24° and Clear
Image
Photo by Clem Onojeghuo on Unsplash. In this photo, a person displays the Pride flag outside a building; The Pride flag approved by Select Board will hang outside Town Hall from an angled flag pole.
By a vote of 2-0 with one abstention, members of Westwood’s Select Board on Monday night, June 5, 2023, have approved a Town of Westwood Interim Flag Policy, allowing the Pride rainbow flag to be flown from a pole by the front door of Westwood’s Town Hall through the month of June 2023.
The Interim Flag Policy appears to have been proposed by Chair Marianne LeBlanc Cummings in response to a resident’s request to fly the Pride flag on town property, and a recognition by Select Board members of the United States Supreme Court’s recent ruling last month against the City of Boston in a case of a citizen’s request to fly a flag on city property.
In May, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Shurtleff v. City of Boston that the City of Boston had discriminated against and violated the free speech of a citizen and his organization when the city denied the citizen’s request on behalf of his organization to fly the Christian flag, after the city had approved 284 other, consecutive applications to fly flags on city property outside Boston City Hall. The Court determined that because the city had failed to exercise control over the content and messaging of the 284 previous flags that it approved at City Hall, that flying those flags constituted not government expression but rather private speech that is protected by the Constitution’s First Amendment. By denying the applicant’s request to fly the Christian flag, therefore, the Court found that the city was discriminating against the applicant's religion and violating the applicant's First Amendment right to free speech.
After Shurtleff, by proposing a flag policy, it appears that Ms. Cummings is suggesting that flags flown on Town of Westwood property be reserved for government speech, and that the Town of Westwood should actively control the expression and messaging of flags flown on town property. Indeed, in proposing the Interim Policy, Ms. Cummings stated, “My own view is flying of the Pride flag would send a clear message of Westwood’s support for rights and wellbeing of the LGBT community and would reaffirm our commitment to celebrating diversity and practicing inclusion in our community.”
Ms. Cummings read aloud the proposed text of the Interim Flag Policy, below in bold. As a transcription of an oral reading, the text below may appear in different format than the Town of Westwood’s official publication of this policy:
Town of Westwood Interim Flag Policy.
1. Introduction. This policy is intended to address flags that are allowed to be flown on the Town of Westwood flagpoles.
2. Flags That Are Allowed To Be Flown. The Select Board authorized the following flags to be flown on town-owned flagpoles as an expression of Town's government speech.
- The official flag of the United States of America;
- The official flag of the MIA POW; and
- The official flag of the Purple Heart award flown on August 7th of each year.
- In addition, the Pride rainbow flag is to flown from an outrigger flagpole on Town Hall during the month of June 2023. No other flags shall be allowed to be flown on Town owned flagpoles as those flagpoles and this policy are not intended to establish or serve to create a forum for private expression.
For local news and analysis, subscribe to Westwood Minute!
Ms. Cummings noted the Interim Flag Policy codifies the current status quo in that the United States flag, the Missing in Action/Prisoner of War flag, and Purple Heart flags would continue to be flown from their vertical flag pole, following town practice. The policy would add, temporarily for June 2023, the approval to fly the Pride flag on a different pole outside the front door to Town Hall, “at an angle, much like a flagpole you might have outside your front door.”
Select Board Clerk Robert Gotti questioned how other communities have dealt with the idea of flying the Pride flag while prohibiting other flags to be flown. Ms. Cummings stated that she did not know the full answer, and offered a short description of the Shurtleff case, noting that the U.S. Supreme Court had determined that the City of Boston was without a flag flying policy.
Mr. Gotti voiced a concern with the Interim Flag Policy’s provision that no other flags will be allowed to be flown on town flagpoles. “I’m concerned that we’re setting a precedent with that and sort of closing a door behind that particular flag,” he said.
Mr. Gotti referenced adding his signature to Select Board’s statement on diversity, equity, and inclusion two years ago. “Obviously, I signed the support statement a couple years ago with my colleagues, so this is not an issue of, you know, support or opposition to the flag itself," he said.
Ms. Cummings and Select Board member Joseph Previtera both attempted to address Mr. Gotti’s concerns by emphasizing that the Interim Flag Policy is intended to be neither comprehensive nor permanent. Ms. Cummings added that public input is needed before a permanent policy is implemented.
Ms. Cummings explained that after flying the Pride flag this June, the Interim Flag Policy represents a simple codification of existing town practice, which is to fly only the American flag, the MIA/POW flag, and on August 7th of each year the Purple Heart flag. “Because we’re contemplating a permanent policy, we’re not closing the door,” she said. “We’re just opening the door for June of 2023 for a different kind of expression of a flag on the Town Hall façade," she said.
Mr. Gotti responded, “I guess I would be concerned with that as a precedent, though. What happens if we have another request that come in June or July, or whatever that is between now and when we make [ ] a permanent policy decision?” he asked. “I have a fundamental question as to whether we’re being fair with this. And to me, I think the American flag covers all of us with that, so I’m struggling with that last part of the policy. . . . the Pride flag in June and no other flag is the part that I’m really struggling with the way the policy is written currently.”
Town Counsel Pat Ahearn offered his opinion, noting that the Interim Flag Policy would be “a step forward.” He provided assurances that it would be “refined in the next eight to twelve months” and could hopefully resolve Mr. Gotti’s concerns.
In the end, however, Mr. Gotti chose to abstain from the vote. He reasoned that to vote now would be premature. “I personally think that I very much stand by the statement that we made two years ago and the valuable contribution and the strength of the diversity of our community. So, I feel very strongly that I’m supportive of that. It is this particular policy and sort of the inconsistency of it is why I’m going to abstain,” he said.
Mr. Previtera made a motion that Select Board adopt the proposed Interim Flag Policy. He and Ms. Cummings both voted in favor of the motion, with the result that the Interim Flag Policy was adopted, 2-0, with one abstention.
