No consensus on Red Raider logo's future
FOSTER'S DAILY DEMOCRAT
Friday, September 22, 2006
By AMANDA DUMOND
Democrat Staff Writer
adumond@fosters.com
 |
|
Spaulding High School's Red Raider logo will remain on athletic uniforms and school facilities, but the Rochester School Board is debating how to ensure it is used respectfully. |
ROCHESTER — While many community members felt victorious this spring in keeping Spaulding High School's Red Raider logo, the School Board is wrangling with how to ensure it is used respectfully.
The debate over having an American Indian logo surfaced this year when Peter Sanfacon of Framingham, Mass., asked the district to consider changing the emblem because some people, including Sanfacon, consider it offensive to American Indians.
On April 11, the board heard passionate remarks from many residents who urged the board to leave the Red Raider alone because it is a symbol of pride. While board member Bob Watson moved the logo be phased out within a year, the motion failed to get a second and the logo stayed.
From that two-hour public forum, the board also learned community members would like to know more about the American Indian culture and would appreciate an ongoing community forum on the logo issue.
According to the Rochester Historical Society, the term Red Raider originated sometime in the 1920s. The logo of an American Indians did not appear until the 1950s.
Superintendent Mike Hopkins also informed the Policy Committee on Thursday the high school is working on developing and offering educational opportunities on American Indian history and culture.
Drafting a policy on the logo, he added, is one step to ensure there is consistency in how the logo is used, and he provided a sample document.
Board member Peggy Parker said she felt the policy tried to make a "decision without making one." On one hand it suggested the gradual removal of the logo, including from facilities and uniforms, but it also suggested the district supported the symbol 100 percent.
"You're either behind it or not," she said. "This is not just about making sure the logo is used respectfully. We have never answered the question of whether we are upsetting someone with the logo or are being prejudicial."
She added she wished she could change her vote from April because she now believes that regardless of the logo being a symbol of community pride, if it still hurts someone else, then it's not right.
Other board members, such as Jae Duntley, said they believe the symbol should remain — as long as it is used respectfully. Duntley added that a community committee, suggested by Watson, is needed to discuss the issue further and that it should encompass a broad spectrum of opinion from those who support the logo to those who believe it should be eliminated.
Vice Chair Charlie DeVito said until the board creates a policy, there will be no consistent stance on where the district stands. He again suggested a code of conduct be created that would ensure the respectful use of the logo.
Even if the board created the code of conduct, Hopkins noted that a visiting athlete or parent might still find the logo offensive.
"As you look at this you have to consider issues that will come up," he added.
The Policy Committee has asked for further research and discussion and will revisit the issue at its next meeting on Oct. 19.
