West Hartford asks judge to dismiss lawsuit seeking to halt mascot changes for Conard and Hall

The West Hartford Board of Education and its fellow defendants are asking a Superior Court judge to dismiss the lawsuit filed against them by two residents who are seeking to prevent the school district from changing the mascots of the town’s two public high schools.

In papers filed Friday, the school board, the school district, now-former Superintendent of Schools Tom Moore and Superintendent of Administration Andrew Morrow (who is now interim superintendent of schools), through their attorney James Healy, argue that plaintiffs Scott Zweig and Mary McGowen lack standing to file the lawsuit and that the ultimate decision to change the mascots rests with the school board, not the courts.

“This is a lawsuit that should have never been filed,” West Hartford corporation counsel Dallas Dodge said in a statement. “Litigation is not an appropriate way to resolve what is fundamentally a political disagreement, and we look forward to fully briefing and arguing this issue.”

The school board in February voted to retire the mascots at Hall and Conard — the Warriors and Chieftains, respectively — at the end of the school year. In early June, the school board voted to adopt new mascots, the Conard Red Wolves and the Hall Titans.

For years, the mascots had come under scrutiny over whether they were culturally insensitive. In 2015, the school district scrapped the high schools’ logos that included Native American imagery, though the Warriors and Chieftains names were allowed to continue until the vote in February.

Prior to the school board’s June meeting, Zweig and McGowan filed a lawsuit as a last-ditch effort to prevent the school district from adopting the new mascots.

Zweig and McGowan claimed, among other things, that the defendants violated “policy, law and due process” when the school board voted to end the use of the mascots.

A Superior Court judge denied the plaintiffs’ motion, instead scheduling a preliminary hearing for July 7. At the hearing, Judge James Graham ordered a briefing schedule for the motion to dismiss, which Healy said would be filed by the end of last week.

In supporting documents filed Friday, the school board argues that the alleged harm to Zweig and McGowan is too vague for a court to intervene.

“The plaintiffs do not claim any injury to their property or themselves that is in any way specific or personal,” the school district says in court papers. “To the contrary, they go to great lengths to explain that their theory of harm is based on notions of ‘goodwill,’ ‘emotional associations,’ and ‘intangible sentimental value’ in the former names, which applies in equal measure to ‘West Hartford residents of all generations.’”

If the lawsuit is permitted to go forward, the school board argues, the door will be opened for residents to file lawsuits concerning matters such as policy, staffing and budgeting decisions that they disagree with.

“There would be no limit to the generalized grievances and political questions that could be foisted upon the courts,” the school board says.

Instead, the school board argues, Zweig and McGowan have the right under the First Amendment to speak out in appropriate forums against the decision to change the mascots, and they have the ability to vote for school board candidates whose positions align with theirs.

“Such matters of governance and politics are left to the ballot box, not litigation in the courts,” the school board says.

The school board also says the plaintiffs do not have standing as taxpayers as they don’t claim any potential tax increase from the mascots’ names being changed. Further, even if they did, the school board says, the lawsuit ignores the benefits to the town by no longer having the Chieftains and Warriors as mascots.

“Although the plaintiffs may not agree, the children in the town’s high schools will now be free to compete on teams that are not clouded by any stigma associated with nicknames that were historically and indisputably linked to Native American imagery,” the school board says. “Keeping the former team names would have forfeited the town’s future eligibility, and would cost the town a significant revenue source each and every year.”

As noted in court papers filed Friday, a newly enacted state law also could have jeopardized the town receiving revenue from the Native American tribal casinos located in Connecticut. The town has received a total of about $1.65 million in such revenue since 2012, the school district says in court papers.

Zweig and McGowen, in prior court filings, have noted that the town wouldn’t lose the revenue if it receives written support from a federally or state-recognized tribe in Connecticut.

The original lawsuit filed by Zweig and McGowen notes that the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, a state-recognized Native American tribal nation, recently approved “the respectful use of names, images and symbols that recognize the history and culture of Native Americans.”

Zweig, for his part, said he will file a response to the defendants’ motion.

“We are disappointed, but not surprised, that the Board is attempting to hide behind legal maneuvering in an effort to evade responsibility for their unlawful actions,” he said in a statement. “While this latest attempt to avoid answering our allegations is unfortunate, it was also anticipated. The Board has shown a repeated unwillingness to listen to our concerns regarding their fatally flawed process, and this case is no different. Instead of addressing the merits of our claims and justifying their actions, they are instead trying to silence us by preventing us from having our day in court.”

Ted Glanzer can be reached at tglanzer@courant.com.