‘The discussion is not going away.’ Bellefonte’s board of directors talk next steps for mascot issue
After more than a month of silence, the Bellefonte board of directors voted 6-3 Tuesday to discuss controversy around the “Red Raider” mascot.
Following ongoing community demands and what board member Rodney Musser called a “surprise” letter released by board president Jon Guizar, he requested that a discussion be added to Tuesday’s meeting agenda as an act of transparency. Assuming most community members were in attendance to comment on the mascot — a red Native American with a headdress — Musser said the board needed to acknowledge concerns that have unfolded online and within the Bellefonte area.
“This is just a discussion about a mascot that other communities have already gotten rid of,” Musser said, citing recent examples. “These are discussions that are happening currently.”
Nearly 4,000 people have signed an online petition in support of replacing the mascot with something not hostile or stereotypical toward Native Americans. A counter petition to keep the logo has been signed by almost 5,000.
Divided on the issue, some board members and community members expressed concerns over the board’s priorities, like the fall reopening plan, proposed elementary school project and superintendent search. Others said the conversation has highlighted tensions between dialogue and civility.
“We had a full plate of big-ticket, medium-ticket and small-ticket items we were working on before COVID-19 blew it up,” board vice president Jeff Steiner said. “It makes no sense to take on this kind of complicated, emotionally-charged and divisive discussion simply because we woke up one morning with a bunch of emails in our inbox. That just isn’t good educational leadership.”
For nearly 15 minutes Steiner urged the board to vote no on having the conversation, citing COVID-19, instances of “bullying” and “sloppy” efforts to research the issue. But he, Guizar and Kimberly Weaver were out-voted.
Despite reservations, the board agreed that change can’t happen overnight. Instead, members said the “Red Raider” mascot and logo is part of a much broader conversation as the district addresses its curriculum and diversity, inclusion and equity plan.
“As a teacher this school year, I would be all over this subject for sure,” board member Donna Smith said. “I can see how it could be used in art classrooms, the language arts rooms and syncretic seminars, history. And I think that this should happen throughout the school year, but I do want to caution; we certainly do not want to put our kids in the middle of any kind of debate.”
Hoping to see progress made “sooner, rather than later,” Musser suggested the board hear a presentation at its next meeting, scheduled for Aug. 11, about the history of the mascot from a credited historian.
“The discussion is not going away,” he said.
In an effort to “explore all of the facts,” Weaver asked that the board set a timeline to address concerns like historical accuracy, the cost of change and community input. Some concerns, she added, can be included in the drafted diversity and inclusion plan.
“This isn’t about the mascot; this is about the diversity and inclusion plan for the district,” she said.
Moving forward, the board agreed to be as open and transparent as possible, something Musser said last week’s letter released by Guizar was anything but.
In a one-page letter, published July 8 on the district’s website, Guizar addressed the groups on each side of the issue — keep the “Red Raiders” or make a change. The board was not informed of its contents prior to its release, Musser said.
“As a school district, we appreciate these conversations and the viewpoints that have been expressed,” Guizar wrote. “However, our attention at this time is on getting our students and staff back to school in August. We must do so while protecting everyone’s safety and ensuring we deliver an equitable educational experience to all students.”
Wanting to address the issue while explaining to the public that the district is faced with a number of challenges, Guizar said the letter was not meant to represent the board’s opinion as a whole. Instead, it was a response to questions and confusion surrounding the mascot discussion.
“It was a statement from the board president about the board agenda for which myself and the superintendent are directly responsible for,” he said. “I didn’t sign that as the board of directors, I signed it as Jon Guizar. If there was misunderstanding about that, I apologize to the community.”
This story was originally published July 15, 2020 at 1:41 PM.
