ROCKINGHAM-Town and village officials have tabled a request to display a rainbow pride flag on town property near a site of deep significance to the local LGBTQ+ community.
Rockingham Selectboard Clerk Elijah Zimmer's motion to the Jan. 28 tri-board meeting - which comprises the Rockingham Selectboard, and the Saxtons River and Bellows Falls Trustees - has stirred discussion, and some controversy, among residents and leaders.
At the Feb. 4 Selectboard meeting, Zimmer's motions were discussed in detail then, but they remain unresolved over concerns about establishing precedents for approving flag requests and over which board - or if all three together - have the authority to make the decision.
And in the week between the two meetings, a heated discussion of flying the LGBTQ+ flag on town property downtown exploded on social media, generating hundreds of comments.
Zimmer said he would continue to try to get the motion passed.
'More than just about a flag'
Zimmer's original motion to the three boards called for the flag to be put on a public utility pole near the Ciao Popolo restaurant in the Hotel Windham, which was known as the Andrews Inn in the 1970s and 1980s.
As described by a state historic marker at the site, in 1973, "Hotel Windham was reopened as Andrews Inn by a local resident. Offering a bar, disco, and hotel, it soon became a destination for tourists and locals who were part of the emerging gay pride movement."
The marker notes that the inn "was sold in 1979 to a same-sex couple who continued the tradition of openly welcoming gays and lesbians at a time when there were few such places in Vermont."
Described as "a unique gathering place dedicated to gay and lesbian people, their families and allies, Andrews Inn prevailed for more than a decade. It closed on April 1, 1984."
Because of the building's historic importance in the gay rights movement, Zimmer requested that the town "display the flag as a visible reminder of the challenges" LGBTQ+ people are facing under the current political climate in the U.S.
"It might be offensive to some," he acknowledged. "I would rather offend a few people than to forget the people who are in a terrible position right now. People who are fearful for their lives."
Zimmer said that some are even suicidal "about the aggression that's being shown towards LGBTQ people around the nation."
He proposed that the LGBTQ pride flag be displayed near the site of the former Andrews Inn. He also asked permission to paint a crosswalk in rainbow colors in the Square.
"It doesn't seem like a lot to ask to me," Zimmer said.
He also moved that a LGBTQ pride banner be displayed across the village square during June, LGBTQ Pride Month.
Zimmer had some positive response from two Bellows Falls trustees, Taylor Pichette and Susan MacNeil.
Pichette said that he felt it was an important motion, because "the Pride flag makes a statement about us being accepting to all."
MacNeil agreed, calling the discussion "more than just about a flag." She said that the history of the Andrews Inn in the gay rights movement was singularly important and noted the "recognized historical significance to the history of Andrews Inn, and the role it played in Bellows Falls and in particular to the LGBTQ community."
She said that when people come to the community "they see that as a symbol of a welcoming community." She said that there is a need to understand the "deeper historical impact" of the Inn's history, particularly in today's environment of anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and even hate speech.
'A very, very bad precedent'
Bellows Falls Trustee James McAuliffe said that "we have established procedures for doing banners in the Square," but not flags.
He noted that there has been a long tradition of alumni banners being displayed in the Square in June around graduation time, which would create a conflict. In past years, the alumni banner and the Pride banner were each displayed during different parts of the month.
McAuliffe asked that the motion be tabled for discussion at the next Selectboard meeting. He also said that he preferred that the banner issue be handled by the Village Trustees, citing "very long-established tradition of doing banners in the Square."
Zimmer said that he thought that the tri-board should make the decision, though he recognized that some members "might be afraid of repercussions."
Several board members spoke up about the issue, noting that while they were not opposed to it, they were concerned about which board should make the decision.
While noting that he was very supportive of the cause, McAuliffe warned that "this is not the right way to do it. It's a very, very bad precedent to set."
He said that he was concerned that "setting a precedent about flags is a very slippery slope." He noted his agreement with Bellows Falls Union High School's policy to display only the United States and Vermont state flags.
"What happens when the next request for a flag comes in?" McAuliffe asked.
McAuliffe said that to "do this now is just wrong" and said he was concerned about legal implications.
He gave the example of someone coming to the town wanting to display a Nazi flag. He said, while the example was ridiculous and it would obviously be voted down, the town's support of other flags such as the Pride flag would open them up for legal action for discrimination.
