KHTS Radio Santa Clarita Radio – Santa Clarita News
Editorial by Carl Goldman
With the election only days away, we thought we’d posted our last editorial a few days ago. Then news came yesterday of legal action being taken against COC by former Chancellor Dr. Dianne Van Hook who is claiming wrongful termination.
According to her complaint, the COC Board, led by Edel Alonso, “…… refuses to honor the unexpired terms of its long-standing written contract with Dr. Van Hook. The Board also singled Dr. Van Hook out for different treatment than other employees who previously separated from the COC.”
In other words, after 36 years as the college’s leader, the current board kicked her in the rear as they booted her out the door. Dr. Dianne Van Hook built the institution from a tiny school into what is now considered the leading community college in the nation and the jewel of Santa Clarita.
The college released a campus climate survey last spring in which it “indicated that 97-98% of respondents found their work to be satisfying and meaningful, and 94% of respondents were happy at work.”
So, it seems the board overlooked most of the glowing responses and cherry picked the very small minority of negative ones. Any strong leader is going to upset a few of their followers. And depending on the mood of the individual filling out the survey, the answers could go from one extreme to the other. Just survey my wife about her feelings toward me on any given day or any hour within that day.
Anyone managing a business or institution in California knows before an employee can be terminated, they need to have a paper trail, outlining concerns, and giving that employee an opportunity to correct those concerns. Apparently, that didn’t happen at any of Dr. Van Hook’s previous evaluations.
Following those clear guidelines is “Business 101.” I guess the COC board missed that course. Maybe because the board isn’t jeopardizing their money. It’s we, the taxpayers, who will have to foot the legal bills, and any penalties incurred for their actions.
Also, according to her complaint, Dr. Van Hook wasn’t even allowed to access her school emails to retrieve an email list of her contacts. How petty? Do we really want a board with that attitude to lead the future our college?
KHTS asked each current board member for a statement defending their actions. They all refused to respond, providing cover that they weren’t allowed to comment, pending possible legal action.
Months earlier, we had a lengthy conversation with a board member when the climate survey first came out. We were told the board was totally taken by surprise by some of the negative comments. If that’s the case, then the board certainly should have given Dr. Van Hook an opportunity to make corrections, especially given her length of service and previous track record. They didn’t.
The current board may have muzzles defending their careless, hasty action, but the candidates opposing them gave us an earful.
Scott Schauer, who is opposing Edel Alonso told us, “It’s deeply concerning that Dr. Van Hook, who led our college through decades of remarkable growth and success, was forced into retirement without clear reasoning. This board, under Edel Alonso’s leadership, has mismanaged the college, costing us 125 years of administration experience with no succession plan in place. The community deserves accountability.”
COC Board candidate, Sharlene Johnson added, “Having been involved with College of the Canyons for so long, I was disheartened when Dr. Van Hook left her position. As we learn more about the nature of her departure, I am deeply concerned about how the board handled this process. The current COC board has failed to be transparent and accountable to our community. We all deserve better.”
Darlene Trevino stated, “As a strong advocate for transparency and accountability, I believe it’s essential that all concerns within our educational institutions are addressed thoroughly and fairly. Our community deserves leadership that prioritizes the best interests of our students and staff. This matter is an opportunity to reaffirm those values and ensure that trust remains a cornerstone of our district.”
We believe the COC Faculty Union and Classified Union are flexing their political muscle, influencing the board, and placing candidates in the upcoming election who will do their bidding. We have a chance to correct their mistakes by electing the following four candidates for the College of the Canyon’s Board: Fred Arnold, Scott Schauer, Sharlene Johnson and Darlene Trevino.
Click here for all our KHTS endorsements.
Sponsored Articles
KHTS FM 98.1 and AM 1220 is Santa Clarita’s only local radio station. KHTS mixes in a combination of news, traffic, sports, and features along with your favorite adult contemporary hits. Santa Clarita news and features are delivered throughout the day over our airwaves, on our website and through a variety of social media platforms. Our KHTS national award-winning daily news briefs are now read daily by 34,000+ residents. A vibrant member of the Santa Clarita community, the KHTS broadcast signal reaches all of the Santa Clarita Valley and parts of the high desert communities located in the Antelope Valley. The station streams its talk shows over the web, reaching a potentially worldwide audience. Follow @KHTSRadio on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Looks like another publication that pretends to be for the people is on Dianne’s payroll.
