College of the Redwoods officials decided to remove a resolution from an upcoming Board of Trustees meeting today that, if passed, would have rescinded previous resolutions recognizing various diversity, equity, and inclusion-related subjects. 

Keith Flamer, CR’s president, originally recommended that the board pass Resolution 828 at today’s meeting, which would have rescinded six resolutions from 2020 through 2024 that recognized “an inclusive environment against racism,” Women’s History Month, hate against Asian-Americans, CR’s commitment to DEI, its support for undocumented students, and campus Pride month. 

According to the resolution, it was a preventative measure against the Trump administration’s punitive anti-university policies, such as denying grants and funding to universities that have supported DEI policies in the past. 

“The Board desires to resolve any uncertainty about compliance with the current state of federal law and federal funding,” the resolution reads, “…and the Board determines that rescinding Resolution Numbers 770, 776, 778, 779, 793, and 806 will resolve that uncertainty and reserve the College of the Redwoods’ continuing eligibility for such funding, and its students’ ability to qualify for continuing federal grants and loans.”

Molly Blakemore, CR’s director of marketing and communications, said in an email this morning that Flamer believes that the “work we’ve done, coupled with the various legal challenges in process” are enough to protect CR from the federal government. 

“We’ll continue to serve all students and uphold our commitment to academic freedom and access to education for everyone,” Blakemore said. “This decision to pull the item reflects the college’s ongoing efforts to update language and policy in a way that is inclusive of the entire CR community — without changing our core values or how we operate.”

Update, 1:31 5/6

Board members read a statement from Flamer at today’s meeting emphasizing CR’s commitments to free speech and its own future. 

“In response to recent federal executive orders and guidance from the Department of Education, we began a careful review of our policies and practices to ensure legal compliance while protecting the values that define CR,” Flamer wrote. “This work was never about retreating from our commitments, it was about adapting thoughtfully in a complex and shifting legal and political landscape…I am not advocating for any revisions in response to outside political pressures or ideological interference.”

“We will not allow external political forces to dictate what our faculty—trained scholars and disciplinary experts—are permitted to teach, research, or discuss. The right to explore ideas, challenge assumptions, and pursue truth is not only protected, but also essential to the mission of higher education and a functioning democracy.”

Several community members also stated their opposition to the resolution, though the board made it clear that the resolution had been pulled and they would not be revisiting it.

“Taking away those [DEI resolutions] wouldn’t help anyone feel safe or welcome here,” said one speaker. 

“[If the board rescinds those resolutions] we’ve already lost,” said another. “That’s not education. The college would lose all credibility.”