A newly implemented policy restricting which flags can be flown on city property in Federal Way has generated significant community opposition and raised concerns about representation for marginalized groups.
During an October 21 meeting, the city council approved amendments to the city’s flag policy that permit only the American flag, Washington state flag, and Federal Way city flag outside city hall. The POW/MIA flag will continue flying in accordance with state law.
At the city council’s November 5 meeting, numerous community members, local group leaders, and business owners voiced opposition to the new policy’s directive prohibiting “non-governmental flags,” expressing concerns about diminished representation for marginalized groups in Federal Way.
“What you did was say ‘Oh, we’re not going to celebrate anyone here except the people who only identify with one thing,'” Allison Fine declared passionately to councilmembers. “You prioritised yourself instead of this community.”
The push for change originated from Councilmember Paul McDaniel. He told fellow councilmembers he felt the different flags previously flown outside City Hall and on other city properties were divisive and contributed to deeper polarization issues in the US.
“I believe that the only way to really unify us is to take away the divisive talk, the divisive actions, and the divisive things,” McDaniel explained. He claimed to have observed posts from people raising concerns about local high schools in Federal Way flying Palestinian flags on October 7, the anniversary of the Hamas-led attack on Israelis.
“People felt that was inappropriate,” McDaniel added. Previously, Federal Way City Hall has flown pride flags, a Juneteenth flag, an Irish flag, and others. Councilmember Lydia Assefa-Dawson, the only city councilmember to vote against the new policy, stated the city’s previous decisions to fly different flags were intended to be inclusive.
“We’re saying ‘it’s okay to be who you are, it’s okay to fly your flag here because you belong here,'” Assefa-Dawson explained. “That’s what those flags represent to me.”
She and McDaniel engaged in several minutes of debate over what constitutes divisiveness. McDaniel stated none of those flags previously flown at City Hall were inclusive of him and his identity. He went further to declare he believes only the American flag should fly on city property.
“It is the only flag that unifies every single person in this city, in this state, and in this country,” McDaniel said.
Again, Assefa-Dawson disagreed with McDaniel’s definition of divisive and argued changing this city policy would be perceived as regressive.
“We’re saying ‘you’re included, you’re part of this community,'” she continued, “‘and we acknowledge and recognise your existence here in our community.'”
The city council’s October 21 decision also faces opposition from Federal Way’s Diversity Commission. Some commissioners addressed councilmembers on November 5 and expressed concern the commission should have been included in the city council’s policy conversations to ensure minority groups had representation.
“Recognition of traditionally marginalised communities is extremely powerful, and removing that recognition may erode trust,” stated Pastor George Houston, a commissioner. Houston indicated the diversity commission plans to discuss the policy further in its upcoming meeting on Thursday, 13 November.
In 2020, the city council declined to adopt a flag policy, transferring the decision to the mayor’s office. For the past five years, non-governmental flags and banners for local sports teams have been displayed on city property, accompanied by Mayoral Proclamations. This arrangement represented another reason some councilmembers advocated for an updated, uniform policy, preventing the decision from resting solely with one person, the mayor.
The new policy took effect immediately.
The controversy encapsulates fundamental tensions between competing visions of unity and inclusion that characterise many contemporary debates in American civic life. McDaniel’s position that flying only governmental flags promotes unity by eliminating visible markers of particular identities reflects one philosophical approach, whilst Assefa-Dawson’s argument that flying diverse flags demonstrates inclusion and belonging represents an alternative perspective.
McDaniel’s invocation of polarisation and divisiveness as justifications for the policy change reveals his belief that acknowledging particular group identities through symbolic means like flags contributes to social fragmentation. This perspective suggests unity requires emphasising shared civic identity, symbolised by governmental flags, over particular cultural, ethnic, or identity-based affiliations.
