BELLEFONTE — The Red Raiders are back less than a year after the Bellefonte Area School Board moved to drop the term word “red” from the district’s nickname or moniker.
A new-look Bellefonte school board voted 6-2 to rescind that motion and retain the name “Red Raiders” during a meeting Tuesday. The board also voted 6-2 to rescind a motion pertaining to the removal of Native American imagery associated with the name from the district.
The moves wiped out two April 2021 controversial decisions made by the previous board over an issue that had the community in an uproar since the summer of 2020, when a group of community members and alumni created a petition asking the board to consider the changes to the “harmful” logo and imagery.
In November, candidates running on the “Win 4 Bellefonte” ticket — consisting of incumbent board members Jeff Steiner and Jon Guizar and incumbent and newcomers Andrea Royer and Jack Bechdel II — swept the school board election, giving the change back to “Red Raiders” some momentum. All four voted “yes” to rescind both motions.
Board members Marie Pernini and Kimberly Weaver also voted to reinstate the Native American imagery, while Weaver and Smith also voted “yes” on the motion to bring back the word “red” in the district’s moniker.
It was just back in April when the previous board voted 8-1 to remove Native American imagery and 6-3 to remove the word “red” from the district moniker. This was after months of discussion and informative sessions by the board on the matter.
Newly appointed board president Stiener had the board sit through two public work sessions on how to move forward with rebranding, before bringing the motions to rescind to the board during the first board meeting of 2022.
The board voted on the matter, despite not being a full board, after former member Mark Badger resigned on Jan. 4. Earlier in the Tuesday board meeting, the board heard from seven community members who threw their names into the hat before unanimously choosing Nate Campbell. Campbell was not sworn in until after the end of the meeting and was not allowed to vote on rescinding the motions.
During the public comment section of the meeting, community members on both sides of the issue again spoke passionately to the board concerning the image, with roughly 10 asking them not to rescind and five speaking in favor of going back.
Since 2015, the district made the Native American imagery its secondary logo in favor the block “B” for the primary logo.
The district can continue on with phasing out that secondary logo as it moves forward, Steiner said.
He added that there was an “honest” disagreement on the issue among the community.
“The imagery was already being retired. All we are saying with this is that we are not going to immediately get rid of it. We are just going to figure out how to phase it out while letting it remain where it is at,” said Steiner.
Guizar who voted for the two motions, said he did not consider the financial cost associated with the move last April, saying the board “jumped the gun.”
“When I voted for this, I made a mistake. I was not doing my fiduciary responsibility by understanding the cost and the impact to taxpayers, to the people in this district that are on a fixed income and the prices of everything going up all around us. Then we are going to approve something and make this kind of a motion and approve it and then find out after the fact that we have to come up with a $100,000. That was not the right thing to do, OK,” said Guizar.
He added, “We all make mistakes, but I am a firm believer that when you make a mistake, you have to admit it and fix it.”
In October, the district director of fiscal affairs said costs associated with rebranding — which included re-painting two gym floors, replacing wrestling mats and replacing scoreboard panels — would run up to $100,000. But, he added that some of these things would be reaching the end of their life cycles soon, and not add any additional cost to the district. Other board members expressed how much work the board put in before making the decision in the spring, saying the board was not rushed.
Guizar said the motions were too restrictive and suggested that the rebranding committee move forward with its work without motions in place. He also suggested the board consider bringing in a professional firm to help the district move forward in a way “that will bring the community together on the matter.”
“Many people are excited about the block ‘B’ and finding ways to modify that,” said Guizar. He added, “For all the people watching, we do not have a mascot. We have a logo and it is officially a block “B.” There are native images and if those images are offending people, I’ll apologize. I don’t want to offend anybody. But on the other hand, you can’t just go ripping things up and offending 80 percent of the people, either. We just need to work together and find a solution moving forward. I think we can preserve the past. We can honor the past and honor natives. I think we reach out to those groups and ask for their input on how we can respectfully memorialize these things and carve a path forward.”
This story appears in the Jan. 13-19 edition of the Centre County Gazette.
