Lawsuit challenges Luke Wood’s record of inclusion at Sacramento State | Opinion

A serious blow to his reputation could befall Sacramento State President Luke Wood if an explosive lawsuit goes against him.

Wood and the California State University Board of Trustees are being sued by Mia Settles-Tidwell, a once-prominent Black leader on campus who was chief diversity officer at Sacramento State. The suit alleges discrimination based on age, gender and race that Settles-Tidwell says she encountered not long after Wood took over as Sac State president three years ago.

According to the complaint, Settles-Tidwell was the only non-interim, dark-skinned Black woman on Wood’s cabinet. It claims Wood and his chief of staff, Kristen Tudor, repeatedly denied her authority to make decisions, manage staff, oversee budgets, and fulfill her core duties as vice president of inclusive excellence. The lawsuit describes these restrictions as isolating and humiliating.

“The culmination of all these incidents, discriminatory actions against Tidwell, mistreatment, exclusion, the unfounded accusations, perceptions, and not honoring any of her meeting requests to meet with him to discuss any of his perceptions or directives, left Settles-Tidwell incapacitated to perform her duties as an MPP Level IV, category 3 administrator and no other choice but to resign from the job and community that she loved at California State University, Sacramento,” the suit says.

In a statement, a CSU spokesperson called Settles-Tidwell’s claims “baseless.”

Wood arrived at Sacramento State with significant momentum, launching high-profile initiatives such as the Black Honors College, a Native American College, and the Guardian Scholars Program for former foster youth.

This contradiction is at the heart of the complaint against Wood: Can a leader who champions opportunity for some also marginalize others? The optics are troubling—especially as universities face scrutiny over their diversity, equity and inclusion commitments. The lawsuit states that while Wood promoted inclusion for students, he practiced exclusion as well.

“Settles-Tidwell was excluded from the Black Honors College Leadership team even though she wrote the initial proposal for the Black Honors College and conducted the Black Student Success Inventory for the campus and submitted the BSSI proposal on behalf of the campus and President Wood. This proposal was awarded $250,000,” the lawsuit states.

If a court finds these allegations credible, Wood’s vision of Sac State as an inclusive institution could be seriously undermined.

Beyond reputation, there are legal and financial risks. Lawsuits like this threaten morale, and could have costly consequences for Sac State and the CSU system—especially following recent high-profile settlements.

As The Bee’s Tarini Mehta reported on Monday: “Earlier this year, the CSU system ended a three-year legal battle with two former Cal State San Bernardino administrators who alleged they were fired or pushed to resign after reporting gender inequities, discrimination and harassment. In what is believed to be the largest publicly reported employment discrimination settlement against the system, the CSU will pay Clare Weber and Anissa Rogers $12 million to resolve those claims.”

To be fair, the allegations against Wood remain unproven and, he deserves the benefit of the doubt until a court rules otherwise.

But the previous judgment against the CSU campus in San Bernardino illustrates the professional jeopardy faced by college presidents like Wood.

Diversity, equity and inclusion were Wood’s main selling point as president. New DEI initiatives have been Wood’s most successful achievements as a leader. He is the first Black president in the history of Sacramento State and its first alumnus to serve as president.

The role of a university president is not just to launch programs, but to embody the values they promote. Wood has been seen as a symbol of progress and possibility. If these claims are substantiated against him, it would mark a significant setback — not just for a leader, but for the ideals the institution claimed to uphold.