Sunday
Freeman
Indian controversy out of spotlight in Onteora by William Kemble
8/19/01
BOICEVILLE - "Aside from complying with a state requirement to remove
an Indian head painting from the Onteora High School gym floor -
because basketball court markings must be visible - school district
officials say they plan no further discussions about team mascots and
nicknames.
In fact, Superintendent Hal Rowe said last week that no one from
either side of the contentious issue has approached the Board of
Education over the past few months to discuss complying with a state
Education Department recommendation that school districts begin
talking about how to phase out the use of Native American names and
symbols. (The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights also has taken a stance
against non-Indian schools using such names and symbols.)
In Onteora, where the high school sports teams are called the
Indians, residents voted 1,940-1,868 in a non-binding referendum in
May to keep the name. That referendum came roughly a year after the
Board of Education first voted to abolish all Indian references but
then reversed itself after a power shift on the board.
District residents who have been outspoken on the issue continue to
attend school board meetings, but most say they are willing to wait
and see whether the state takes any formal action against districts
that reject the Education Department's recommendation.
Of removing Indian images from the middle of the floor in the high
school gym, Rowe said the action merely was part of a facilities
upgrade.
"The guidelines have changed regarding the middle circle and it has
to be an unbroken line through ... the middle of the court," he said.
State Education Department spokesman Tom Dunn said actions taken by
school districts have not been closely monitored since Education
Commissioner Richard Mills issued his recommendation on April 5. In
that recommendation, Mills called the use of Native American images
detrimental to the instruction of students.
"We haven't gotten a lot of feedback," Dunn said.
Mills, in a letter to school district officials across the state,
asked for "a new understanding of this matter" and said each
district's progress would be evaluated.
"We sent (the letter) out and asked for local discussion, and, to our
knowledge, that's what is going on," Dunn said. "We'll revisit it at
the end of a year."
Prior to the state's recommendation, the Native News Online Web site
listed 105 public schools and colleges in New York using Indians as a
nickname. Thirty-two were using Warriors, eight were using Chiefs,
six were using Braves, five were using Red Raiders and three were
using Redskins.
Colgate University announced last week it was changing its nickname
from the Red Raiders to the Raiders.
Dunn said the state Education Department's Native American Education
Unit has reported progress in several districts, but he was not able
to provide details. The Freeman, in a review of actions taken in
districts reported as being monitored by state officials, found the
following.
* The Massena Central School District in St. Lawrence County has
formed a committee to determine the fate of its Indians nickname
after classes resume next month.
* The Cooperstown Central School District in Otsego County will
finalize the formation of a committee during its next Board of
Education meeting and expects to conduct a review through June
regarding the use of its Redskins nickname.
* The Canastota Central School District in Madison County earlier
this year approved changing the name Red Raiders to Raiders beginning
with the 2001-02 sports season.
* The Afton Central School District in Chenango County eliminated its
Indians name in April and will go without a nickname during 2001-02.
* The Penfield Central School District in Monroe County changed its
team names from Chiefs to Patriots at the end of the 2000-01 school
year.
* The New Lebanon Central School District in Columbia County has
approved eliminating Indians as a nickname, but information about on
a new name was not immediately available.
Besides Onteora, the only school districts in the Mid-Hudson Region
that use Indians as a team name are Rhinebeck, in Dutchess County,
and Coxsackie-Athens, in Greene County. In both of those districts,
officials said they conducted discussions immediately after receiving
the state recommendation but have not made plans to either form
committees or change their team names.
The issue also has been reviewed by the state Attorney General's
Office, which investigated a civil rights complaint against Onteora
and released a statement asking district officials to consider
changing the nickname. However, Paul Larrabee, a spokesman for the
office, said there is "no additional involvement" expected from the
attorney general."
*********************************************************
Who did Kemble speak to from STAND? Anyone?
Do we want to make some sort of short public reply to this along the
lines of "The members of STAND (Support Tolerance and Nurture
Diversity) are willing to participate in a dialogue on the mascot
issue as soon as the Onteora community indicates its willingness to
begin the discussions which Commissioner Mills has requested. The
current Board of Education has a policy of outright defiance of the
State Education Department requests for discussion. Given these
circumstances, a presentation of educational material on the national
issue of Indian mascots is simply unfeasible until the district
officials are willing to be supportive of such a dialogue."