Dianne Van Hook’s leadership at College of the Canyons has left a legacy marked by intimidation, control, and self-interest. For decades, she ran the college with an iron grip, fostering a toxic, fear-driven culture that impacted faculty, staff, and students alike. Allegations of her authoritarian and abusive behavior are well-documented, yet she continues to demand more from an institution she’s been accused of exploiting.
Under her tenure, College of the Canyons became a place where staff feared retaliation for speaking out, and critical voices were silenced. Financial mismanagement flourished as funds intended for students and faculty were redirected toward high administrative salaries and never-ending construction projects. Van Hook herself became one of California’s highest-paid public employees, with an annual salary of $435,000—more than $500,000 including benefits—and a compensation package surpassing that of the President of the United States. Despite this, she is now seeking an additional $2 million through a wrongful termination claim.
Her timing speaks volumes. Van Hook chose to retire during an annual performance evaluation, yet frames her departure as “wrongful termination.” She left with a $330,000 severance, lifetime healthcare, and a taxpayer-funded pension close to $500,000 annually. Her claim appears to be a final attempt to take more from a college and community she has already exploited.
Despite the facts, recent media coverage presents Van Hook as a victim, conveniently overlooking her history of abusive leadership and the hostile work environment she created. This portrayal disregards numerous complaints from faculty and staff who endured years under her oppressive rule, where favoritism, retaliation, and a culture of fear were prevalent.
The narrative of a “smear campaign” against Van Hook is misleading. The criticisms she faces stem from legitimate grievances by individuals who were stifled for years. A campus climate survey, which her attorneys dismiss as a “pretext” to force her out, exposed a deeply ingrained culture of fear. Staff feared speaking up or questioning her decisions, knowing they risked retaliation. Since her departure, campus morale has notably improved—a fact that media coverage has chosen to downplay.
This isn’t the first time certain publications have sided with Van Hook, prioritizing her “vision” while ignoring her self-serving actions, authoritarian methods, and disregard for the people who supported the college’s mission. Instead of reporting on the issues that mattered—the hostile work environment, financial mismanagement, and silencing of critical voices—these outlets have repeatedly propped her up, ignoring the lasting damage felt by faculty and staff.
Dianne Van Hook’s exit is not the result of a “campaign” but of years of unchecked power finally facing accountability. College of the Canyons deserves better than a legacy of secrecy, oppression, and financial mismanagement. The community deserves media that holds public figures accountable rather than protecting the powerful while disregarding those affected.
Van Hook’s recent lawsuit appears to be an attempt to maintain influence over the college, casting doubt on the Climate Survey findings that nearly 50% of employees experienced “psychological harm” under her leadership. Her decision to sue the college reflects poorly on her chosen candidates—Schauer, Arnold, Trevino, and Johnson—who are currently endorsed in advertisements calling the college a “dumpster fire,” a statement that disrespects the hardworking staff and faculty.
This election, the choice is clear: Edel Alonso, Jerry Danielsen, Michelle Kampbell, and Andrew Taban represent candidates who genuinely care about College of the Canyons and its community. These are the individuals who have the support of educators and staff who want a positive future, free from the damaging legacy left by Van Hook.
Put me down for 100 likes of Jordan’s comment.
I second that. Truer words were never spoken
#WokeJokeMob ruins everything.
I think skimming millions of dollars of funding from a community college for your and your friends personal property and luxuries, when your already being paid almost half a millions dollars a year ruins a lot of things too. But hey, one man’s embezzlement is another man’s new mansion, renovation, or retirement cushion…
If the Board of COC has followed the law, and has sufficient evidence of poor performance or wrong doing for termination, they should welcome an open hearing of the facts in the courts. The public has a right to know, since the public pays the bills. If the Board settles the case to keep their actions secret, they should be the ones to resign.
Her followers? She is not Jesus. In fact, the employees at the college work for the state of California just like she did.
