The Minnesota state flag is once again in the news for a controversial bill introduced by eight Minnesota House DFL members. The bill introduced by representatives, Freiberg; Keeler; Fischer; Xiong; Lee, X; Falconer; Hussein and Jones, would penalize cities and counties which fly a flag other than the current design approved in 2022. None of these house members represent southeast Minnesota. The teeth of the legislation would target local government aid (LGA) by penalizing cities and counties financial payments from the state government by 10%. LGA is distributed to smaller, rural governmental entities to equalize the funds which disproportionately favor larger metropolitan areas.
The effort is a reaction to a number of rural towns which have made the decision to fly the 1893 version of the Minnesota State flag, which was replaced by a new design in 2022. The new design has come under fire partially for nostalgia as well as the claim that the new design resembles the Somali flag. The longstanding state flag design was deemed offensive to some as it characterized a native American riding off into the sunset while a white settler plowed the soil. The new design eliminated both the native American and the farmer. The official name for H.F. 5077 is Aid Reduction for Use of Incorrect State Flag.
The 10% penalty, if implemented would impact towns in Dodge County. Last year the State of Minnesota distributed $644 million in local government aid. The majority of these funds reach out state communities. Based on 2025 LGA payments, cities would lose out funding in the following amounts; Claremont $18,740, Dodge Center $89,190, Hayfield $50,035; Kasson $137,115, Mantorville $34,512 and West Concord $34,726.
Even though the H.F. 5077 was introduced, it does not seem to have a legal precedent or good odds of becoming law. There is only one reference in Minnesota code books pertaining to the official state flag. According to Sec. 1.141, “The official state flag shall be flown on the State Capitol grounds at all times between sunrise and sunset.” Doesn’t mention or regulate a local community’s preference of flag in any manner. But it does serve as a reminder that the Capitol seems to have a disdain for Greater Minnesota and a willingness to withhold funds for almost any purpose.
