A Flag Is Not a Billboard—And a Mayor Is Not a Monarch On the eve of Utah’s flag law taking effect, the Salt Lake City mayor proposed not one, but three new city flags—each emblazoned with activist color schemes and branded as “official” simply because they include the Sego Lily. This is not leadership. It’s ideological defiance wrapped in municipal technicality. Let’s be clear: the spirit of HB77 was simple and noble. It was not about banning expression—it was about removing divisive symbols from government buildings and restoring a sense of shared civic space. For too long, public institutions have been turned into ideological battlegrounds, where one group’s banner becomes another’s exclusion. HB77 reaffirmed that government spaces should unite, not segregate by identity or cause. Public buildings belong to everyone—regardless of politics, race, gender, or creed. That’s why HB77 limited flags to those representing the nation, the state, and official municipal identities—symbols that belong to all of us, not just some of us. By twisting that framework to smuggle in ideologically loaded designs under the guise of city flags, the mayor has subverted the law’s intent and cheapened the very idea of inclusive governance. This isn’t about inclusion. It’s about institutional favoritism. When a government adopts flags based on identity categories—be it sexuality, race, or ideology—it doesn’t bring people together. It draws lines. It replaces civic unity with tribal signaling. Salt Lake City deserves better. Our capital should model lawful unity, not partisan resistance theater. This precedent is not progressive. It’s reckless. Mayor Mendenhall should respect both the letter and spirit of the law—and remember that public symbols are meant to bind us together, not brand us apart. @LindsayOnAir @VoteTrevorLee @danmccay