Retaliation. High turnover. Lack of support.
Cuesta College employees are fed up with administration—at least that’s what some faculty members said after the college released the results of its campus climate survey.
Former Engineering and Technology Division Chair John Stokes told New Times he decided to retire early in 2023 due to issues with Cuesta leadership and blames President Jill Stearns and the board of trustees for low employee morale.
“Jill Stearns is a manager. She is not a leader,” Stokes said. “One of the classes that I teach is a professional development class, which works on workplace skills.
“She has none of those,” he said.
Campus climate
Nearly a year after Stokes retired, Cuesta issued a campuswide climate survey, asking employees if it fosters an environment for student success; diversity, equity, and inclusion; and job satisfaction among other areas. Of about 708 faculty and staff—between full-time, part-time, and classified—about 370 responded to the survey, and the results were released in early 2025.
In some areas, like student focus, Cuesta College scored relatively high: 78 percent of respondents agreed that the college places a high priority on student success.
In other areas, not so much.
Survey results also showed that staff and faculty feel a low sense of belonging on Cuesta’s campus, and only 17.7 percent said they felt that college leadership provides a climate of trust and openness.
According to Cuesta board trustee Debra Stakes, the survey was created for faculty and staff at the request of ad hoc groups that wanted to know the current campus climate. The survey was developed by two board members and launched by a third party.
When the results were presented to the board of trustees on Jan. 8, Stakes said she was pleasantly surprised that focus on student success was high.
“That was the highest priority. I think that it’s a commitment that we can all get behind,” she said.
But regarding the fact that respondents felt unappreciated—she said it would be challenging to navigate a solution. Right now, Stakes said the board is waiting on feedback before it takes any action to address the results.
“The data has been published in this raw form, and we have also given the data to three constituent groups. … We have asked each of those constituent groups to go within themselves, to look at the data … and then to come to the administration with some suggestions of how to improve things,” she said. “It’s not the administration, it’s not the board that’s going to be driving this.”
Of those who responded to the climate survey, 39 percent said they disagreed that college leadership provides timely and relevant communication with the campus community, but Stakes said she didn’t understand why.
Through “opening days” on campus with the president and board every semester and weekly reports posted and emailed to campus employees, Stakes said there are plenty of resources where staff and faculty can be informed.
“Yet somehow, they’re not taking advantage of it,” she said. “I don’t know what else we can do, maybe provide free food or something. It’s not that there’s no communication being provided. It’s out there, but I think people are just so heads-down trying to do their own job and take care of their families that they haven’t been able to take advantage of it.”
President Stearns told New Times via email she was both surprised and concerned by the survey results about leadership support and said she values trust and transparency as key elements of leadership.
“Not only am I open and direct about institutional challenges and opportunities, I believe that the best decision-making comes when we are all working with the same information,” she said. “I encourage questions and am happy to seek out answers when I don’t have the details.”
Once the board receives the feedback from its constituents, Stakes said it will go to Stearns for review.
Retaliation
Former Division Chair Stokes said he doesn’t believe the board is doing its due diligence in leadership and lacks insight on campus climate.
“I think one of the big problems is that the board of trustees is not doing their job,” he said. “They get their information through board meetings. … I cannot say [I’ve seen] a board member one time out at our facilities, looking to see with their own eyes what’s going on.”
Stokes also takes issue with the results being handled by Stearns, whom he alleges causes the most issues—specifically noting retaliation against employees who may not agree with the administration.
Stearns responded via email: “Cuesta College does not tolerate retaliation in any form or manner. All complaints of retaliation are taken very seriously and addressed according to policy.”
Interference
A recent example of the potential disconnection between faculty and leadership happened last November when Vice President of Instruction Jason Curtis spoke at an academic senate meeting discouraging the senate from electing faculty member Lara Baxley as president.
“I urge the academic senate council to reject the proposal on the agenda and to reopen the nomination process for academic senate president,” Curtis said, according to the Nov. 22 meeting minutes. “In my opinion, Lara lacks the collaborative spirit and collegiality to serve as senate president for the next two years.”
Curtis accused Baxley of belittling and disrespecting a fellow faculty member of color and said his testimony was of his own volition.
“I want to close by sharing my reaction upon first seeing this item on the senate agenda for the previous meeting. … I went home that evening and started looking for other jobs,” he said. “I will not risk my own mental and physical health by attempting to work with Lara as senate president over the next two years. Thank you for hearing me out and allowing me to speak my truth.”
One senator said they were stunned by Curtis’ comment and had never heard an administrator speak about a faculty member that way.
