Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Funding Flagpole topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Puallup council approves $150,000 America 250 flagpole after heated public debate
Summary
After more than an hour of public comment and council debate, Puallup approved one-time funding from tier‑three reserves for a 100‑foot memorial flagpole for America 250, with an amendment to create a memorial fund and a pledge to fly only the U.S. flag; opponents urged private funding and alternatives for veterans and urgent infrastructure needs.
Council Member King and other backers framed the proposal as a memorial to veterans and a lasting tribute for the city’s 250th‑anniversary observance. "This isn’t about politics, ideology, or political parties. Tonight is about honoring 250 years of American sacrifice," Council Member King said in the debate before he proposed an amendment to establish a community memorial fund to accept private donations.
The project introduced by City Manager Steve Kirkley included a DOT/contractor estimate of roughly $149,000 to install a 100‑foot pole, lighting and a 20x30‑foot flag at a North Meridian site tied to the SR‑167 gateway project. Kirkley told the council the city’s tier‑three funds include roughly $10 million, with about $5 million earmarked for public safety facilities and the remainder available for one‑time capital projects.
Residents in public comment were split. Joseph Columbo (District 2) urged council to reject taxpayer funding and redirect the money to infrastructure, saying, "I respectfully ask the council to vote no on this proposal and instead reallocate these funds toward the projects that address the city's most pressing needs." Several speakers raised ongoing costs such as flag replacement, specialized lighting and maintenance; Libby Bristol warned replacement flags could cost "$4,000 to $6,000 each." Others, including several veterans, urged the city to honor service members with a visible memorial.
Opponents on council said the timing and optics were wrong. Council Member Smallco said she "cannot support" spending public dollars on a decorative structure while residents face affordability and public‑safety needs and urged private funding or alternative uses such as scholarships, weatherization or youth programs. Council Member Adler also opposed funding from the city’s tier‑three balance, saying the proposal had become politically divisive even though he supports veterans generally.
Supporters argued the project is a modest one‑time commitment to remembrance and proposed a hybrid approach. Council Member King’s amendment would launch a memorial 250 community fund to solicit donations through the end of 2026; the motion recorded that the memorial flagpole would fly only the flag of the United States in perpetuity. Deputy Mayor Johnson made the motion to approve and fund the memorial project with the King amendment; the motion was seconded and carried by voice vote after discussion. A single explicit dissent was recorded during the roll call of voices.
Council members asked staff to return with clarifying details on maintenance responsibilities and permitting: the proposed location is within state right‑of‑way on North Meridian; the city would own and maintain the pole if installed on the state right‑of‑way and would finalize any agreements with WSDOT. Several council members urged the proponents to seek private contributions to offset or reimburse the public portion, and some pledged personal donations.
The council’s decision: approve initial funding from tier‑three one‑time capital funds with King’s amendment to solicit private contributions and a commitment that the pole will fly only the U.S. flag. The motion passed by voice vote; council instructed staff to return with any required agreements and the final budget details and to schedule a dedication (Council Member King suggested July 4, 2026).
