Boonton council advances amendment to flag policy after heated public hearing; mayor vetoes and override attempt fails

Boonton’s town council took up a contentious amendment to the municipal flag-display policy that would permit the town to fly a pride flag in Gracelord Park during Pride Month. After more than two hours of public comment with dozens of speakers presenting both support and opposition, the council voted 5–4 to advance Ordinance 11‑26. Mayor Lynch then announced he would veto the measure; the council’s attempt to override the veto failed to meet the six‑vote threshold, leaving the mayoral veto in place.

Public comment dominated the meeting. Speakers in favor described the pride flag as government speech that signals welcome and safety for LGBTQ residents and youth, citing other New Jersey towns that display the flag and arguing that fears about legal exposure are unfounded. Danielle Jean Fortune, a resident, told the council the claim that flying the pride flag would compel the town to accept all flags was “not grounded in law” and called flying the flag a visible affirmation that some residents currently say they lack.

Opponents urged the council to preserve a single unifying symbol on municipal flagpoles — the American flag — and warned that adopting the amendment would politicize town property and risk division. Several veterans and longtime residents said the town’s flagpoles should remain reserved for national, state and county flags and that the American flag represents unity for the whole community.

Clerk-read emails and written statements submitted before the meeting reflected a similar split: dozens of messages urged passage in support of inclusivity and community safety; dozens more urged rejection to avoid what writers described as politicization of government property.

During council discussion, proponents argued the amended ordinance would establish the pride flag as government speech and follow the U.S. flag code and relevant case law; opponents cautioned that the change could invite legal challenges and open the town to requests to display many other flags. After debate the council voted to advance the ordinance in a 5–4 roll call.

Mayor Lynch placed a brief veto statement on the record, saying he objected to flying flags other than the U.S. flag under town flagpoles and that the change did not have sufficient community consensus. Council members moved to override the veto; a roll-call override vote resulted in five supporting override votes and three opposed, insufficient under local rules that require six affirmative votes to overturn a mayoral veto. The veto therefore held and the ordinance did not become law.

The council also conducted routine business later in the meeting, including introductions of bond ordinances for capital projects and consent‑agenda items. No further action on the flag ordinance occurred at this meeting.