[riker]

Edmonton's current flag fails. Our flag, which has been around since the 60s, is a complex coat of arms and hard to make out at a distance. It also feels very... colonial.

Great flags are a massive source of civic pride. They anchor a city’s "placeness"—that feeling that makes a place actually feel like home. Look at Chicago or Amsterdam. Their flags are everywhere because they’re simple, bold, and iconic. People are happy to drape them over balconies or wear them on shirts because they’re proud to say, "this is where I live."
We had an effort to redesign it back in 2016, but it didn't cross the finish line. That project stalled largely because the design didn't resonate—it felt too abstract and lacked the kind of deep, recognizable symbolism that sticks with people.

I’ve been messing around with a new idea that I think could work better, continuing to use the Canadian Pale layout. Since our current flag uses this structure, keeping it would be a subtle nod to our country. It means the central vertical panel is wider than the two outer panels, creating a perfect, prominent space to highlight our central symbol. It’s a classic, balanced, and visually striking format that elevates the emblem rather than letting it get lost in a busy background.

The concept: The Magpie
I’ve settled on the magpie as the central symbol. They’re everywhere, they’re smart, and they’re tough enough to handle our winters. They are so ingrained in our local identity that Edmonton officially voted the black-billed magpie as our city's official bird in May 2025.
I’m picturing five magpies in an upward arc. This number works on two levels:

• History: They represent the five towns/settlements that came together to make Edmonton: Beverly, North Edmonton, Jasper Place, Fort Edmonton, and Strathcona.
• Symbolism: The five can also represent the essential elements of this place—the sky, the flora, the animals, the water, and the people—drawing inspiration from the interconnectedness central to Indigenous worldviews.

I’m not a graphic designer, but I have a vision and some rough concepts.
I’m looking for a local designer or anyone who knows their way around vector software who might be interested in helping me polish this into a professional file. I am also looking for thoughts and suggestions. As the city welcomes more people, this is an opportunity to imprint a sense of pride and unity for the place we call home.

 

[Yeggy]

A new flag was presented to Iverson.

It was designed by an indigenous individual based on the elements that were important to Edmonton’s original inhabitants.

 

[Yeggy]

I suspect the prov gov’t needs to actually approve a change and no way the current UCP are ever going to get rid of the current flag that was likely made by some old white guy.

 

[riker]

A new flag was presented to Iverson.

It was designed by an indigenous individual based on the elements that were important to Edmonton’s original inhabitants.

View attachment 743962

I referenced that flag but when it came out it was unfortunately mocked. I don't like it and I think it comes down to the rules of vexillology.
1. Keep it simple: it should be easy enough for a child to draw
2. Use meaningful symbolism
3. Use 2 to 3 basic colours
4. No lettering or seals
5. Be distinctive or be related

I find these rules a bit too restricting and European because they fall the rules that heraldic banners would use. So I think viewing them as general guidelines is best. There are some great flags that break 2 or 3 rules, like Brazil.

I think the main thing that didn't work with the proposed redesign was the geometry and the colours. Green, purple, yellow, blue and white is 5 colours and they don't particularly go together.

I suspect the prov gov’t needs to actually approve a change and no way the current UCP are ever going to get rid of the current flag that was likely made by some old white guy.

And no, the MGA allows cities to change their own symbols and corporate slogans without provincial approval.

 

[constance_chlore]

A new flag was presented to Iverson.

It was designed by an indigenous individual based on the elements that were important to Edmonton’s original inhabitants.

View attachment 743962

I think this flag was proposed by sculptor Ryan McCourt, who I don't think is Indigenous (could be wrong). But it was selected via a contest judged by First Nations leaders and gifted to Don Iveson by Randy Ermineskin.

(For what it's worth, I like this flag and think it's important for flags not to be too... well, flaggy.)

 

[ChazYEG]

There are some great flags that break 2 or 3 rules, like Brazil.

Brazil's flag only "breaks" one, the lettering part.

1 - It is easy enough for a child to draw: a rectangle, a diamond and a circle
2 - it has LOADS of meaningful symbolism: the stars over the blue orb symbolize the 26 States + Federal District, and the stars are arranged to reflect the most important constellations in the southern skies; the green background with the yellow diamond are the traditional colours and banner of the house of Orleães e Bragança, the Portuguese dynasty that conquered and ruled Brazil from 1500 to 1889 (first as a colony and then separately as the Imperial Family of Brazil from 1822 to 1889). Originally, instead of the blue orb + stars, it had the coat of arms of the Imperial Family, and prior to that, the same spherical astrolabe that is in Portugal's flag.

The green and yellow were re-signified after the end of the monarchy to represent the historically two largest resources in Brazil: forests (and the abundance of unique nature in general) and gold (and mineral reserves as a whole).
3 - It uses 3 basic colours:Green, Yellow and Blue
4 - That is broken, however the lettering is minimal and not particularly relevant at all anymore.
5 - It is both distinctive AND related, so pick your poison here

sorry for the small rant, but just because the symbolism isn't known in the anglosphere doesn't mean it isn't there. Sometimes (like most countries in Latin America), such symbolism goes deeper and further into the past than even famous flags, like the Union Jack.

 

[riker]

Brazil's flag only "breaks" one, the lettering part.

1 - It is easy enough for a child to draw: a rectangle, a diamond and a circle
2 - it has LOADS of meaningful symbolism: the stars over the blue orb symbolize the 26 States + Federal District, and the stars are arranged to reflect the most important constellations in the southern skies; the green background with the yellow diamond are the traditional colours and banner of the house of Orleães e Bragança, the Portuguese dynasty that conquered and ruled Brazil from 1500 to 1889 (first as a colony and then separately as the Imperial Family of Brazil from 1822 to 1889). Originally, instead of the blue orb + stars, it had the coat of arms of the Imperial Family, and prior to that, the same spherical astrolabe that is in Portugal's flag.

The green and yellow were re-signified after the end of the monarchy to represent the historically two largest resources in Brazil: forests (and the abundance of unique nature in general) and gold (and mineral reserves as a whole).
3 - It uses 3 basic colours:Green, Yellow and Blue
4 - That is broken, however the lettering is minimal and not particularly relevant at all anymore.
5 - It is both distinctive AND related, so pick your poison here

sorry for the small rant, but just because the symbolism isn't known in the anglosphere doesn't mean it isn't there. Sometimes (like most countries in Latin America), such symbolism goes deeper and further into the past than even famous flags, like the Union Jack.

I was merely using Brazil as an example of a great flag that doesn't strictly adhere to the vexillology rules. I believe the rules should be general followed with some (colours, simplicity) being more important than others.
In the context of Edmonton's flag, the 2016 proposal broke every single rule and that is why it doesn't "feel" like a flag.
I believe if there was a community-led initiative with a very strong proposal, it would have legs to be formally adopted.