In the end, McNeill suggested that Zimmer simply add the word "consider" to his motion, as in the three boards would vote to "consider permanently displaying an LGBTQ flag on town property" and then the matter would be brought up with the Selectboard at its next meeting.
It was regarded as an appropriate compromise and was agreed to unanimously by all three boards, with one abstention.
Zimmer's second motion regarding the downtown banner was dropped for the moment, with the idea that it would be brought up with the appropriate local board at another meeting.
First, a policy
The Selectboard took up the matter at the Feb. 4 meeting. In the week between the two meetings, the motion of flying the LGBTQ on town property downtown was a hot subject of discussion on social media, with hundreds of comments.
While much of the discussion was respectful and thoughtful, from people both for and against flying the Pride flag on town property, the comments also frequently devolved into insults and name calling.
A major concern of many opposed to the motion was that, if the town supports and displays the flag of one group, "then it has to allow the same flag waving rights to all groups."
Those in favor of the motion repeatedly referred to the current presidential administration's attacks on LGBTQ rights and their desire for the town to take a definite stand in favor of a minority whom they feel are in serious danger.
At the Feb. 4 Selectboard discussion of the issue, Zimmer said that the LGBTQ Pride flag does not symbolize a particular political view, as members of the community represent the full spectrum of American politics, from the far right to the far left.
Nor are Pride flags linked to any political party, Zimmer said, likening sexual orientation and gender identity to being left-handed or having curly hair.
"It's a physical and mental state of being," he said.
Vice Chair Bonnie North said that she had initially moved to Bellows Falls years ago with her gay son, "because it was known to be gay friendly back then. No one [on the town boards] is unsupportive of gay rights or the LGBTQ community in any way whatsoever." But she added that she was still concerned about a motion that would commit to a permanent installation of a flag with such strong cultural connections.
Meeting attendee Jamey Berrick said that in 2022 all of the local boards had already signed an agreement stating that they supported inclusion, equality, and diversity in the community.
"We've already made it very clear within our community that we accept everybody," he said.
Berrick also expressed his concern that without a flag policy in place, other groups will "just crawl out of the woodwork" asking for their flags to be displayed. He said the town would have no leg to stand on "when the lawsuits start."
Town Manager Scott Pickup was asked by board members his expertise about flying the flag on town property. He said that the board would likely get a lot of challenges, and "with the absence of a policy, you're going to have a difficult time from a legal standpoint."
Board member Peter Golec suggested that a compromise would be to put the flag on the privately owned building, something which the current owners have agreed to. Then he said the town would have time to develop a flag policy and get it accepted.
The Selectboard decided to hold off on the motion while Town Attorney Stephen Ankuda consults on creating a flag policy.
Pickup also cautioned that the Federal Highway Administration's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices - the nationwide standards that maintain consistency in signage and road design for traffic safety - spells out what colors would be permitted in a rainbow crosswalk.
The board will consider these mandates as it moves forward with the issue.
'An unprecedented time'
Briar Hills called in to the meeting to state that they were a queer, nonbinary person with a new home in the community where, with their wife, they are raising three children.
"It's an unprecedented time right now where hate is taking the front stage in the media and in our federal government," Hills said. Noting that they felt safe in the town, where many local businesses display LGBTQ-friendly stickers and flags, "I feel like there is acceptance here."
Hills described the flag and banner as an opportunity for the town to support people who at the national level are "being put on the chopping block."
"They're trying to erase trans people from literal federal documents. The pride flag includes all people. It's a time where you stand up and show your support for a community that is literally on the chopping block and is trying to be erased.
"A lot of people out there right now are "feeling very scared and alone."
Hills said that seeing the pride flag displayed by the town can be reassuring when "so many people, up to 50% of the population, are looking to see you not exist. Knowing I live in Vermont is already part of a safety net for me."
Zimmer had some final words on the subject.
"I just think that it's really too bad that this particular subject has this amount of controversy," he said.
Noting the "hateful, disgusting comments" that came in the aftermath of news coverage about the tri-board meeting, "I think that it shows that we cannot say that there is not prejudice and bigotry in our community and that we're not fearful of opening ourselves to prejudice and bigotry [because of] the backlash from that," Zimmer said.
This News item by Robert F. Smith was written for The Commons.