Mrs. Stirling, a seasoned Leeds public servant, had publicly challenged Mr. Hoster on procedural and fiscal matters during council meetings, including calling for a full fiscal audit. Their disputes became increasingly more contentious. In search of some peace, Mrs. Stirling shifted her focus from fiscal matters to cleanup and organization efforts within the Leeds Cemetery. Stirling was working with Mrs. McNally, who is a longtime volunteer and the town’s sexton.
Mrs. McNally, who serves on the local water company board, was running for town council against Troi Hoster, Bill’s wife.
Shortly before the general election, a letter from the Town’s legal counsel to Mayor Hoster was posted on a public bulletin board in Leeds alleging that Mrs. Stirling and Mrs. McNally had violated Utah law by “entering into an unauthorized contract related to their cemetery work.” The posted letter was privileged communication to which only Mayor Hoster and the attorney had access. The allegation in the letter was rooted in an inaccurate invoice mistakenly sent to Leeds for payment by a landscaping company whose bid the council had approved for a project in the cemetery. Despite the landscaper’s apology and admission of error in a letter, Mr. Hoster moved forward with the false accusation. Check out the letter from the landscaper.
Mrs. Stirling and Mrs. McNally, through legal counsel, disputed the allegations and sent a cease and desist notice to Mayor Hoster. Even with a cease and desist notice in place, Mr. Hoster posted his false narrative in a social media post on the Leeds’ Facebook site.
This dispute unfolded during the general election season; most immediately Mr. Hoster’s allegation cast a shadow over Mrs. McNally’s candidacy. She was the second highest vote-getter in the primary for an open town council seat; however, neither Mrs. McNally nor Mrs. Hoster won in the general election.
Danielle Stirling and Doris McNally later filed suit against the Town of Leeds, Bill Hoster, and Troi Hoster. The lawsuit alleges First Amendment retaliation, equal protection and due process violations, interference with civil rights, defamation, and related claims. The litigation is ongoing.
Criminally charging a former town councilwoman
A former councilwoman, Lorrie Hunsaker, lost her temper in a council meeting when she confronted Mr. Hoster for trying to pressure a local elderly woman and her daughter into an unwanted real estate sale. Following the meeting, Mr. Hoster made a complaint with law enforcement that led to Ms. Hunsaker being charged with a felony. The situation needed de-escalation but instead Mr. Hoster chose escalation. His overreaction was deeply disturbing to many as Lorrie Hunsaker was known to be a generous public servant. The charge was eventually dropped for lack of evidence but not before Ms. Hunsaker spent $4,000 in attorney fees to ensure the charge never moved forward.
Firing the town clerk and filing felony charges against her
Another example involved former Town Clerk Michelle Rutherford, who said she was targeted after raising concerns about procedural violations inside Town Hall. When she questioned whether proper processes were being followed, Mr. Hoster allegedly warned her to “stay in her lane.”
Tensions escalated to an apparent impasse. Ms. Rutherford borrowed an 18-year-old town trailer, a piece of equipment routinely used by residents. The trailer was delivered by the Leeds public works officer to her father’s property in Leeds. More than 2 weeks after using the trailer, Mr. Hoster fired her for “unauthorized use of town property.” He did so without the knowledge or consent of the Town Council. He went further and actually filed felony charges against Ms. Rutherford. The felony charges were eventually dismissed for lack of evidence.
In March 2026, Ms. Rutherford filed suit against both the Town of Leeds and Mr. Hoster, alleging retaliation, defamation, due-process violations, and related torts. The case remains active.
These instances sent a chilling message to the residents: consequences could be delivered if you dared to speak up.
Our Motivation
In today’s world, so many of us are exhausted from widespread contention. Are we adding to it by calling out what we see as the abuse of power? Or is it our responsibility to do so? As our former mayor is seeking access to even greater power, we consider it our responsibility.
All leaders must expect to encounter disagreements and misunderstandings. A good leader, regardless of experience, will easily recognize the need to lower the temperature. In the landscaper’s letter that is part of the Stirling/McNally case, you see the landscaper courteously seeking to clear up a misunderstanding, but the former mayor began the interaction by threatening to get the town’s attorney involved. What a contrast! This type of top-down aggression used against our neighbors and friends in this small community fuels anger. When decisions are being made that have a major impact on communities, we do not like feeling excluded, threatened, or denied due process.
Before returning your ballot, we suggest you reach out to anyone you know in Leeds to hear how they feel about Bill Hoster’s impact on our community. What was their take on his administrative and leadership style? We encourage you to ask residents who have stayed engaged during town meetings or have served in leadership or volunteer positions during Mr Hoster’s term as Mayor.
As for us, we will not be voting for Bill Hoster for Seat A, Washington County Commissioner.
The winners of the Republican primary almost certainly will be the next County Commissioners. Your ballot must be in the county clerk's hands by June 23, 2026. Postmarks no longer count. Mail your ballot at least 7 days before June 23 or drop it off at one of the many ballot boxes around the county or vote in person on June 23.
Thank you for your time and consideration. And above all, Please Vote in this primary election! It’s an important one. Your Voice Matters!!
About Martha Ham and Susan Savage: Susan and Martha are citizens of Leeds who regularly attend town meetings. Susan, a retired special educator, has lived most of her 80 years in Leeds. Martha, a retired social worker, moved to Leeds from SLC in ’93 and gradually became more active in town affairs beginning in the 2000s. Susan and Martha often sit together at town meetings.
Editorial Note: The Toquerville Sentinel publishes community commentary representing a variety of viewpoints. Publication of this article does not necessarily constitute endorsement of every statement or conclusion expressed by the authors.