🔍 The Controversy at Mott Community College Unfolds

In the heart of Flint, Michigan, Mott Community College (MCC), a public institution serving over 6,000 students annually, finds itself at the center of a heated debate over religion in leadership. The community college proselytizing scandal involves accusations against President Shaunda Richardson-Snell, who allegedly made religious comments promoting Christianity during official college events. This leadership controversy has divided faculty, students, trustees, and the local community, raising questions about the boundaries of personal faith in public higher education roles.

The issue came to a head with a formal complaint from the nonprofit Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU), highlighting potential violations of the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. As a public college funded by taxpayers, MCC must navigate strict rules prohibiting government endorsement of any religion. Yet, defenders argue that Richardson-Snell's expressions fall under protected free speech. This tension mirrors broader discussions in U.S. higher education about inclusivity, power dynamics, and constitutional rights.

Understanding this scandal requires context on MCC's role in Genesee County, where it provides affordable associate degrees, workforce training, and transfer pathways to four-year universities. With a diverse student body reflecting Flint's demographics—including significant African American, Hispanic, and Native American populations—the college prides itself on fostering an inclusive environment. The proselytizing allegations threaten this mission, prompting calls for clearer policies on religious expression in leadership.

👩‍💼 Shaunda Richardson-Snell's Background and Appointment

Shaunda Richardson-Snell, a Genesee County native, brings over 25 years of experience in global enterprise leadership, entrepreneurship, and senior finance roles at major corporations like General Motors (GM), Delphi, Trinity Health, and TI Fluid Systems. Holding a Master of Business Administration (MBA) from the University of Michigan-Flint, she transitioned from corporate finance to higher education without prior experience in academia—a point of contention from the start.

Her appointment as interim president in July 2024 followed the resignation of previous leadership amid financial and governance issues. The Mott Community College Education Association (faculty union) opposed the move, citing her lack of higher education credentials and arguing for a national search. Despite protests, a faction of trustees voted her in, making the role permanent in May 2025 without a formal search process. This decision fueled early criticisms of board partisanship and transparency lapses, setting the stage for the current religious controversy.

Richardson-Snell has emphasized her local roots and commitment to innovation, but detractors question whether her corporate background equips her for the nuanced cultural sensitivities required in community college administration, especially regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

📋 Key Incidents Fueling the Proselytizing Accusations

The core of the Mott Community College proselytizing scandal stems from several reported incidents where Richardson-Snell allegedly shared her Christian faith in official settings. These events, while personal for her, are viewed by critics as coercive due to her positional authority.

• Indigenous Peoples Day Ceremony (October 13, 2025): During the 33rd Annual Peace & Dignity Observance Sacred Ceremony, guest speaker Wayne Wilson, a Navajo Nation member and survivor of Christian-run Indian boarding schools, shared his traumatic experiences. Post-speech, Richardson-Snell reportedly asked him, "Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?" Wilson described feeling retraumatized, especially given historical forced conversions at such schools. Retired professor Celia Perez Booth, Wilson's adoptive parent, relayed his distress and noted that Richardson-Snell's lawyer sent a declaration seeking acknowledgment of no wrongdoing.
• Student Interaction on AI Standards: A student raised concerns about academic integrity with artificial intelligence (AI) tools. Richardson-Snell responded by referencing a "one truth," espousing her Christian beliefs and mentioning a global struggle involving the devil.
• Board Meetings: Recitation of the Lord's Prayer following the Pledge of Allegiance, noted by former trustee Anne Figueroa as inappropriate for a public forum.
• General Staff and Faculty Remarks: Multiple reports of faith-based comments to employees and students, creating fears of repercussions for disagreement.

These incidents were first aired publicly at the October 2025 board meeting, leading to an internal probe resolved in December—details remain privileged.

🏛️ The Board's Response and Community Reactions

AU's December 12, 2025, letter demanded a response within 30 days, prompting trustees John Daly III, Kenyetta Dotson, and Art Reyes to call a special meeting on February 18, 2026. About 75 attendees filled the room; Richardson-Snell was absent, attending a conference. Public comments lasted nearly two hours, revealing a split community.

• Critics: Former trustee Michael Freeman urged addressing constitutional boundaries; Diana Van der Vossen stressed institutional neutrality; Figueroa highlighted power imbalances.
• Defenders: Lou Penton invoked freedoms fought for; Miosha Robinson said faith is inseparable from her identity; former student Ashley Shafer called the question an act of love, not coercion.

The board entered closed session and postponed action, opting to review a draft statement at the February 23 meeting. The statement affirms religious freedom while committing to inclusivity: "Mott Community College... has a responsibility to maintain an environment that is inclusive and welcoming to people of all faiths and those with no religious affiliations." No new investigation was launched, relying on the prior internal review.Bridge Michigan coverage details the emotional testimonies.

⚖️ Legal Context: Balancing Faith and Public Duty

At stake is the First Amendment's dual protections: the Establishment Clause (no government favoritism toward religion) and Free Exercise Clause (right to practice faith). Public colleges, as state actors, cannot proselytize, especially leaders whose words carry weight.

Board counsel Carey DeWitt referenced the 2022 Supreme Court case Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, where a coach's private post-game prayer was upheld as non-coercive. However, critics argue Richardson-Snell's targeted questions differ, potentially alienating non-Christians. AU contends such acts signal an "officially favored" faith, unwelcome to others.

For community college administrators, this underscores the need for training on religious neutrality—explaining processes like complaint handling, board oversight, and cultural sensitivity, particularly with Native American histories of assimilation.

🌍 Implications for Higher Education Leadership

This scandal highlights risks in hiring non-traditional leaders for higher ed administration jobs. Without academic experience, navigating DEI and constitutional nuances proves challenging. Nationally, similar cases test post-Kennedy boundaries, with faculty unions voicing discomfort over workplace faith expressions.

In Flint's recovering economy, MCC's stability matters for workforce development. Ongoing board infighting erodes trust, potentially impacting enrollment and funding. Stakeholders worry about chilling effects on diverse voices or, conversely, suppressing authentic leadership.

Photo by Fotos on Unsplash

🛤️ Paths Forward: Solutions for Inclusive Leadership

To resolve the Mott Community College leadership controversy, actionable steps include:

• Adopt clear religious expression policies, defining permissible personal vs. official speech.
• Mandatory training on First Amendment, cultural competency, and power dynamics for executives.
• Independent audits of hiring processes to ensure qualifications match role demands.
• Foster dialogue via town halls, encouraging faculty and student input—perhaps via platforms like Rate My Professor for leadership feedback.
• Board reforms for transparency, like public investigation summaries (anonymized).

Positive outcomes could position MCC as a model for balancing faith and neutrality. Aspiring leaders should prioritize higher ed career advice on these issues. Explore higher ed jobs or university jobs to see evolving expectations.

In summary, the proselytizing scandal tests MCC's resilience. By embracing solutions, it can reaffirm its role as a welcoming hub. Share your thoughts in the comments, rate campus leaders on Rate My Professor, or browse higher ed jobs and career advice for guidance. For job postings, visit post a job.