Another said they believed that “this event illustrates what the climate survey is intended to measure but may not—an institution where many feel as though they cannot speak freely and work together collegially.”
The senate ultimately put its decision to elect Baxley on hold, as it considered how to address Curtis’ comment, including censuring.
Baxley withdrew her application for senate president, and Dec. 13 meeting minutes said that Curtis had interfered with the senate’s autonomy of its own government and violated Cuesta core values in an “unkind and unprofessional” manner.
Stearns told New Times that Cuesta College does not comment on personnel matters.
Former Division Chair Stokes said that the academic senate is made up of faculty.
“The administration has no influence whatsoever over it, nor should they. And yet he came in and read that letter,” he said, accusing Stearns of knowing about the interference.
“And we all are well aware that with Jill Stearns nothing goes on at that campus without her knowing about it. And you know, because [Curtis] worked so closely with her, he had to have consulted with her before sharing during the academic senate,” Stokes said.
New Times contacted Stearns for comment, and Associate Director of Marketing and Communications Ritchie Bermudez responded saying this allegation is inaccurate.
Functioning in fear
One faculty member, who requested to speak anonymously due to fear of retaliation, told New Times they have taught at Cuesta for 20 years and said they hadn’t seen leadership like this in a long time.
“A fish rots from the head down; if things aren’t great, it trickles down,” they said.
Leadership does send many campuswide communications, but it’s the personal interactions that are lacking, they said, mentioning that they have had no individual communication with Stearns in six years.
Stearns said via email this was surprising to hear.
“I have an open-door policy, as does human resources, and we are very responsive to email,” Stearns said.
The faculty member questioned the effectiveness of the campus climate survey and said they had been invited to join the faculty task force, but the expected hours were during class time—40-minute sessions every Tuesday in the middle of the day.
“Seems a little like we aren’t getting to the root of the problem,” they said.
They also wished the survey had offered the option for open-ended questions rather than multiple choice, allowing staff and faculty to specify their grievances, noting that “not all leadership is bad.”
But overall, the faculty member said the frustration between leadership and staff and faculty negatively impacts Cuesta’s students.
“Vulnerable students need faculty that are on their game,” they said. “If we are worrying about things we shouldn’t worry about, it’s hard to focus on what we need to be doing.” Δ
Reach Staff Writer Libbey Hanson at lhanson@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Mar 13-23, 2025.
Here’s a suggestion. Get to work or leave.
What a great article to finally start cracking the corruption of leadership at Cuesta College. These employees and the New Times should be applauded for exposing the lack of transparency Jill Stearns and her administration has exhibited in the last few years. I am sure employees, past and present are feeling some vindication. And for her to say she has an open door policy and does not tolerate retaliation… well Jill when the real investigations start, that statement right there is going to cost the college thousands of more dollars than what has already been paid out due to you and Melissa Richersons targeting. Residents of San Luis Obispo County, it’s time you start looking at the Board Of Trustees for their failing leadership. If this administration is not stopped, we could see another bond on your ballot and I don’t think we need to give Cuesta College another blank checkbook to cheat our students, fail employees and fail our voters.. these people DO NOT CARE about our communities, just look at the fear they have talking to the newspaper through email. Board President Stakes commented on “what do you want them to do” based on the failed survey which costed thousands of dollars of taxpayers money. How about you all start to lead and follow what your voters elected you for and hold Jill Stearns accountable, but when you are traveling with her and being taken care of on the taxpayers dime it’s real easy to forget what is important.. the students and the communities. New Times, keep the stories coming because we as taxpayers need to know the waste since Cuesta College has NO LEADERSHIP.
Letter to the Editor:
Thank you, Libbey Hanson, for your courageous and accurate reporting in the recent article, Survey says: Cuesta College faculty push for change after campus climate survey reveals dissatisfaction with leadership. I want to express my full agreement with everything outlined in the piece.
As someone who has watched the situation at Cuesta College closely, I can say the concerns brought forward are very real. The leadership vacuum, the culture of fear, the alarming rate of turnover, and the widespread feeling of being unheard or dismissedthese issues are serious and have been building for far too long.
Many individuals are afraid to speak up out of fear of retaliation, and that silence only allows the dysfunction to grow. Its troubling to see a once-respected institution suffer under such poor leadership. The fact that so few employees feel a sense of trust or support is not just disappointingits dangerous for the health of the institution and the well-being of its faculty, staff, and students.
The damage being done isnt abstractit impacts real people, every day. And most concerning of all, it ultimately affects the students, who deserve better.
Thank you again for publishing this important article. Please continue to hold Cuestas leadership accountable. A culture of fear cannot be allowed to define the future of this college.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Member of the Cuesta College Community