lauren
SBCC student protesting racism at a Board of Trustees meeting (Photo by an edhat reader)
By Lauren Bray, edhat staff
Santa Barbara City College (SBCC) students led a powerful protest during a Board of Trustees meeting last Thursday, while the Pledge of Allegiance became a National talking point.
During the meeting, students of color and allies stood with signs in a silent protest to bring light to racism on SBCC’s campus and community.
While students expressed that racism on campus has been a long-standing issue, the silent protest was sparked when SBCC’s Board of Trustees reinstated Vice President of Business Services Lyndsay Maas after she said the “N-word” during a gender and equity meeting late last year. SBCC placed her on unpaid leave in November but she recently returned to campus.
Maas said the “N-word” referencing how African-American students were being addressed on campus. Staff who were present at the meeting wrote a letter to the Board stating a faculty member of color stopped Maas to “address the harm caused by the racial slur,” yet, “[she] tried to explain herself, but she did not take the opportunity to listen to the experience of others,” reports The Independent.
SBCC President Anthony Beebe sent an email to managers and supervisors summarizing the event and directing them to attend cultural-sensitivity training within the next six months. He later sent a campus-wide email after receiving criticism for not doing so, reports The Independent.
A week later, Maas released an email stating, “I should not have used that word and sincerely apologize for this mistake that has caused so many such pain […] That word should never be used in any context as it only serves to perpetuate racism, and I was complicit. I recognize that I need to reflect on what took place and do thoughtful, informed work to educate myself.”
Student protestors signed up for public comment last Thursday, but instead of speaking, they chose to remain silent while holding neon signs that read, “Students Against Injustice,” “Why Hide Her When You Could Just Fire Her,” and “Support the Black Faculty and Staff Association.”
Black Lives Matter Santa Barbara posted a response on Facebook stating, “Our SBCC community deserves better than an administration that is more willing to protect its image (by attending to cover up the harm caused by this woman) than stand by its black students.”
This isn’t the first time SBCC students have spoken up and protested about racism on campus. Another protest took place this past November before Maas was placed on leave. Students publically shared the many times they reported incidences of racism and anti-blackness on campus that resulted without follow-up or action.
In a letter dated November 29, Beebe publicly apologized for the controversy stating, “I want to recognize and say directly to our Black/African-American students, staff, and faculty that your courageous comments at various public meetings and in private discussion have been instrumental. I hear you, I see you, I believe you, and I am deeply sorry for the harm you have faced, the institutional response, and my contributions to that harm.”
The Pledge of Allegiance Debate
A separate issue that occurred at the same meeting revolved around the Pledge of Allegiance and was not related to the student protest. Three women spoke during the public comment session admonishing the Board for their recent decision to not recite the Pledge of Allegiance. A SBCC professor, who was not involved with the student protest, shouted over the speakers while SBCC Board President Robert Miller asked her to stop.
The issue of not including the Pledge of Allegiance in board meetings has garnered national coverage, although mostly from biased right-wing conservative blogs such as Breitbart and Patheos.
In a statement released Tuesday, Board President Miller stated the Pledge of Allegiance will now be recited at Board of Trustee meetings until a potential future date. The full statement is below:
Effective immediately, the Pledge of Allegiance will be recited at Board of Trustee meetings until some future date when the matter may be considered by the Board. This decision, which restores the status quo, follows an appeal for reinstatement from members of the public who raised important issues at the January 24 board meeting.
While the College recognizes that there are different opinions about the Pledge of Allegiance, it expects that the First Amendment rights of members of the public to comment at board meetings will be respected. It is inconsistent with those rights for other audience members to interrupt and mock speakers on this topic, as happened at the January 24 Board meeting.
On Wednesday morning, an SBCC representative sent out another email stating they have asked for security assistance from the Santa Barbara Police Department. Due to the national blog coverage, SBCC has received “a considerably high volume of phone calls, emails, and social media messages,” with a significant increase in the past 24 hours, the email stated.
Stating that SBCC’s Security Team is short staffed, and for an abundance of caution, Santa Barbara Police will provide an increased presence on campus.
The email clarifies almost all the messages have been from out of the area and out of state. They have not received a credible threat of harm or injury, it is just a precaution.
Pretty obvious most of these comments are from white people, most likely white men, who have never experienced systemic racism. Of course their below responses would include mocking and unsympathetic reactions. Relax white men, equality for all doesn’t mean your rights will be taken away.
The Country has gone nuts !
Red Creek, READ THE ARTICLE. These were 2 separate incidents that happened to occur at the same meeting. The students were not protesting the Pledge of Allegiance.
