Sonoma State University is facing legal action from seven student-athletes followng the decision to eliminate 11 NCAA Division II athletic programs.
The lawsuit, filed in Sonoma County Superior Court, accuses the university of fraud, negligent misrepresentation and emotional distress.
The plaintiffs argue SSU officials knowingly misled them by continuing to recruit athletes while planning to cut the sports programs. The decision to eliminate athletics came as part of broader budget cuts aimed at addressing a $24 million deficit. Interim President Emily Cutrer and Chancellor Mildred Garcia justified the cuts by stating that discontinuing athletics would save the university $3.7 million annually.
However, student-athletes and their supporters have questioned the financial reasoning and trans- parency behind the decision.
Among the plaintiffs are student-athletes from multiple sports, including former baseball player Vincent Len- cioni, women’s soccer player Wyievee Binda, track and field athlete Janae Schwan, and men’s soccer player Jose Rios. The athletes claim SSU’s actions deprived them of opportunities to compete, develop athletically and pursue their education in the environment they were promised.
Many of the plaintiffs turned down offers from other schools, unaware SSU planned to eliminate their programs. “If we knew Sonoma State was planning to cut all sports, most of us would’ve transferred or gone somewhere else,” one of the plaintiffs stated. “We were promised an opportunity to play throughout our college careers. Instead, they pulled the rug out from under us.”
According to the lawsuit, SSU actively recruited student-athletes throughout the fall of 2024, despite knowing that the entire athletics program would be cut. The plaintiffs claim they were misled by the school’s continued promotion of its sports programs through recruiting efforts, social media posts and website updates. Some student-athletes had signed National Letters of Intent and paid tuition for the spring semester, only to be blindsided by the abrupt cancellation of athletics.
The lawsuit also chal- lenges the financial justifications behind the cuts, arguing SSU failed to consider the broader economic impact. The athletes’ legal team claims eliminating sports will actually harm the university financially, pointing to potential drops in enrollment, reduced alumni donations and the loss of student-athlete tuition revenue. They argue the school’s projected $3.7 million in savings lacks transparency and supporting evidence.
The legal battle has sparked outrage across campus. Many students, faculty, and alumni have expressed support for the athletes, calling the decision unfair and short-sighted. Several protests have taken place, with students demanding the administration reverse the cuts. They argue athletics plays a crucial role in school spirit, student engagement and campus culture.
Despite the backlash, SSU officials have maintained that the cuts were necessary due to declining enrollment and budget shortfalls.
However, if the lawsuit is successful, the court may issue an injunction preventing the cuts, forcing the university to reinstate athletics or provide compensation to affected athletes. For now, the future of SSU athletics remains uncertain. But one thing is clear: the student-athletes aren’t backing down without a fight.
