Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Community Culture topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents urge San Ramon council to keep flying Pride flag amid commemorative‑flag policy review

San Ramon City Council · April 28, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

More than a dozen residents urged the City Council during public comment to continue flying the Pride/progressive flag at the commemorative pole and to use a stakeholder process before changing the policy; speakers cited mental‑health and safety evidence for LGBTQ youth.

Dozens of San Ramon residents used the public‑comment period to press the City Council to continue a five‑year tradition of raising the Pride (progressive) flag at the city’s commemorative pole and to ensure any policy review includes community stakeholders.

Jamie Wolf, a long‑time resident, said visible civic support has measurable effects. "Clear support matters and paints San Ramon as a safe and compassionate community where LGBT folks can feel welcome," she told the council.

Speakers cited national and academic statistics about violence and suicide risk in LGBTQ populations and urged the council to treat the commemorative flag as government speech that affirms inclusion. "The pride flag is symbolic. It's a historic symbol of their struggle," said Anur Radha Gupta, president of PFLAG Danville‑San Ramon Valley, who asked the council to commit to a stakeholder process before any policy changes.

Several speakers said the practice had already been limited by where the flag was flown and called for more visible, year‑to‑year commitments and concrete supports for the community. The council closed public comment after hearing 22 speakers on multiple topics; staff later clarified that the current review pertains to the city’s broader commemorative‑flag policy rather than a single‑flag decision.

No formal action was taken at the meeting on the commemorative‑flag policy; residents asked the council to report back with a transparent, stakeholder‑driven process if the policy review moves forward.