The Little Compton Town Council has set aside a proposed ordinance that would create a new flag policy for the town, and councilors agreed there will be no further consideration on the matter.

The unanimous vote followed a recent virtual public hearing in which the council heard statements from residents who expressed a common theme: The proposed ordinance is unnecessary and redundant, because under pre-existing rules, the council already has full and complete authority to determine which flags are flown, where, and for how long.

At the start of the meeting, council president Robert Mushen outlined steps taken after the council voted last summer to adopt a town-wide flag policy. The first version of a draft policy was presented to the community in November. Following that meeting, the council formed a subcommittee to create a revised draft based on community members’ feedback.

The proposed draft ordinance was intended to establish a policy for display of flags on town-owned flagpoles throughout Little Compton. The language in the draft included a statement that the town, through the town council, has sole discretion to approve the display of any flag that is raised on a municipally-owned flagpole. The proposed policy was also meant to give town officials a means to vote on whether to allow other flags to be flown, on a case-by-case basis.

After describing efforts in recent months to create a new policy, Mushen said, “This issue, to a degree that is unprecedented on my time on the council, has developed a tremendous challenge with respect to choosing a path that considers all of our citizens. Usually, there is a clear path to that result. It was not as clear here.”

The community had the opportunity to review and submit comments on the revised draft before the council took final action. Snell Road resident Larry Anderson described the proposed ordinance as redundant and said it is not clear why it is needed. He said the town, without such an ordinance in effect, has “consistently been able to exercise their right and duties with regard to the display of the U.S. and other flags, throughout more than three centuries.”

A statement from Carolynn Montgomery referenced her view of the symbolism of the U.S. flag and her opposition to displaying other flags alongside it:

“When I look at the red stripe in our flag, it represents to me the blood that was lost in the wars we were involved in. To approve another flag to fly with the flag of the United State is to dilute the meaning of those who sacrificed so much. It is my hope the council members will vote with their heart and not let political agendas influence their decision.”

Cushing Anderson presented an opposing view, however, saying he supported  “the broader use of the town’s flagpole to highlight worthy and positive messages that do not advocate for a specific policy, political party, political candidate, office holder or person.”

“While it might be ‘safest’ to use the poles for the United States and official flags, that is also the path of complacency (and complicity),” said Anderson.

Town solicitor Richard Humphrey also weighed in prior to the vote, saying he believed setting the matter aside was the right thing to do.

“Every one of the writers were all great writers and give great perspective,” he said. But every time we adopt an ordinance, we take away a freedom. So I would suggest you set it aside.”

Following the vote to set aside the ordinance, Mushen clarified that community members have the right to petition the council to display a non-official flag. The council would then vote on the petition and designate the site where the flag it to be flown, if not specified in the petition.