Controversy Erupts Over School Mascot Changes in Connetquot
A recent board meeting for the Connetquot school district in Long Island has sparked significant debate among trustees and community members alike. The meeting turned particularly tense when Trustee Jacquelyn DiLorenzo accused her fellow board members of orchestrating a covert agreement to change the school’s mascot name from Thunderbirds to T-Birds. She expressed concern that this move was not only sneaky but also lacked transparency and disregarded the voices of constituents.
“In my two years of service, I’ve never witnessed such blatant corruption carried out to serve personal and self-interested agendas,” DiLorenzo remarked during the July meeting. She went on to stress that decisions affecting future generations should involve more than a handful of individuals. “I cannot, in good conscience, make an irreversible decision that could strip future boards and future generations of their right to determine their own path,” she added.
The tension arises from a recent state law that bans the use of Native American mascots and logos across New York. Connetquot, like several other districts, initially took a strong stand against this legislation, even pursuing legal action in court. However, the stakes are high, as non-compliance could result in severe penalties including the loss of state funding and the removal of board members.
Despite this backdrop, it appears that the district has quietly acknowledged plans for a costly logo change since 2020, with estimates claiming upwards of $23 million. The board’s recent proposal to alter the Thunderbirds name to T-Birds was made just before a federal investigation into the deal was announced. This investigation raises questions about whether the change violates civil rights protections under federal law.
Former trustee Jaquelyn Napolitano-Furno, who recently resigned in frustration, has openly criticized the secretive manner in which this deal was approached. She argued that T-Birds should not even be considered an acceptable substitute for Thunderbirds, especially since it was previously labeled as derogatory.
“Mascot-gate is unfolding in Connetquot because the School Board decided to defy the will of the people,” said Napolitano-Furno. She added that over several years, many community surveys indicated that a majority of residents preferred to continue the fight for the Thunderbirds name, rather than simply bowing to the state’s demands.
Both DiLorenzo and Napolitano-Furno have voiced concerns over the lack of transparency from their colleagues. DiLorenzo pointed out that while the school board has conducted community surveys, the data showing public support for retaining the Thunderbirds name was conveniently kept under wraps. “They’ve asked for your input through surveys they never intended to honor—unless the results gave them political cover,” she remarked.
Moreover, Napolitano-Furno disclosed that she has faced mounting pressure from other board members to drop her legal case in favor of the compromise with the state. The pressure was so intense that it reportedly continued even during her daughter’s graduation ceremony, further illustrating the contentious atmosphere surrounding this issue.
During the same meeting, DiLorenzo emphasized that any changes affecting the community should ideally proceed with significant public involvement. “If change ever becomes unavoidable, it should be done with full community involvement, not through backdoor assumptions,” she asserted.
As the debate unfurls, local residents and advocates are left to ponder the implications of this decision. Many see the move as part of a broader pattern where local governance appears to put personal or political ambition ahead of the community’s will. The trustees’ contentious squabbles have revealed more than just a disagreement over a mascot; they expose deep-rooted concerns about accountability and representation in local government.
The coming weeks will be critical as the Connetquot community continues to voice its opinions and hold its leaders accountable. Will the board take a step back and listen to those they represent, or will they continue down the path of secrecy and self-interest? Only time will tell, but the community’s eyes are firmly fixed on the outcome.