You can tell an “opinion” piece is more than a little suspect when it has a lot of hyperbole. College of the Canyons is a great school with dedicated hard-working teachers and support staff. It is not “one of the leading community colleges in the nation”. In fact, in the most recent community college ranking it ranks 423rd of the 642 community colleges ranked. COC is not even the top ranked community college in CA.
https://smartasset.com/data-studies/best-community-colleges-2024
COC was not a “tiny college” when Van Hook became the president of the college. The college was founded and developed by Dr. Robert C. Rockwell in the late 1960’s. By the time Van Hook took over in 1988, COC had 60 full time faculty and nearly 5,000 students and the population of the Santa Clarita metro was 108,000. Today the Santa Clarita metro area has a population of 434,000.
COC grew along with the community. Personally, I am tired of this “I and I alone” mentality surrounding how things get done or how to solve problems. No one person was responsible for moving the college from where it was then to where is today. Hundreds of people, both at the college and in the community worked together to make it what it is today.
Dianne Van Hook was rewarded handsomely for her work as evidenced by her $500k compensation package which I believe is the highest for any head of a community college in the state of California. 36 years is a long time to be in essentially the same position. In the non-profit sector that kind of time frame tends to breed a buildup of layers of administration that don’t necessarily serve the interests of the organization. That seems to have been an issue in this case.
The author’s assessment of the campus climate survey where he claims 98% of the people were “happy” is at odds with their own article about the survey published in June of this year.
I am not sure where the author has any support for his claims about the BOD acting as the hammer for the teacher’s union or the “paper trail” claims. Anyone managing a business or institution in California knows that a Board of Directors operates according to their bylaws and that personnel issues and records are not actually public information, much the same as medical records are not.
When they bring on a new President at a lower compensation level and eliminate some of the unnecessary and highly paid administration positions built up over the that don’t benefit the students, COC will actually be reducing expenses. If you want to be mad about the $2 million, you should be mad at Van Hook and her lawyer.
None of the candidates the author is “endorsing” have much in the way of education experience. I believe COC is in good hands with the current board and candidates running who are supported by the teacher’s union including Edel Alonso, Jerry Danielson, Michelle Kampbell, and Andrew Taban.
Thank you, Carl! As usual, your perspective proves to be the most rational, and challenges all the loud objections of the morally questionable voices yelling at the top of their lungs to the contrary. I, like most community members, do not know how the COC Board of Trustees decided to push Chancellor Van Hook out of office. After a stellar record of growing one of the most celebrated community colleges in the State, why are they hiding what they have done to the Chancellor? What I do know, from many years of first hand time with Dianne is that she is a very decent, honorable and passionate champion of her students. I have seen and felt her love of our community in Santa Clarita. I have admired her leadership in the education of our young adults here, and her joy in their growth and promise for their futures. Something really stinks in how she was pushed out of her leadership role. And, what stinks even more is how it has been hidden from all of us in the community. I hope the current Trustees come clean so we can make the changes needed to keep College of the Canyons the gem of education in our great community.
As the founder of COC’s Engineering and CAD programs I can speak to Diane’s extraordinary dedication to Santa Clarita and to students and their success in particular. In the late 1990s Diane realized that COC engineering students after completing 2-years were transferring to universities like CSUN and USC were entering as freshman. At the time I was the Engineering Department Chairman at East LA College and a driver of 2+2 programs with CSULA, USC and others. Diane recruited me to form an engineering program at COC so engineering students could transfer as Juniors. For several years I worked with tireless Diane to put together courses and negotiate 2+2 agreements with CSUN, UCLA and USC. After the COC engineering program was up and running I stepped down and that program is still thriving today. Diane’s extraordinary drive and dedication led me to donate 100% of my salary as an adjunct professor back to the COC Foundation board. She did not ask me to do this, she inspired me so much that I wanted to do this. Great leaders with her vision and dedication sometimes “ruffle some feathers.” I can with 100% accuracy that her passion and energy circled around what is best for the STUDENTS. Prof. Robert Stevenson
This is why you don’t allow people to name buildings after themselves while they are still alive