SAN MARCOS — After a tense debate and emotional public comment, Palomar College’s Governing Board voted to delete its anti-racism and equity policy during the Oct. 14 meeting.
The board voted 3-2 to delete BP 3000, an anti-racism and equity policy adopted in 2021, after an hour of debate and multiple amendment attempts. The amended version removed BP 3000 but created a subcommittee to potentially draft a replacement. Trustees Jacqueline Kaiser, Yvette Acosta, and Holly Hamilton-Bleakley supported the motion, while Roberto Rodriguez and Judy Patacsil opposed.
Public reaction
Thirty-one people signed up to speak, including 24 on BP 3000. Nineteen were ultimately heard, with 13 on BP 3000 before the 30-minute limit on the topic expired.
Speakers said deleting the policy ignored the college’s values and the voices of those affected by discrimination. All who addressed BP 3000 opposed its deletion.
“Words matter. Language is power. Erasing BP 3000 is erasing our power,” said speech and communications professor Holland Smith.
Palomar retiree Patti Serafin, who served 15 years in Financial Aid and now chairs the Council of Classified Employees Retiree Chapter of AFT Local 4522R, spoke in strong opposition. She helped create BP 3000 in January 2021 as a member of the Professional Development Committee.
“This policy is our collective voice, a promise that Palomar College is and will remain a safe and inclusive place for our students, employees, and community,” Serafin said. “Deleting this policy exposes a board majority that behaves like wolves in sheep’s clothing, appearing harmless while taking actions that harm the very people this institution is meant to serve.”
Palomar curriculum specialist Cheryl Kearse urged trustees to reconsider deleting BP 3000. “How is anti-racism wrong? How is promoting equality wrong?” she asked. As a Black woman who experienced racism in a predominantly white school district, she said removing the policy sends a message that racism is acceptable.
“Today it begins with racism. Tomorrow, classism and elitism follow,” Kearse said. She urged Trustee Hamilton-Bleakley, who later voted for deletion, to “do what’s right to protect those who can’t protect themselves.”
Timothy Swan II, secretary of the Associated Student Government (ASG), told trustees that deleting BP 3000 could affect campus climate. He was one of three ASG members who addressed the board in public comment.
“Any fathoming of the removal or deletion of any of our anti-racism policies is racist,” Swan said. “It is pompous, it is blatant, it is disrespectful.”
Angie Martinez-Heffner, secretary of the Council of Classified Employees (CCE), read CCE’s official resolution opposing the deletion of BP 3000. Elizabeth Alvarado, communications co-chair for the Association of Latinos and Allies for Student Success, also spoke in opposition, saying the deletion would “erode trust” and mark “a retreat from our collective commitment to confront inequalities.”
Motion and amendments
When the board reached New Business item P7, Trustee Acosta moved to delete BP 3000, seconded by Board President Kaiser. Student Trustee Ariel Fridman urged trustees to reconsider, noting the policy had not received a first reading. She said students were “concerned, confused, and disappointed” and suggested tabling the item, adding that community members did not support its removal.
“No other California community college has a board policy, the college can make a statement, our president can make a statement, the faculty can make a statement. It doesn’t have to be a board policy,” Trustee Acosta said. “I believe the best way to serve all students of every background is to center our resource’s on academic achievement, completion, and workforce readiness.”
Trustee Rodriguez proposed forming a subcommittee to rewrite BP 3000 and draft a revised version for board review, emphasizing that deletion would signal abandonment. The board then voted 3-2 to open item P7 for modification, with trustees Rodriguez, Patacsil, and Hamilton-Bleakley in favor and trustees Kaiser and Acosta opposed.
Trustees Kaiser and Acosta argued BP 3000 was performative and could expose the college to legal liability. Kaiser said the board should focus on “the business of education.”
After Rodriguez’s proposal failed, Trustee Hamilton-Bleakley introduced a compromise to delete the policy now and form a subcommittee to draft alternatives.
Trustees Rodriguez and Patacsil opposed the compromise, arguing that it would silence constituents and that being the only California community college with such a policy is a point of pride, not a problem.
Student Trustee Fridman cautioned that removing the policy without a proper read and replacement plan would be “getting off on the wrong foot.”
“The fact that Palomar College is the only college in California that has a policy is a point of pride for me, not a point for elimination. I don’t want to disclose the conversations that have been alluded too but elimination was not the only option given,” Trustee Rodriguez said.
Midway through the hour-long discussion, ASG member Timothy Swan II rose to speak out of order after Trustees Acosta and Kaiser discussed that BP 3000 exposed the district to legal risk. Both trustees cited universities such as the University of Florida, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and the University of Michigan, which had removed similar policies, saying Palomar should follow suit.
“I know I’m speaking out of time,” Swan said. “The institutions you mentioned, besides the University of Michigan, ironically, are all in the Southeast, they’re all confederate states. That’s why this institution should continue to keep it, so that the rest of them can join it.”
Hamilton-Bleakley’s compromise passed 3-2, with Trustees Acosta, Hamilton-Bleakley and Kaiser in favor of the deletion and subcommittee, and Trustees Rodriguez and Patacsil opposed. Student Trustee Fridman hesitated but cast an advisory vote in favor.
Only one audience member, former Governing Board candidate Frank Xu, applauded the decision, while others left the room chanting “vote them out.”
“I hope the board will vote to remove that board policy. And in the meantime, keep fighting discrimination inside the campus and make sure every student and every faculty got the same equal treatment, equal opportunity without regard of their race or ethnicity or skin color,” Xu said.
Reaction and implications
Removing BP 3000 leaves Palomar’s Governing Board without a board-level policy on racism. The quick deletion left students and faculty concerned about how the board will address racism moving forward. During her constituent report, ASG President Yaretzi Hernandez said the removal undermines years of student advocacy and steps ASG would take in response.
“Our Rules Committee is currently developing a proposal to formally adopt a Land Acknowledgment into ASG meeting agendas, and to draft an anti-racism resolution,” Hernandez said. “ASG stands before you, deeply disappointed by a decision of the removal and deletion of BP 3000.”
BP 3000 was adopted in January 2021 amid national calls for justice after the murder of George Floyd and other violent incidents targeting minorities, marking Palomar’s commitment to oppose white supremacy and racism.
The board will form a subcommittee to review equity-related language and bring new resolutions forward. Palomar President Star Rivera-Lacey thanked trustees for their deliberations and said the college will continue its commitment to an inclusive environment and ensure Palomar remains a safe place for all students and employees.
