Naming policy update: District committee mulls details
The American flag flies at Woodstock Union High School & Middle School last summer. (Gareth Henderson Photo)
A proposed facility naming policy for the Windsor Central Unified Union School District is not yet ready for the full board’s consideration, a local committee decided on Monday night. But several key details were discussed and will be revisited at the Policy Committee’s next meeting on May 17.
That’s the latest development for a policy proposal that sparked great concern among Woodstock Union High School & Middle School alumni recently. The proposal is one idea on the table connected to raising money for the proposed $73.3 million new WUHSMS building. But earlier this month, alumni circulated a petition online to preserve legacy names on fields and facilities, and ensure they aren’t re-named. District school board leaders responded with a statement saying, in part, that the new policy would aim to preserve names of beloved teachers, coaches and community members on existing facilities. They said the previous mention of the football field during a renaming discussion at a March meeting was only an example, and no policy had been finalized. Earlier this month, following the petition, the district board sent the policy back to the Policy Committee for further discussion.
At Monday’s Policy Committee meeting, which was held on Zoom, Maura McLaughlin Tynes, a WUHS alum, said she appreciated board leaders’ recent assurances that there had been a misunderstanding. The high school football field carries the name of her father, James T. McLaughlin.
“I'm hopeful the policy will give us some assurances that places will not be renamed," Tynes said. She also noted the policy “needs to be worded very carefully,” noting the level of concern about the renaming issue.
One new part of the proposed policy, under the section “Named Funding Opportunities,” states: "It is the intent of this policy that past legacy dedications will be honored."
Later in the current draft, a procedure is outlined for how to handle any proposal for the “re-naming of an existing dedication”. The Fundraising Work Group and the superintendent would have to create a report about the details, including the individual proposed for naming and the donation’s impact. A public meeting is required, and any renaming proposal would need an affirmative vote of 60% of the board or more.
Policy Committee member Kelly Welsh was concerned that including a procedure for renaming “undermines” the stated intent of protecting legacy dedications.
“I'm very concerned about having anything built into this about how we would rename things,” Welsh said.
However, committee member Sam DiNatale, herself a former WUHS Yoh Theatre Player, noted that having some kind of language about renaming not only makes a stronger policy, but does more to protect past dedications. She pointed out that renaming would require 60% of the board’s votes. That’s much “better than not putting something in there at all,” she added.
Keri Bristow, the vice chair of the district board, was chairing Monday’s committee meeting and said she’d spoken to Committee Chair Lou Piconi, who couldn’t make the meeting, about that same issue.
“There are all kinds of reasons why if nothing's in there, it probably opens it up to more of an attack,” Bristow said. Policies are also reviewed regularly per state guidelines, especially if there’s a challenge.
Welsh said she’d be more comfortable with the policy if this language was strengthened: "It is the intent of this policy that past legacy dedications will be honored.” She suggested language such as, "except for unusual and extraordinary circumstances", would offer better protection.
Committee member Clare Drebitko said having a procedure is helpful, in looking toward the future. There may be an extraordinary coach or educator the school wants to honor 50 years from now, for example.
“You don't want to make it impossible for people to honor them, but I do think it's really important to honor legacy names always, and I do think it's really important for people in the future to do that," Drebitko said.
There was also no objection to another idea offered: increasing the threshold for the board to approve renaming, from a 60% to a 75% vote.
Faith Hendricks Stevens, head of the WUHS Alumni Association, also weighed in.
“I am totally against renaming … (but) I do agree there needs to be a policy,” she said.
Stevens said a totally different situation could merit renaming something quickly. For example, a future name may need to be removed from a facility because of some wrongdoing that comes to light and could “shame the school.”
Woodstock resident Jeff Kahn said that in such a case, he’d imagine 75% of the board would easily agree to a renaming proposal.
Also, regarding the renaming procedure, DiNatale suggested that just the superintendent should be responsible for submitting the required report to the board. She noted there may not always be a Fundraising Work Group, since this group is linked to the proposed new school project.
The Policy Committee will continue to work on the facility naming policy during their May 17 meeting, also to be held on Zoom. The policy’s first reading would be done at the full board meeting in June, if the proposal is ready at that time.
— Gareth Henderson
