Uneasiness filled the room for Board of Education members and audience members alike in what was likely the most-watched meeting of the year.

It soon became apparent that the majority of the Board was in favor of keeping the mascot, with five of the seven members speaking on behalf of keeping the Indian mascot. After a lengthy discussion, the Board decided unanimously to create a committee with several goals in mind. Until those goals are met, the Indian mascot will be retained.

After five and a half hours of listening to testimonials regarding the Indian mascot the previous week, BOE president Marcia Rozell made it clear that last Wednesday’s meeting was solely for the Board to discuss the fate of the mascot. The audience was there to listen, not speak, and the mascot was the first item on the agenda.

Board member Dave Colburn started the discussion and was the first to say that he could not support the change of the Indian mascot at this time for various reasons, such as money.

“This is not simple or easy. Some people seem to think it should be, but it’s not and it hasn’t been. There’s a lot to consider,” Colburn said. “The Board is stuck in the middle of a national debate — one we can not solve. It’s about mascots, it’s about labels and it’s about political correctness … we can’t solve all of that. Maybe we can do something locally though. We’ve got deep splits in the community among the alumni, and among the Native American community and maybe we can do something about that.”

Board member Leah Fliter recognized the detriment that changing the mascot could potentially do to the district’s budget, but believed there are other things that matter more.

“The emotional and the fiscal cost of retiring the Indian, as significant as they are, cannot stand in the way of this Board’s responsibility to do what’s best for current and future students of USD 383,” Fliter said. “I believe that in spite of our best efforts to the contrary, retaining the Indian is disrespectful to Native American students, families and community members. Retaining the Indian also, in my opinion, tells our students that reducing a diverse people to a single image is acceptable, or that cannot or should not change an outdated symbol because the process is difficult.”

Board Vice President Pat Hudgins acknowledged the value that a mascot holds in athletics, but stated that the Indian mascot was interfering with the district’s mission statement.

“I sit here in a space today where our mission says ‘where all can learn’… our athletics department is not our mission,” Hudgins said. “Education is our mission, you guys. If there are people who can’t learn, we don’t turn them away.”

Rozell later stated that part of why she wanted to retain the Indian was for the educational value.

“The thing that resonates in my head is that if we don’t remember, we will forget,” Rozell said. “History repeats itself.”

Board member Darell Edie explained his efforts in exploring the Native American culture and stated that the Indian should be retained because America has already taken so much from Native Americans.

“For those who want to know, I have walked, I have talked, I even tried a few dances and ceremonies … to really try to understand the Native Americans in this country,” Edie said. “It is a fantastic group of people and I am very, very sorry for how we treated them.”