Pride flag ordinance fails in Oak Harbor council vote

Published 1:30 am Friday, June 12, 2026

Oak Harbor city leaders rejected a proposal Tuesday that would have allowed commemorative flags — including the Pride flag — to be flown on city flagpoles, ending an emotional debate that exposed divisions over how the city should express inclusion in public spaces.

The ordinance failed on a 5-2 council vote, with Mayor Pro Tem Tara Hizon and Councilmember Chris Wiegenstein voting in favor.

Many supporters of the ordinance gave public comments arguing that flying commemorative flags, including the Pride flag, would signal that marginalized residents are seen and valued. Jennifer Juniper, who recently organized a local Pride celebration in Oak Harbor, told council members that Oak Harbor stands apart from neighboring communities that already fly the flag, such as Langley and Anacortes.

“To fly the Pride flag is not to exclude anybody. It’s actually to say that we’re being more inclusive,” Juniper said.

Some residents countered that government flagpoles should remain limited to official civic symbols, specifically the U.S., state and city flags.

During public comment, Timothy Hazelo — who is running for state representative as a Republican — questioned the need to revisit the issue at all after passage of the flag ordinance last summer and argued that “government should remain neutral on these stances.” Hazelo maintained that flying only official flags would unite residents without favoring any group.

Some residents described Pride as an “ideology” during public comments. Mayor Ronnie Wright countered that people were using the word incorrectly.

“You all talk about the research you’ve done when you come to these meetings and the things that you’ve fact-checked. You all need to look up ‘ideological’ and understand what the definition of that word is before you start throwing it around,” he said.

Others described the proposal as a matter of personal safety and belonging. Resident Phillip Bernhardt-House reflected on growing up in Oak Harbor and experiencing discrimination.

“This is a good step for saying that we recognize that there are people out there who are not experiencing the equality and liberty and justice for all that the flag of the United States represents,” he said.

Sara Dean, owner of Yon Bureau, a new shop in the Harborside Village Mall, noted during public comment that her landlord repeatedly asked her to remove a Pride flag gifted to her by Wright. She said the landlord considered the flag a political statement.

“I am seeking support from my new community to pass this resolution, to make it permissible in all of Oak Harbor to celebrate inclusivity,” she said. “No flag should ever be a weapon.”

Since her appearance at the city workshop, Dean has posted a video on social media of herself taking down her Pride flag, with a caption expressing her sadness.

Concerns about precedent surfaced among opponents of the measure. Cheryl Johnston warned that approving one commemorative flag could make it difficult to deny future requests from other groups.

“If we open our flag flying to one, we have to open it to all,” she said.

Council members expressed sympathy for residents on both sides who shared stories of exclusion, though the divide remained clear.

Councilmember Bryan Stucky said that although some residents claimed Coupeville Town Hall raises the Pride flag, he spoke directly with Coupeville Mayor Molly Hughes, who confirmed that it was false. Stucky said Hughes also said she would not have put her council in the position of considering such an issue in public without knowing whether it had support.

Wiegenstein, who said he self-identifies as “queer,” emerged as one of the proposal’s strongest supporters, saying public testimony changed his position.

“I came in here flat ‘no.’ I was already headstrong,” he said, adding that commenters “reframed it in a way that made sense.” Wiegenstein later said that while flying the Pride flag carries some risks, it is the right choice.

Councilmember Sandi Peterson said the issue should be viewed through the lens of municipal governance rather than emotion.

“I have rarely seen more outpouring of people and their opinions in this chamber, and it’s wonderful to see that you all are engaged,” she said. “Making decisions that affect municipalities, however, should not be made with emotion, but rather with facts, research and information.”

She noted that government flagpoles represent government speech and warned that approving the ordinance could require the city to consider requests from any group seeking recognition.

Like Peterson, Councilmember James Marrow said raising a flag could be perceived as government endorsement, opening the door to other groups requesting similar treatment. Councilmember Eric Marshall added that it could lead to “debate on the merits of everybody that comes forward with a flag.”

Though Hizon voiced support for the ordinance and also identified as “queer.” She suggested attention should not be focused so heavily on a single flagpole, adding that she would be open to displaying support for Pride in other ways on city property.

Stucky agreed, saying the city could better demonstrate LGBTQ support through events, proclamations and community engagement rather than changes to flag policy.

Before the vote, Wright thanked residents on both sides for participating and encouraged continued civic engagement.