LOCK HAVEN -- Lock Haven City Council voted 3-4 this week to keep a previous use-request as-is following public outcry.
Discussion surrounding flags and the city's resolution first began after council, in a 4-2 vote, elected to place a Christian flag in Triangle Park for the month of April.
Since the vote in February, city residents and other members of the public have voiced opposition to the move. Many cited the ties to Faith Month -- implemented by the Concerned Women for America -- that was used to explain why the request was made.
It was noted during previous meetings, the CWA was classified as an LGBTQ+ hate group by Southern Poverty Law Center, which led to many's concerns. Others noted the use of the word "faith" implies other religions and not just Christianity.
Following the discussion, council elected to direct City Manager Gregory Wilson to review the city's current flag policy -- adopted via resolution in 2023 -- with Solicitor Justin Houser, and provide other options to ensure the city was remaining within the confines of the law.
The resolution presented was struck down in a 4-3 vote, with Councilmember Steve Stevenson requesting Wilson and Houser draft a new resolution which would bar any flags except the American and POW/MIA flags being displayed in Triangle Park.
Before council began discussion about the amended policy, it first considered amending or rescinding the use request that began the discussion.
On its agenda under use-requests was a consideration to amend or rescind the adopted motion from Feb. 26 for the installation of Easter crosses in Triangle Park and to hang the Christian flag on the Triangle Park flag pole for April.
The use request was submitted by city resident Bill Stankiewicz and initially indicated both were also endorsed by Richard Wallace and the Swissdale United Methodist Church. Wallace serves as the church's pastor.
However, Stankiewicz provided clarification about the intent behind both use requests before council's vote on Monday.
Stankiewicz said he submitted the request for the three crosses -- which was approved unanimously in 2023 -- for Triangle Park with the assistance of Swissdale United Methodist, who provides the liability insurance.
"The petition submitted for this year was, again, for three crosses with insurance to be covered by Swissdale United Methodist Church and their pastor, Richard Wallace, to conduct prayer opportunities during Holy Week and a Sunrise Service on Easter Morning," he said.
City Manager Gregory Wilson clarified the requested services were not up for approval because they would take place in a public park -- of which members of the public are encouraged to gather. Use requests, he said, must be filed if the event involves a form of liability, such as the crosses.
Stankiewicz emphasized that he personally requested the Christian flag be flown in Triangle Park.
"I personally, individually, requested the Christian flag be flown under the American flag for the month of April as recognition of Faith Month," he said. "Richard Wallace and the Swissdale church were never to be included or associated with any part of that request."
Stankiewicz said when he inquired about the process, he was told he could place both requests on one form after learning the space under the American flag was unoccupied.
"I had no idea that this action would have developed in the way in which it has," Stankiewicz. "I submit it was not to tie Richard Wallace or the Swissdale church in any way to the flag request of the petition. Their involvement was solely for the required liability insurance associated with use of the space."
Council ultimately voted to keep the use-request vote as-is in a 3-4 vote after Councilmember Rick Conklin motioned to split the requests and revote.
Before a vote could be made, Councilmember Heather Alexander asked if the vote should take place after council considered an amendment to its flag policy -- an item listed under unfinished business on its agenda.
Mayor Joel Long directed the question to Houser, who was asked to attend Monday's meeting.
Houser said if council wanted advice he would prefer that discussion be held in executive session.
"In the case there's any factual questions or basic questions that can be answered here in a public setting. As far as the impact to the city, I'd prefer to do that in executive session," he said.
Councilmember Steve Stevenson said he was fine to discuss it or not but felt the use request needed to remain as-is.
"At the time it was presented to us, we accepted that when we voted to do it," he said. "Let that pass... and then work under unfinished business to vote on an amended policy."
Stevenson said amending the motion could be considered a "bait and switch" and felt the city could be held liable for that change.
Council's regular meeting was put on hold while members held an executive session for roughly 20 minutes.
At its return, Stevenson reiterated his original point.
"I don't think (amending it) fixes what problem we may have. If you want to vote on that, I don't know if I can support splitting the two," he said.
Councilmember Jeff Brinker said he felt the motion on the table was not "conducive to the law that I read last time with Shurtleff vs. Boston."
Councilmember Barbara Masorti noted that, if the motion were to pass and the request split, it didn't mean the flag request wouldn't be approved anyway.
"We're just saying let's have the vote for the use of the park be one thing and the other be separate," she said.
Ultimately the motion was struck down with Masorti, Conklin and Councilmember Tami Brannan voting in favor. Voting against the motion were Councilmembers Stevenson, Alexander, Brinker and Long.