New Britain City Hall Flag Policy: Records Request to Test Enforcement

Why This Matters

Public-forum law doesn’t live in press releases or policy PDFs.

It lives in how a policy is actually enforced.

If a city claims neutrality, equal access, or content-neutral administration, that claim is only as good as the records created when real requests are handled.

This post documents a Connecticut Freedom of Information request submitted to test how the City of New Britain enforces its City Hall flag-raising policy in practice.

The FOI Request

A formal request was submitted under the Connecticut Freedom of Information Commission framework seeking records sufficient to show how the City of New Britain processes, approves, denies, and documents flag-raising requests at City Hall.

Records requested include:

• All flag-raising requests received by the city within the relevant period
• All approvals, denials, conditions, or modifications related to those requests
• Internal emails, memoranda, or routing records discussing flag requests
• Any logs, calendars, or tracking documents used to manage flag displays
• Communications referencing criteria, discretion, or exceptions

The request does not ask for opinions or justifications.

It asks for artifacts.

The Policy Language

The City of New Britain maintains a written policy governing flag displays at City Hall.

Like most municipal flag policies, it typically asserts some combination of:

• Neutral, content-based criteria
• Administrative discretion
• Procedural requirements for submission and approval
• Statements disclaiming endorsement

Written policies are necessary.

They are not dispositive.

In First Amendment analysis, policy text is aspirational. Enforcement is evidentiary.

The Enforcement Question

The core question is simple and binary:

Does New Britain enforce its flag policy evenly and mechanically, or selectively and discretionarily?

More specifically:

• Are requests handled consistently, regardless of viewpoint or identity?
• Are approvals and denials documented contemporaneously?
• Does actual practice match the policy’s stated criteria?
• Are exceptions created ad hoc?
• Is there a de facto approval process that differs from the written one?

These questions cannot be answered by reading the policy alone.

They can only be answered by reviewing records generated while decisions were made.

What Comes Next

When the city produces records, they will be reviewed and published with minimal editorialization.

The analysis will focus on:

• Process consistency
• Documentation gaps
• Variance between policy and practice

If the records show neutral, even enforcement, that result will stand on its own.

If they show discretionary or selective handling, that result will also stand on its own.

Either way, the records decide.

Method Note

This inquiry does not challenge speech.

It audits administration.

The question is not what the city allows to fly.

The question is whether the rules apply the same way to everyone.