Why don’t we display the official flag of the City of Rochester? Perhaps it’s because it was never very popular and is poorly designed. Perhaps it has been hidden away because of its association with our founder, Nathaniel Rochester, who was a known slave owner and trader. As a community, we need to consider whether symbols like this one are truly different from the ones being taken down in other places around the country right now.

Background: In 1910, the city of Rochester adopted a flag with a blue, white and gold background and the family crest of founder Colonel Nathaniel Rochester at its center. The flag has never been widely used and is not currently being displayed in public spaces. In a lot of ways it is “unofficially retired”. 

Instead of flying this flag, the city typically uses the city banner and logo in its place. You probably know it, the banner is blue and white featuring a water wheel that looks like a flower to capture the Flour/Flower City nickname. While it is beautifully designed, it was never intended to be our flag. It’s used on official documents, to communicate the “official” status of certain vehicles and add legitimacy to initiatives. It’s also a trademarked symbol and the city would have to abandon the trademark to make the banner our official flag. So while it’s a nice design that is popular with the community, we recognize the obstacles in using it as the city flag. 

The Request: We are requesting that the Rochester tricolor be removed. In its place we are asking Rochester City Council to support the City Historian in creating a competition to design a new flag with community input and local artist inspiration.

Why the Flag Should be Replaced:

1. The flag and the coat of arms are tied to Colonel Nathaniel Rochester and his family. Rochester was a known slave owner and trader. The use of this imagery is not in line with our community’s values.   
2. While an interesting historical topic, heraldry and old world coats of arms have no place on our banners. Institutionalized social classes and titles are inherently un-American.
3. The flag is actually considered to be quite ugly and was rated poorly by the American Vexillological Association, a group of flag enthusiasts. This negative review was discussed in a 2004 article in the local Democrat and Chronicle.  
4. The flag is not widely used, so it would be an incredibly easy change to make as the community has little to no investment in it currently.  
5. While largely symbolic in nature, the change and subsequent competition would help spread the word about Nathaniel Rochester’s past and our own community’s involvement in the institution of slavery. 
6. Most importantly, a new flag inspired by the resilience and creativity of our community could become a new source of Rochester pride and unity.