Park City leaders on Thursday evening indicated they want to consider some sort of response to a state bill that critics say targets pride flags, but it was not clear whether they will take such a step or, if they decide to do so, what possibilities they may have available.
Mayor Nann Worel and the Park City Council addressed the polarizing issue during an unscheduled discussion at the Marsac Building. They were not slated to take any action and the elected officials are expected to return to the topic at a later meeting.
State legislators passed a bill during this year’s session that would effectively prohibit the flying of pride flags on government property. The prohibition does not apply to a variety of other categories of flags, including those of the U.S., Utah and local governments. Gov. Spencer Cox has not yet signed the bill into law.
The mayor and City Council engaged each other in a brief discussion that may ultimately be a precursor to a more difficult one later should they press forward with a response to the bill. The topic was not on the meeting agenda on Thursday, meaning supporters and critics did not have prior knowledge there would be a discussion. Any future step would likely be publicized prior to a meeting. Pride-related issues have spurred controversy previously, including a tense verbal exchange at the Marsac Building in the summer of 2023 between Worel and a critic of Park City’s decorations for Pride Month.
City Councilor Ed Parigian offered some of the most extensive comments on Thursday, saying legislators had not “banned rainbows,” people grew up with rainbows and they represent “Hope. Future. Promise.” He asked whether rainbows could be included in the marks the municipality uses.
“I’m wondering if there’s a way, I think I’ve seen this, but we can incorporate rainbows into our official city logo, our motto, so god forbid, we don’t break the law by putting a rainbow flag up. I think it represents what we all feel. We all have hope. We all have promise. … It’s the universal symbol of equality and inclusion,” Parigian said.
He said the idea was not a formal proposal, but an opportunity for the elected officials to consider “a version of our logo that incorporates some rainbow.”
“We could do it like a rainbow arc over the 1884 or something. I don’t know,” Parigian also said, referring to the year of Park City’s incorporation.
He added: “It’s about a universal symbol of hope. Just take the pride part out of it. It’s a rainbow, and there’s nothing wrong with a good rainbow in my book.”
Other members of the City Council did not appear prepared to address the topic in any depth. They were willing to hold a conversation about the issue but did not appear ready to endorse Parigian’s suggestion.
“It’s very raw right now. And I think there’s a lot that we need to unpack from what has happened and what the implications are going to be. But I think the conversation needs to start,” City Councilor Tana Toly said.
City Councilor Jeremy Rubell described the idea from Parigian as creative, but he was not sure whether he would support an alteration to the municipal flag. Rubell wanted to learn more about the issue and understand what measures City Hall could take.
Bill Ciraco, another member of the City Council, desired an audit of the steps already taken by the city as he expressed support for the continuing discussion about the topic.
Park City Attorney Margaret Plane told the elected officials that staffers will review the bill and craft options for the mayor and City Council to consider.