Committee explores implementing new mascot

copied and pasted
Rutland City Public Schools
Committee explores implementing new mascot
By Jim Sabataso Staff Writer 17 hrs ago 2
Facebook
Twitter
Email
Print
Save
A new committee charged with adopting a timeline for and investigating the costs associated with implementing “Ravens” as Rutland City Public Schools’ new mascot met for the first time Wednesday evening.

The City Board of School Commissioners formed the committee at its Sept. 28 meeting after several members of the public pressed the board to begin to implement the new mascot, which was adopted by the board earlier this year.

Last October, the board voted 6-4 to retire the “Raider” name and arrowhead logo deeming them offensive and hurtful to Indigenous peoples. In February, it approved “Ravens” as the new name and mascot.

On Wednesday, the new Ad Hoc Committee of the Whole met to explore the process of formally implementing Ravens.

Commissioners Ann Dages, Kevin Kiefaber, Alison Notte, Charlene Seward, Cathy Solsaa and Stephanie Stoodley attended the meeting. They were joined by Superintendent Bill Olsen, Assistant Superintendent Rob Bliss and Rutland High School Principal Greg Schillinger.

At the top of the meeting, commissioners elected Notte to serve as committee chair by a vote of 4-2, with Seward and Stoodley voting “no.”

Olsen then presented a cost review of rebranding athletic team uniforms, scoreboards and additional signage at RHS and the district’s various athletic facilities.

Estimated uniform replacement costs totaled $159,000, according to Olsen.

He explained that the uniform replacement cycle varies from team to team and uniforms that didn’t display the Raider name or arrowhead would not need to be replaced.

Costs to modify the name and logo on signage, scoreboards, a scorer’s table and folding chairs at Keefe Gym and Alumni Field were estimated to be approximately $24,600.

Olsen noted that the Raider name had already been removed from the floor of Keefe Gym for a cost of $3,600, which he said was lower than expected. “Rutland” was added in its place. The work was paid for through the maintenance budget, he said.

Olsen said the district would move forward with changes to scoreboards, stating that he expected the costs would be lower than estimated. “Raiders” will be replaced with “Rutland,” he said.

Olsen presented the estimates with the caveat that it was incomplete and other items would certainly be added as they came up.

Schillinger agreed, noting the complexity of inventorying uniforms for each team, which can include multiple items. For example, he later acknowledged that practice jerseys were not included in initial estimates.

Much of the meeting’s conversation involved how the changes would be funded.

While there is an athletic budget line in the district’s expenditure budget — which covers equipment expenses, such as helmets and pads — jerseys and other articles of clothing are paid for by a combination of the Rutland High School Booster Club and team fundraising.

Schillinger explained that helmets are branded each season with stickers, which are not a significant cost to the district.

Stoodley, who is a member of the Booster Club, said the private group generally funds 75% of uniform costs, with the balance being raised by individual teams. She added that it’s not a hard-and-fast rule and the club assesses each request differently.

The club, she said, also funds scoreboards and signage.

“Pretty much (the) majority of the athletic stuff that we’re talking about in this has been funded by the club, not the school district themselves and not in our budget at all,” she said.

However, she said the Booster Club would not be contributing to this current effort.

“The Booster Club will not fund this change in the whole entirety,” she said. “That would take all of the money we have and then some.”

Notte agreed that it made sense not to lean on the club since its revenue, which is made largely by selling concessions at sporting events, was negatively impacted due to the pandemic.

Stoodley added that the club was in the process of updating its logo.

It also recently changed its name to Rutland High School Booster Club from Rutland Raider Booster Club on its Facebook page.

Kiefaber raised the possibility of soliciting donations.

“I think there’s lots of folks that would kick in that might not otherwise,” he said.

“We’ll take donations, I’m not opposed to that,” said Olsen.

Commissioners acknowledged that some costs may need to be added to future school budgets as part of the athletics line but did not discuss that option in depth.

Commissioners also seemed to support the idea of creating a multiyear schedule for replacing uniforms, prioritizing teams that are in greatest need.

Olsen agreed.

“We’re thinking it would make more sense to do it staggered, to try to break down the cost year by year,” he said, adding that throwing out brand-new uniforms would be wasteful.

Dages suggested that new uniforms could simple say “Rutland” rather than display any mascot or logo.

“That would be a good rational step to take,” said Olsen.

Notte asked Olsen to provide a more detailed breakdown of the uniform replacement cycle, including cost and frequency of replacement by team.

The otherwise quiet meeting took a contentious turn at the end when Stoodley accused the administration of “erasing history” by covering the former “chief” logo displayed on some of the Tri-Scholar-Athlete plaques that line the hallways of RHS.

“At a certain point, some things I don’t believe should be changed and covering stuff up is erasing the history,” she said.

The “Red Raiders” name and Native American chief mascot were both retired in the early 2000s in favor of simply “Raiders” and the arrowhead.

Olsen said that when Schillinger noticed the old logo, they both decided it needed to be changed, noting that it should have been done years ago.

He compared the plaques displayed in the school to scoreboard, saying they are front-facing symbols of the school.

Solsaa questioned whether putting a sticker on the plaques did anything to change the high school experience of those students.

“No matter what the sticker or logo or whatever is on it, that student still earned that award,” she said. “Isn’t that the real value of that award?”

“I guess that’s an individual person’s own preference,” Stoodley replied.

Schillinger pointed out that the school has not been represented by the chief logo for close to 20 years.

“I also think there’s a point where we need to be thinking about, these are the kids in the building today,” he said. “This is the representation of Rutland High School on Oct. 20, 2021. That’s what needs to be publicly represented.”

Stoodley argued that the student body is not represented by the Ravens either.

“And that has been very clear at every single home football game and every single event. So we’re not representing the student body,” she said.

Soon after, Notte moved to adjourn, stating, “This is not the task of this meeting. This is not what we’re here for.”

Despite forward movement Wednesday, the mascot debate, which continues to be divisive within the Rutland community, remains unsettled.

A slate of pro-Raider commissioners, including Stoodley and Seward, were elected to the board in March on the promise of reinstating the Raider name and arrowhead.

Those efforts were slowed, however, when Board Chair Hurley Cavacas created a committee this spring to investigate whether the board acted properly when adopting the Ravens as the new mascot.

Last month, the board accepted the findings of an independent report delivered to that committee, which found that the board did, indeed, act properly.

So while Ravens is currently the district’s official mascot, it’s possible that pro-Raider commissioners could attempt to reverse the action at some point.

Cavacas acknowledged as much at the Sept. 28 meeting, stating, “I cannot prevent a future motion coming up in the next year or two, whatever, to change anything, just like this motion came up. … But as of right now, I can tell you that the mascot is the Ravens, yes.”

jim.sabataso

@rutlandherald.com

jim.sabataso@rutlandherald.com
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=rm&ogbl#inbox/FMfcgzGlkXtmMMkrkkbnnhwhvcvqxGKq