Thank you (below) for proving my point. White people are uncomfortable by these topics and discussions.
Tribalism at it’s worst. I suggest we break up this country into sections with specific areas devoted solely to groups of like-minded people so no one has to interact with “The Others”.
Kind of like Gated Communities, only on a greater geographic level.
Take out “under God” the same way it was put in. Legal process. Get Salud Carbajal to start working on this right away. There is nothing jingoistic about the Pledge of Allegiance. Perhaps you are confusing it with the National Anthem, which is a salute to Revolutionary battle victory. A war, thank God we, the American patriots, won. Quite a stirring reminder. People at that time were willing to shed blood for this country’s independence.
Our republic has fallen. We are now under 1 party dicktatership. Just ask Nancy.
Oh you’d be surprised how many conservatives live right here in Santa Barbara. I know a lot of them. I’m neither a left or right nut. Both parties are clearly not in this for our benefit.
However, the board did decide not to say the pledge of allegiance. Which could make sense if we lived in another country.
RED CREEK: It’s true, read the article, the Pledge debate had nothing to do with race. Aaaaand… to your larger and actual point, actually anyone and everyone is welcome to recite it, if they want to. But i think it’s fair to say that to REQUIRE or pressure someone to stand up and recite an oath of loyalty to ANYTHING is just… kinda creepy. And your assertion that “pledges to one’s nation are by definition Nationalist” does nothing to reassure me of their innocuousity. Is that even a word? 🙂
Luckily, most people don’t derive political philosophy from egocentric twit science fiction authors, except maybe the Libertarians and the Scientologists.
I don’t say the “pledge of” because when I learned it in the late 40s and early 50s there was no “under god” part. As an evangelical atheist, I don’t believe in god. Our country frequently doesn’t believe or behave as if a god was watching, even if there was one. I am patriotic, just not superstitious, blindly following, or unperceptive.
Not surprised the right wingers come out strong for the pledge of allegiance and don’t live anywhere near here. Good for the students for protesting racism on campus, hope SBCC listens to them.
If anyone wants to recite an oath of loyalty to their country, or to anything else, go for it. As long as it’s not mandated. Also, lots of typos & grammar issues in this article. Is the proofreader out sick?
Oh the IRONY in this….
The Pledge of Allegiance is not steeped in “White Nationalism.” But it is steeped in “Unionism.” Its origins are right after the Civil War.
I pledge allegiance to the United States (as opposed to Confederate States, or some other country), and the Republic (as opposed to confederacy or monarchy), One Nation (as opposed to several states), indivisible (as opposed to secession), with Liberty and Justice for ALL (as opposed to one race). In short… every major bullet point over which the civil war was fought.
SO….. UM…. Which part of the confederacy do these Santa Barbara students SUPPORT?
Which part of the confederacy does the Santa Barbara Board of Trustees SUPPORT?
And that decision has already been reversed.
The two problems with the pledge are “God” and “with liberty and justice for all”. Our country is not “one nation under God” and liberty and justice does not happen for all, only for some!
420722 made a very even-handed comment. Please re-read it. What is your issue with it/the poster?
“innocuousness” —
Good points, too.
lol!! And give up the Alinsky devil, it’s 2019.
I keep thinking of thoughtful things to post here, then I remember it will accomplish absolutely nothing
What drug are you on? I have no issues with conservatives. Most of my family are republican. I was replying to a person that said there are no right wing people in this town which is totally false. I don’t understand where you got you got my comment so mixed up. By saying I’m not a right or a left nut is me saying I haven’t gone so nuts over politics that’s I can no longer think clearly. Obviously you have.
Who is this Robert Miller guy? He needs to be run out of town. Go to Russia Robert.
I say the original pledge, which means that I finish before everyone else.
We must find ways to unit us. Do you believe in Liberty and Justice for all? Simply skip the ‘under God’ spiritual part that was added ivy Eisenhower acknowledging that our country was founded by those seeking freedom from a religion being imposed on them. Regardless of your personal decision on the Pledge, Chairman Robert Miller does not have the Authority to unilaterally remove the Pledge from the Agenda. SBCC is a taxpayer supported K-14 public school. See CA Edu Code. Miller’s District voters or Trustees ought remove Miller.
Why? SBCC is a tax supported K-14 public school operated subject to the CA Ed Code, Open Meeting Laws, and Brown Act. Newly Elected Chairman Miller’s his first meeting thought he was elected SBCC Dictator. He’s obviously unpreparedto serve as a Trustee, ignorant of laws, codes, and duties.