City Council Memorandum
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL DATE: JANUARY 17, 2023
FROM: GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT WARDS: ALL
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHIN G A POLICY FOR THE PROPER
DISPLAY AND HANDLING OF FLAGS AT CITY FACILITIES AND FOR THE
APPROVAL AND DISPLAY OF COMMEMORATIVE FLAGS
ISSUE:
Adopt a resolution establishing a policy for the proper display and handling of flags at City facilities and for the approval and display of commemorative flags.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the City Council adopt a resolution establishing a policy for the proper display and handling of flags at City facilities and for approval and display of commemorative flags.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
The Inclusiveness, Community Engagement & Governmental Proce sses Committee met on November 2, 2022, with Chair Ce rvantes, Vice Chair Perry and Member Conder present to provide input and guidance regarding establishing a policy for the proper display and handling of flags at City facilities and for the approval and display of commemorative flags. Following discussion, it was moved by Chair Cervantes and seconded by Vice Chair Perry to refer the Riverside Flag Policy to City Council in January 2023 for consideration. The motion carried with Chair Cervantes and Vice Chair Perry voting aye, and Member Conder voting no.
BACKGROUND:
On August 4, 2021, the Inclusiveness, Comm unity Engagement & Governmental Processes Committee (Committee) received a report and presentation from th e General Services Department requesting input and guidance establishing a policy for the proper display and handling of flags at City facilities, and for the approval and display of commemorative flags. After discussion, the Committee requested that staff retu rn to the Committee with clarification on the approval process for display of commemorative flags. In addition, the City Attorney was requested to provide clarification as to whether the City can legally restrict display of certain commemorative flags.
Flag Policy ● Page 2
On December 1, 2021, staff returned to t he Committee with information on the Government Speech Doctrine as it relates to content based restrictions. Staff also provided clarification on the process for consideration and approval of commemorative flags as further outlined in the draft policy. After discussion, the Committee requested t hat staff return to t he Committee with history on the redesign of the City flag and the significance of the flag colors, clarification on whether the flags of other nations, including Tribal Nati ons, may be displayed under the draft flag policy, information on which cities across the state or nation have raised the Pride flag, and/or other commemorative flag(s), and an explanation as to why language pertaining to “themes of diversity, equity, social justice and inclusion” was remo ved from the draft policy in regards to commemorative flags.
The development of the draft policy was paused while the case Shurtleff v. City of Boston was reviewed by the Supreme Court of the United States. On May 2, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court released its ruling. While it struck down Boston’s commemorative flag policy, it provided guidance on the Government Speech Doctrine discussed below.
On November 2, 2022, staff returned to the Committee with responses to the questions raised at the December 1,2021 meeting. Specifically, staff reported that the City of Riverside Flag redesign, which was approved by City Council on Decem ber 8, 2020, features symbols and colors representing California’s Spanish mission era, the Native American “raincross” and natural local landmarks, such as the Santa Ana River, and the prominent hills around Riverside. Staff further clarified that there are no prohibitions on the display of flags of other nations, including Tribal Nations. A list of public entities displaying comme morative flags was provided (and updated as Attachment B to this report). Finally, staff clarified that the draft flag policy was revised to reference the Council’s adopted City vision, mission and strategic plan, which includes but is not limited to themes of diversity, equity, social justice and inclusion.
DISCUSSION:
Historically, the City of Riversi de has displayed flags in conf ormance with Federal and State statutes which outline standards fo r the display of the flag of t he United States, the State of California flag, and the City of Riverside flag. When properly displayed, flags are powerful symbols of our shared history, pride, principles and commitm ent to our nation, state and community.
Overview Of the Draft Flag Policy
The proposed flag policy establishes the order of the flag display and incl udes the requirement that, when a commemorative flag is added, it will be displayed in a position of honor following the aforementioned flags unless otherwise directed by the City Council and to the extent such protocol does not conflict with Federal or St ate law. Key points of the dra ft flag policy are outlined in the following sections.
Proper Flag Handling
1. Flags are to be raised and lowered by hand.
2. Flags are to be lowered slowly and with dignity.
3. The flag of the United shall be hoisted first and lowered last.
4. Flags must not touch the ground or anything beneath it.
5. When no longer in good condition, flags are to be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.
Flag Policy ● Page 3
Proper Flag Display
1. Flags are to be flown from sunrise to sunset, unless properly illuminated.
2. Flags should not be displayed during inclement weather unless an all-weather flag is used.
Proper Placement of Flags
1. No flag or pennant may be placed above or to the right of the flag of the United States.
2. When displayed on a single pole, the order from top to bottom shall be the flag of the United States, the State of California flag, and if displayed, the City of Riverside flag, followed by a commemorative flag.
3. If the City of Riverside flag is displayed, it must be the design approved by City Council on December 8, 2020.
Flags Flown at Half-Mast
1. Flags may be flown at half-mast only by order of the President of the United States or the Governor of the State of California. Notifications to lower flags to half-mast will be sent via e-mail by the General Services Department.
2. The flag of the United Stat es should be hoisted to the peak for an instant and then lowered to the half-mast position.
