After Weeks Of Debate, Greenwich Approves Town Flag Policy

GREENWICH, CT — After several weeks of discussions, the Greenwich Board of Selectmen on Thursday voted to adopt a town flag policy, although it was not unanimous and did not come without some contentious debate.

First Selectman Fred Camillo and Selectwoman Lauren Rabin voted in favor, while Selectperson Janet Stone McGuigan voted against.

Rather than institute a ban on flags except for the American, Connecticut and Greenwich flags — which Darien recently enacted — or opt for a "free for all" policy, the selectmen pursued a hybrid option.

According to the policy approved on Thursday, those three flags are authorized to fly over town-owned buildings.

Each January, the selectmen will meet to review the calendar and propose a slate of "legacy flags" to be displayed throughout the year "which will be consistent with past practices and custom of commemorating certain holidays, nations, civic organizations or groups."

In the past, the town has raised flags for St. Patrick's Day, Pride Month, Juneteenth, Columbus Day and Greek Independence Day, to name a few.

Residents can also submit a request to the Office of the First Selectman for a particular flag display with supporting rationale at a minimum of 30 days in advance of the proposed date of the requested flag display.

The flags of foreign national governments that maintain formal diplomatic relations with the U.S. may be displayed in conjunction with official town events or ceremonies by resolution of the Board of Selectmen.

The policy also outlines what the town can do to honor the death of a town employee, first responder or figurehead.

Camillo said in August the town started to get requests for flag raisings that had to be denied. He felt a policy would enhance procedures and protect Greenwich from litigation while still allowing beloved traditions and celebrations to continue.

Flag policies in municipalities have cropped up in recent months following a recent Supreme Court case out of Boston, Mass.

The court said the city of Boston violated the First Amendment of the Constitution by refusing to allow a Christian rights organization to raise a "Christian flag" on the city hall plaza flagpole.

Boston had no flag policy at the time.

The selectmen had discussed variations of the policy over the last few weeks and held three reads of the agenda item rather than the traditional two to allow time for more public feedback.

There had been discussions about "grandfathering" in certain flags the town has honored in the past so that they wouldn't be up for approval each year.

Stone McGuigan had been advocating for that route because she had concerns about some town traditions and celebrations being excluded in future years as a result of a flag policy.

The LGBTQ community also expressed concerns in August that the Pride flag would be targeted in future years by different boards of selectmen.

"While the purpose and scope lay out that the intention is to respect our cherished traditions, in my mind voting every January doesn't accomplish that. It just leaves room for future boards to vote against one of these flags," Stone McGuigan said Thursday.

Camillo said he was in favor of reviewing a list each January, and noted it would take about two minutes to look over and approve a slate of flags for the year.

He argued that the meaning of flags can change, and pointed to the Gadsden flag as an example. He also said over time, the number of flags the town raises will probably grow since many of the ceremonies are "community builders."

"Any flags on here are going to be fine because the meaning hasn't changed yet. But over time, we've seen where flag meanings have changed. It will help the town keep out of trouble, and I'm firmly in favor of going that route," he said. "I think this protects the town, it gives us the ability to address, discuss, get input and then vote."

Assistant Town Attorney Laura McGeachy, who worked on policy and performed research, said in the last selectmen meeting that it was better to have a general policy instead of listing specific flags.

She echoed Camillo's thoughts on Thursday that the meaning of flags could change. She referenced the Ukrainian flag, which was included in the agenda packet on a reference list of past flags the town has flown.

The town raised the flag in solidarity with Ukraine when the war started in 2022. It's not an annual raising.

"That Ukrainian flag might not be flown again, or there may be reasons why that might not be appropriate in the future," McGeachy said. "That's where I caution against pre-approving a slate of flags… I think it does require a fresh look. As the first selectman mentioned, flags do change meanings."

Rabin motioned to amend the policy and include the words "legacy" and "will" in the section describing the annual January meeting. The motion passed with Camillo and Rabin voting in favor, and Stone McGuigan voting against.

"Each January, the selectmen shall meet to review the calendar and propose a slate of legacy flags to be displayed throughout the calendar year which will be consistent with past practices and custom of commemorating certain holidays, nations, civic organizations or groups."

Public comment on the matter had been tame over the last few weeks, but the debate turned somewhat contentious on Thursday.

State Rep. Stephen Meskers (D-150) spoke and urged the board to reject the flag policy, which he said was "not inclusive" and "harms our community."

He noted that the flags that have been flown at Greenwich Town Hall are "representations of our diversity and our acceptance of all members of our society."

"There's no reason whatsoever not to grandfather those flags in our policy. It is very simple and very easy," Meskers added. "If you ask me, at this point, if we're going to bring it forward, even the policy you're proposing, I'd like to see it before the election because I think the town residents have a right to know where their selectmen stand on the idea of that diversity and that vote."

Meskers said he felt it was better to have an approved list of flags and have a policy on how flags are either included or removed from that list.

"The idea that we're going to go to Groundhog Day every year, subject to the whims of the selectmen who have two-year terms, I don't think it's acceptable; I think it's questionable. In fact, I'm very angry to have to be up at the podium today," he added. "I'm making an issue about diversity and inclusion, which is a problem in this town. If you fail to acknowledge that problem, you fail to resolve the issues, and I don't think the policy is adequate."

Rabin pushed back on Meskers' comments. Camillo said they were uncalled for.

"I'm disappointed that somebody would mix this into the election and make a threat like that. To suggest that I'm not inclusive, that's how I'm perceiving it, it's just really disappointing," Rabin said. "I've always looked for compromise, I've always looked for win-win solutions. It's a big issue and I'm just really disappointed and upset."

"So am I," Meskers replied from his seat.

Meskers also made mention of the incident over the summer in which anti-LGBTQ signs were placed in front of town hall following the annual Pride celebration.

In August, he suggested tying in a proposal with the flag policy to install cameras in front of town hall.

The cameras that are in place now were out of sight and did not capture who left the signs.

Meskers said Thursday the incident wasn't "aggressively pursued."

Camillo, who acts as the town's police commissioner, said he took offense and that Greenwich police looked into the matter "extensively."

Meskers was the only member of the public to speak. Afterward, the selectmen voted 2-1 to pass the flag policy.

The policy will take effect on Jan. 1, 2024.