Councilmember Gina Driscoll proposed two official flag variations — a “Harmony” flag and a “History” flag — for the City of St. Petersburg and asked the council to direct the mayor to fly them at city facilities on appropriate dates.

The proposal was referred to a committee of the whole for discussion on Oct. 23 after a lengthy exchange among council members, legal staff and public commenters about process, community outreach and the risk of state preemption.

Driscoll said the flags were intended as “variations” on the official city flag to recognize history and community harmony and described the designs as inclusive. “I want these to be evergreen and all-encompassing,” she said, noting the images were created by local artists and paid for with private funds.

The item prompted sustained public comment. Artist Andrea Paulus, who said she designed the flags, urged approval and framed the flags as an artist-led response to recent erasures of public murals: “Art is a great communicator of culture and value,” Paulus said. Resident Keandra Darling, who identified herself as a fourth-generation St. Petersburg descendant, called the flags “symbols of belonging.” Paul Fontaine, dialing in by Zoom and identifying himself as one of the organizers of a sidewalk-chalking event after the mural removal, said the flags matter to both LGBTQ people and straight allies who asked for flags.

Council members debated two central issues: (1) whether the city should act quickly to adopt and fly the flags as a visible response to the mural removal; and (2) whether a deliberate process—committee review, broader public outreach and legal vetting—should precede formal adoption. Several members, including Vice Chair Sher Hanowitz and Councilmember Corey Givens Jr., emphasized the need for community input and coordination with arts advisory bodies. Councilmember Mike Harding said he could not support changing or adding official city flags because the city flag should represent all 280,000 residents.

City attorneys advised the council that municipalities are subject to state law and that the state has, in recent legislative sessions, considered bills that would limit municipal flags and the use of municipal seals. The attorney’s office representative reminded the council that “municipalities are created by the state and can be abolished by the state” and that any approach should consider legal risk and potential preemption.

After debate the council voted to refer the resolution to the committee of the whole for Oct. 23; the referral passed on a recorded vote. The motion to refer was made by Councilmember Gina Driscoll and seconded; recorded voting results were announced by the clerk as passing with six yes, two no and one absence, with Councilmember Mike Harding recorded as voting no and Councilmember Brandy Gabbard recorded absent. The referral directs council and administration to bring community input and recommended next steps back to the full council at the Oct. 23 meeting.

The committee-of-the-whole discussion is expected to include results from a city outreach survey the administration ran, notes from an earlier joint Arts Advisory/Public Art Commission discussion, and recommended options that attempt to balance visibility for affected communities and legal durability. Driscoll said she had privately commissioned the designs to accelerate a visible response and offered to work with council and administration going forward.

The referral does not itself adopt or place new flags into circulation; it asks staff and council to return with options that reflect public input and legal review. The committee meeting is scheduled for Oct. 23, 2025.