Fall Quarter Diversity Forum Causes Controversy on Campus

Blue Lives Matter flag causes a stir during online forum

Students raised a variety of concerns with administrators at a university sponsored online forum on October 28, including Campus Safety Services (CSS) performance, Multicultural Center (MCC) funding, and the Black experience at Santa Clara.

The Fall Quarter Diversity Forum was organized by the university's Inclusive Excellence Student Advisory Council (IESAC) in collaboration with university administration. The forums are  described as "an opportunity for students, faculty and staff to come together in a safe space to advance issues of racial justice and learn from student experiences."

This quarter’s forum follows a highly publicized Aug. 22 incident involving Santa Clara Campus Safety officers. Danielle Morgan, an assistant professor in the English Department, alleged that she was the target of racially motivated treatment by officers who escorted her brother off campus and then questioned her at her home. As a result, the Office of Equal Opportunity and Title IX is overseeing the investigation into the events of August 22, which is proceeding in accordance with the Interim Discrimination, Harassment and Sexual Misconduct Policy. The university also has initiated an independent audit of CSS under the leadership of Judge LaDoris Cordell (Ret.). The audit is reviewing all practices, procedures and training at Campus Safety Services and is being overseen by the Office of the President Chief of Staff Molly McDonald and should conclude by the end of this calendar year with a full report and recommendations.

The forum began with introductions from the IESAC members and an explanation of how to access the five conversation tables in the digital meeting space. Students attended different Zoom sessions based on which conversation they wanted to take part in.

Angel Lin, IESAC secretary, moderated the Campus Safety discussion along with administrators, including Molly McDonald, chief of staff in the Office of the President; Phil Beltran, director of Campus Safety Services; John Loretto, assistant director of Campus Safety Services, and John Ottoboni, senior legal counsel and chief operating officer.

Lin asked what an ideal relationship between the university’s students and Campus Safety would look like.

“The perfect relationship would be that we have mutual respect and that Campus Safety provides a service that the university deserves,” Beltran said. “That we hear when we are not [providing] that and that we make...changes to make sure it happens.”

Senior Ciara Moezidis discussed how some students and Community Facilitators (CFs) feel uncomfortable with Campus Safety responding to all incidents, particularly ones regarding mental health.

“I think there needs to be a greater understanding and conversations and not just ‘Oh well, this is how it is,’” Ciara said. “We just need to be more open to where Campus Safety is and where [it is] important in the role of campus and where [it is] not.”

Omar Medina, IESAC member, moderated the being Black at SCU discussion along with the administrators Eva Masias, vice president for Enrollment Management, and Margaret Russell, associate provost for Diversity and Inclusion.

Various students voiced their concerns over the demands posted on the Being Black at SCU instagram page having not been addressed properly.

“These demands [are not] new,” Senior Liyah Lopez posted to the comment section. “Just because they were just posted [does not] mean that [it is] the first time [it has] been asked for.”

Senior Isaac Addai also expressed his frustration.

“The trauma was the ace in the hole because these demands have not been met,” Isaac said. “We have been talking about these things for the last six months and there are still answers that I do not have and I feel that is ridiculous to a certain extent…[T]he notion that these important issues take longer to solve than getting a building done is insulting to me.”

Kevin O’Brien, S.J. noted that he and other staff members have been working on cataloging all the recommendations from the task forces from the last three years, the campus climate survey and the demands from the summer, and the @beingblackatscu Instagram account in order to address issues appropriately.

He reassured the students that faculty are trying to work on meeting their demands. Some of them have already been met but not communicated properly, and others have not been done well enough or are still in progress.

When the discussions ended, students returned to the main room for questions. They asked about how Santa Clara will support current housing-insecure students on campus who do not have alternative housing options after the Nov. 21 move out deadline and if there will be a direct and public response to the @beingblackatscu Instagram page.

IESAC members announced several changes to improve campus life which include establishing search committees, better Counseling and Psychological Services and Cowell, increasing Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) tenured faculty and updates on the school’s ten priority areas. This year, IESAC plans to increase transparency, act as a liaison between students and administrators and provide updates through the IESAC newsletter.

During the announcements, students pointed out in the chat that John Loretto had a Blue Lives Matter postcard in his office.

The postcard appeared to be a Thin Blue Line flag, which resembles a black-and-white version of an American flag with a prominent blue stripe replacing a single red stripe. It was attached to a bookshelf behind Loretto and was clearly visible in his feed. 

Students questioned why it was there and whether or not he understood the implications of the emblem, which for many, was created against the Black Lives Matter movement.

“I do not see it as a white supremacist emblem, and I do not take that away from those who do, but 25 years in law enforcement I have had a lot of cops killed in the line of duty,” Loretto said. “So, just like things matter to you, things matter to me too.”

Senior Chloe Gentile-Montgomery explained how the symbol could have a very different meaning for many people.

“I just think that you should understand that this particular emblem...actually came as a direct response to the Black Lives Matter movement and in that it is considered a white supremicist emblem not just by students, but by a lot of people and...this is supposed to be a brave space for students to talk about their experiences…[and] to have that visible in your background legitimately compromises the safety of this space,” Gentile-Montgomery said. “So, I understand your positionality and your respect for your lost officers, but I also think that that can be represented in a different way.”

An email was sent out to the student body the day after the forum which expanded on these sentiments.

"We deeply apologize for this incident and the hurt it has caused," stated the Oct. 29 email, which was signed by a dozen university officials, including O’Brien.

The email went on to state that the "incident has further damaged the trust and faith that we are working so hard to build. But we cannot let it derail the important work we have underway. We are steadfast in our commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being of our students and to building a Santa Clara community where all are welcome."

The Santa Clara reached out to the university for further comment.

“No work is more important than our efforts to create a safe, inclusive and welcoming campus where all are respected and valued,” a university statement said. “Santa Clara University is striving to create a campus community where everyone is valued and can feel safe and respected. As part of that effort, we are deeply committed to racial justice and to healing the suffering caused by racism, which is core to our mission and values as a Jesuit, Catholic university. We have not always lived up to these goals, but we are working hard to make real progress.”