And if this sounds acceptable to you, do we want it read at the Board
meeting tonight? Or save it for a Board reading for September when
more people will be around, and for now just send that response (or
any changes you feel appropriate) to the Freeman?
Given that many of us are on holiday, I think it would be better to
just send a reply to the Freeman (and maybe Hal) for now, and mull
over what further public response is called for. I would like to send
a response to Dunn (anyone had any dealings with him?) and Mills, and
I have some printouts of the Freeman articles on the mascot when the
calls for dialogue came out, showing Marty's defiance and the loony,
nasty supporters who wrote in to support him that they should
probably see.
Your thoughts on these?
-- Anonymous, August 20, 2001
Upon consideration, how about just this single sentence for the
Freeman, as a print edition letter to the editor?:
"The members of STAND (Support Tolerance and Nurture Diversity) are
willing to participate in a dialogue on the mascot issue as soon as
the Onteora community indicates its willingness to begin the
discussions which Commissioner Mills has requested."
Or do we even want that at all?
Given that Kemble says, "District residents who have been outspoken
on the issue continue to attend school board meetings, but most say
they are willing to wait and see whether the state takes any formal
action against districts that reject the Education Department's
recommendation, " I don't know that we want to let people off the hook
as he implies. I will email Kemble and see who he says he talked to
on our side. I don't know that we ever agreed in any way that we
would simply wait until push came to shove with Mills. If we don't
respond in at least a minimal fashion, someone else is speaking for
us here. Do we want that?
With the expanded version officially notifying Hal and state
officials:
"The members of STAND (Support Tolerance and Nurture Diversity) are
willing to participate in a dialogue on the mascot issue as soon as
the Onteora community indicates its willingness to begin the
discussions that Commissioner Mills has requested. The Onteora Board
of Education has a current policy of outright defiance of the State
Education Department requests for discussion. Given these
circumstances, a presentation of educational material on the national
and local issue of Indian mascots is simply not feasible until the
district officials are willing to be supportive of such a dialogue."
(and a packet of Freeman reprints regarding Marty's defiance of the
discussion requests, and the calibre of responses backing him up in
the online letters)
Or, do we drop any ideas about responding via the Freeman, and just
formally notify Hal and the state officials of our willingness to
dialogue contrasted with the defiance of Onteora officials?
In any case, I see no reason for us to make a formal statement to the
Board about this.
I'm willing to follow through on this with whatever is best for the
situation, but I'd like some consensus. Further comments?
-- Anonymous, August 20, 2001
Jim just returned from out of town with about over 100 e-mails. He
has lovingly tweaked these, and I think we should go with his
versions. Quoted items are mine.
>To: Freeman: The members of STAND (Support Tolerance and Nurture
>Diversity) are willing to participate in an educational dialogue on
the
>mascot issue as soon as the Onteora community indicates its
willingness to
>begin the discussions which Commissioner Mills has requested
I would tend to be more kind and cozy in a reply yet be pointed to
the
board, NOT the community. For instance...
The members of STAND (Support Tolerance and Nurture Diversity) look
forward
to participating in an educational dialogue on the mascot issue when
the
Onteora School Board indicates its willingness to support the
community
discussions which Commissioner Mills has requested.
>Added for Hal and state officials:
>
>The Onteora Board of Education has a current policy of outright
defiance
>of the State Education Department requests for discussion. Given
these
>circumstances, a presentation of educational material on the
national and
>local issue of Indian mascots is simply not feasible until the
district
>officials are willing to be supportive of such a dialogue.
Again to appear more friendly, willing and able...
The Onteora Board of Education has a current policy of ignoring the
State
Education Department request for community discussion. Given these
circumstances, a presentation of educational material on the national
and
local issue of Indian mascots is simply not feasible until the
district
officials are willing to be supportive of such a dialogue.
Or, perhaps, a compilation of the two...
The Onteora Board of Education has a current policy of ignoring the
State
Education Department request for community discussion on the use of
Native
Americans as mascots. Given these circumstances, a presentation of
educational material on the national and local issue of Indian
mascots is
simply not feasible until the district officials are willing to be
actively
supportive of such a dialogue. The members of STAND (Support
Tolerance and
Nurture Diversity) look forward to participating in an educational
dialogue
on the mascot issue when the Onteora School Board indicates it's
willingness to support such creative community discussion.
-- Anonymous, August 26, 2001