Resident Questions Pride Month Flag Raising Decision In Chester

CHESTER, NJ — Last year, the decision was made to not fly the rainbow flag during the month of June in Chester Township in honor of Pride Month.

Chester Township Mayor Mike Inganamort, who was a council member at the time, spoke about the choice at a recent council meeting after a town resident questioned the decision.

In 2021, the Chester Township Council took a vote on a previous request to display the Pride Flag. The vote passed 3-2, with Brian Curley, Tim Drag, and Andrew Inganamort voting yes, and Joseph Di Paolo and Marcia Asdal voting no.

As a compromise, the council decided to place the flag in a different location, an idea proposed by Curley, who thought it would suffice and amended his motion to approve the display of the flag on a flag holder near the door.

In 2022, that decision was reversed, and the council argued that a recent Supreme Court case, Shurtleff v. City of Boston, No. 20-1800, raised enough concern to require that no flags other than the New Jersey and American flags be displayed at town hall.

Neil Cooperman, argues against that logic.

"It was based upon a complete misinterpretation of a Supreme Court ruling, which absolutely did not apply in our situation," Cooperman said. "From my perspective, this was not the reason for not raising the flag; it was a pretext to justify a retreat from a political position that the members of the town council appeared to think might reduce their support from a perceived, more conservative constituency. It was very self-serving. You elected to govern, not to play political games."

When the decision was initially made, back in June 2022, several members of the public spoke out, upset by the choice that the township was making. One resident, Jane Curtis, argued that the mayor should not have been able to overturn the decision that was voted on by the majority of the council.

"That is unacceptable and I am embarrassed," Curtis said.

Cooperman stated last month that he had previously written to each member of the council, expressing his opinion on the decision and questioning the ruling, but no one responded to his inquiry. Cooperman also mentioned that, as of last month, the township was in violation of state law by excluding certain LGBTQ people from marriage license applications on their website.

Read more: Discriminatory Language Found In Chester Marriage License Forms

Chester Township was one of the 28 municipalities in New Jersey to have been cited by the state attorney general's office for alleged discrimination.

The AG's office issued violation notices to Chester's local government. According to the state agency, the towns' municipal websites only allow marriage applicants to list themselves as "m" (male) or "f" (female), which constitutes LGBTQIA+ discrimination.

The practice is inconsistent with the New Jersey Department of Health's marriage-license application. Since 2019, the health agency has included a third gender option for nonbinary people, individuals with undesignated or unspecified gender identities, and others who don't wish to list themselves as male or female.

Nonbinary identity is an umbrella term for those who don't neatly fit into the categories of "man" or "woman" or "male" or "female" as a gender identity.

The AG's office sent Chester notices of violation, advising them to update their application forms. Fines of up to $10,000 may be imposed for such violations. The state provided municipalities with the option of resolving the violations and avoiding fines by:

• Update its websites to state that marriage licenses are available to qualifying couples of all gender compositions.
• Update its websites to include, or link to, the New Jersey Department of Health’s Application for License: Marriage, Remarriage, Civil Union, or Reaffirmation of Civil Union, as well as DOH’s Same-Sex Marriage Frequently Asked Questions.

• Ensure that its website does not contain gender-restrictive language regarding who may obtain a marriage license and that the services the municipality offers will be open to all persons on an equal basis without regard to sex, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or gender expression.
• Adopt a written policy prohibiting discrimination against persons using or seeking to use the municipality’s offerings and services.

Several local officials stated that this was an oversight and that they would update their marriage registration forms. They also stated that their municipalities have not discriminated against same-sex couples filing marriage applications since state law established that protection.

In response to the citation, Inganamort told Patch, "Rather than pick up the phone and advise Chester Township that an old link sat on our website, the Attorney General announced with great fanfare and no advance notice that it would pursue penalties against Chester Township."

"This is the definition of grandstanding. Unfortunately, this performative stunt is further evidence of the State of New Jersey’s punishing attitude toward small towns," Inganamort said. "Coming off 22 percent increases in state-mandated health costs and 19 percent increases in state-mandated pension costs, a monetary penalty over an old link would be especially egregious.”

At the March 21 meeting, no comment was made regarding the citation, but Inganamort said that he suspects there will be more conversations about raising the pride flag in May.

"In full disclosure, I will advocate at that time that we only fly the American flag on the flagpole outside of town hall, which is consistent with my position last year. I think that the American flag flies for everyone," Inganamort said.