The city of Belle Plaine has reportedly received a request from citizens to not fly the Minnesota state flag. New Prague has not received such a request. Over a dozen Minnesota cities and many townships have decided to reject the new state flag. The decision is understandable. Lacking creativity, it looks like a design an elementary student could have created using clip art. To its credit, the new flag addresses Gov. Tim Walz’s “One Minnesota” theme by eliminating the symbolism some folks find offensive. But in today’s ideologically polarized world, one person’s fix creates an offensive image for another.
The new flag has been described as something akin to the flag of Somalia. Its approval was highly partisan and some felt, the old flag, was out of date and racist, depicting the forced removal of Native Americans from land they settled until settlers arrived in the 19th Century and the government forced Native Americans onto reservations.
The seal on the retired flag depicted a white settler plowing land, with his rifle resting on a stump nearby, while a Native America rode away from the scene on horseback. Flag experts believe the state symbol on the retired flag was too complex and hard to recognize at a distance.
Just in case you hoped cooler heads might prevail, a bill in the Minnesota House of Representatives would, if signed into law, assign financial penalties to cities and counties for flying the state flag retired in 2024 rather than the new state flag. KTTC reported the proposal calls for a 10% reduction in state governmental aid to a county or city that uses a state flag with a design different than the certified design approved by the State Emblems Redesign Commission. The bill directs the commissioner of the state Department of Revenue to reduce state aid for the year following any year in which the “incorrect state flag” is being used on governmentowned land.
In the split Minnesota House, Speaker Lisa Demuth (R-Cold Spring) said the DFL bill has “no path forward” in the chamber, KTTC reported. Fortunately, there is currently no companion bill in the DFL-controlled Senate.
Many find the new state flag objectionable not solely because of its symbols, but because its creation was deemed rushed under the control of the DFL legislature. Many feel the new flag was one of many examples of the DFL trifecta (House, Senate and Gov. Walz) passing legislation without considering alternative points of view. Arguablely, those critics were correct. However, during the redesign effort, a commission overseeing the effort received about 20,000 public comments and more than 2,000 submitted designs before identifying its preferred new state flag.
“We were committed to maximum public input in this process,” Anita Gaul, vice chairperson of the redesign committee, told KARE TV. When the new flag was unveiled, Gaul expressed confidence in its broad appeal, calling it “a winning flag that unifies us.”
Not quite. Two years later, the flag has become anything but unifying. Then again, these days, the GOP, especially MAGA Republicans, and DFLers would likely argue whether it was a sunny day or overcast.
Some said the decision on a new state flag should have been decided by voters via a referendum, a move allowing lawmakers who led the creation of the new state flag off the hook. Face it, elected lawmakers are in office to make decisions on what is best for the whole, not hold a moist finger to the wind before casting a vote.
If the objection to the old state flag was its symbolism, why not consider adding the new state seal to the open sky-blue area of the new flag. It might make the new state flag seem more of our own. The Minnesota Reformer described the new state seal as “a nature scene of Minnesota that utilizes official state symbols. Of course, there’s water; wild rice, which is our official state grain; then our state bird the common loon, in an art deco style that includes its notable red eyes; a contemporary North Star; and land with a couple of red pines, which is our state tree.”