3. Before lowering the flag of the United States for the day, it should again be raised to the peak.
4. On Memorial Day, the flag of the United States will be flown at half-mast until noon only, then hoisted to top of staff.
Commemorative Flags Approval Process and General Guidelines
The Government Speech Doctrine, defined by the United States Supreme Court, establishes that a government organization, such as the City of Riverside, may advance its own expression without requiring viewpoint neutrality when the government itself is the speaker, so long as its expression does not show religious preference or encourage a certain vote in an election. If the City Council adopts a resolution to display a commemorative flag, the display of the commemorative flag would be an exercise in government expression, where the City is the speaker.
The City Council may authorize the display of commemorative flags as follows:
1. In January of each year, the City Council will consider the display of commemorative flags for the upcoming year. After an initial agendized discussion, staff will return to a subsequent City Council meeting with a resolu tion supporting the City’s display of the flag(s) chosen. A majority of the City Council must vote affirmatively for said resolution.
2. In addition to the annual consideration, a Council Member may, at any time during the year, suggest the display of additional flags meeting t he criteria of this po licy. Consideration would be a two-step process where on an agenda the Council considers the request, and if supported by a motion approved by a majority of the Councilmembers, staff would return with a formal resolution authorizing display of a commemorative flag. A majority of the City Council must vote affirmatively for said resolution.
Flag Policy ● Page 4
3. The specific date, historical event, caus e, or group of people be ing honored must be consistent with the City’s vision, mission and ongoing and strategic priorities.
4. Commemorative flags must not be larger than the flag of the United States, the State of California flag, or the City of Rivers ide flag, and must be on the flagpole beneath the aforementioned flags when flown on the same staff.
5. No more than one commemorative flag ma y be displayed on a flagpole concurrently.
6. Commemorative flags may be displayed at Cit y Hall and other City facilities which have multiple flagpoles and/or a flagpole tall enough to accommodate multiple flags.
7. Commemorative flags representing political organizations, for-profit organizations, or religious organizations shall be prohibited from being displayed at City facilities.
8. The City will not display a commemorative flag based on a request of a third party or to sponsor the expression from a third party.
9. Commemorative flags shall be displayed fo r a period of time that is reasonable or customary for the subject that is to be commemorated, but no longer than 30 continuous days, with the exception of Parks facilities and the Memorial Wall which continuously display the Prisoner of War flag.
Analysis of Ruling in SHURTLEFF V. CITY OF BOSTON, REGARDING CITY’S PROPOSED
FLAG POLICY
On May 2, 2022, the United Stat es Supreme Court released a new ruling on the Government Speech Doctrine ( Shurtleff v. City of Boston ) regarding display of a commemorative flag on a government flagpole that promotes or otherwise could be cons trued to be related to religious beliefs. The issue the Supreme Court decided in Shurtleff v. City of Boston was whether flying a flag on a flagpole owned by a government entity is government speech. The Supreme Court found that Boston’s policy did not c onstitute government speech and t herefore it violated the First Amendment when it rejected a flag. Significantly, Boston’s policy did not involve review by its council and every flag request received was granted until the flag in question was rejected. Even though the Boston policy was inva lidated, the Supreme Court co ntinued to acknowledge the Government Speech Doctrine. The City can still engage in gover nment speech so long as the speech is adopted as an expression by the City. In light of the Shurtleff v. City of Boston decision, the City’s draft flag policy was revised to e liminate third party r equests for display of commemorative flags to help ensure the policy constitutes Government Speech.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
The proposed Flag Policy aligns with Strategic Priority No. 5 – High Performing Government, and Goal No. 5.5, Foster a culture of safety, well- being, resilience, sustainability, diversity and inclusion across the City organization.
1. Community Trust – The proposed Flag Policy has been reviewed publicly at three meetings of the Inclusiveness, Communi ty Engagement & Governmental Processes Committee, and is now agendized for consideration by the full City Council, ensuring public transparency.
2. Equity – The proposed Flag Policy promotes equity and representation for diverse groups of people and historical events consistent with the City’s adopted vision, mission and strategic priorities.
Flag Policy ● Page 5
3. Fiscal Responsibility – Any flags purchased as a result of adoption of the proposed Flag Policy will be procured in accordance with City purchasing policy.
4. Innovation – The proposed Flag Policy provides a path to promote diversity and inclusion through the display of approved commemorative flags.
5. Sustainability & Resiliency – The proposed Flag Policy promotes social sustainability, as an integral component of sustainability is the ability to embrace diverse communities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with adoption of a resolution establishing a flag policy.
Prepared by: Carl Carey, General Services Director
Certified as to
availability of funds: Edward Enriquez, In terim Assistant City Manager/Chief Financial Officer/Treasurer
Approved by: Kris Martinez, Assistant City Manager Approved as to form: Phaedra A. Norton, City Attorney
Concurs with;
___________________________
Clarissa Cervantes, Chair
Inclusiveness, Community Engagement & Governmental Processes Committee
Attachments:
1. Presentation
2. Resolution
3. Exhibit A – Draft Flag Policy
4. Exhibit B – Public Entities Displaying Commemorative Flags