Jun. 11—The Santa Fe City Council has approved spending nearly half a million dollars on legal representation to fight a lawsuit demanding restoration of the toppled Plaza obelisk.

The costs could continue to rise beyond the more than $454,000 approved so far for an outside law firm if the civil case — filed by Union Protectíva de Santa Fé against the city and Mayor Alan Webber — goes to trial as scheduled in September.

“Ideally, we’d get summary judgment, which would stop it from going to trial,” City Attorney Erin McSherry said.

Union Protectíva President Virgil Vigil, one of Webber’s harshest critics, said in an interview Tuesday, “The city is paying a lot of money for this.”

Known as the Soldiers’ Monument, the obelisk was built in the late 1860s in honor of Civil War Union soldiers who died on New Mexico battlefields.

One inscription on the base of the monument also dedicated it to U.S. soldiers who died in battle against “savage Indians” — language that drew criticism for decades, even after the word “savage” was scratched away in the 1970s. The obelisk was toppled by protesters on Indigenous Peoples Day in 2020 amid a nationwide movement calling for racial justice.

Union Protectíva, a Hispanic fraternal organization, sued the city and Webber in state District Court in June 2021, accusing Webber of violating state historic preservation rules by calling for the obelisk’s removal a year earlier, several months before it was toppled.

The mayor’s call to remove the obelisk and two other controversial monuments in the city came as Indigenous activists were planning a protest on the Plaza. However, only one of them — a statue depicting Spanish conquistador Don Diego de Vargas — was removed from public property in June 2020. An overnight effort to dismantle the Plaza obelisk that month was halted when a crew damaged the top of the monument; an obelisk on federal property honoring Kit Carson was left standing.

As the costs of the lawsuit have continued to mount, the obelisk has remained stored in pieces, and its base is nearing its fourth year encased in a large wooden box in the middle of the Plaza.

Meanwhile, the Kit Carson monument, also encased in a wooden box to protect it, was damaged in August 2023. No one has been charged with the crime.

A trial date for the lawsuit is set Sept. 9, with a pretrial conference July 22.

While the city aims to avoid a trial, Kenneth Stalter, a lawyer representing Union Protectíva, said he believes it is “very likely” the case will go to trial.

Both sides initially were ordered by a judge to go through mediation, an effort that was unsuccessful.

Along with representation by the city’s staff attorneys, Webber and the city are represented by outside attorneys from the Modrall Sperling Law Firm. In December, the City Council approved a $40,000 increase in the firm’s contract, bringing the total to about $324,000.

McSherry said that would be enough to last the city through the discovery phase of the civil case, an evidence sharing process.

At its latest meeting May 29, the council approved an addition of $120,000, putting the contract total at $454,000.

How far that money will go is unclear. A memo requesting the contract increase said the cost of fully litigating the case “will depend on numerous factors.”

McSherry said the increase might be enough to go through the trial phase.

The city has filed several motions in the case, including one seeking dismissal of the lawsuit in the months after it was filed. A judge denied the motion in January 2022.

A more recent motion seeks a summary judgment and another contests one of Union Protectíva’s expert witnesses.

Vigil declined to say how much his organization has spent on the lawsuit so far.

“It’s not chump change, I’ll say that much,” he said.

However, Vigil said the organization is “financially strong,” and its members have approved spending “whatever it takes to protect our history, culture and traditions.”

Former Santa Fe County Treasurer Pat Varela told The New Mexican in 2020 the organization had an estimated $14 million in real estate assets. Vigil said Tuesday the organization invests most of its money in property and recently purchased a building for $400,000.

One of Union Protectíva’s main responsibilities is to help pay for burials for its members when they die. Vigil said the organization had hoped to increase the amount of the funeral costs it covers but has put that goal on hold while the lawsuit is pending.

“If we win, we will, because the city will be paying everything back and more,” he said.

During a deposition in February, Webber said he had turned to Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham for advice, and that she recommended he do nothing to address the growing conflict over the obelisk. Lujan Grisham harshly criticized his description of her involvement after details of the deposition were published in The New Mexican.

“She threw him under a bus and ran him over a couple times,” Vigil said.

The city’s legal fees are in addition to $254,000 it paid to contractor Artful Life in 2021 for a yearlong process of gathering input on how to move forward with the obelisk and other public monuments and artworks that have created cultural conflicts. The process led to several recommendations, but few actions have been taken on them.

City Councilor Michael Garcia said he and other councilors have a resolution sitting in the City Attorney’s Office directing staff to determine the obelisk’s ownership — an issue that emerged as Webber called for its removal.

Garcia said he was told by city staff several years ago the city did not own the monument.

McSherry said, however, the city came to own the obelisk in the early 1900s and she does not believe there is ambiguity about its ownership.

“The territorial legislature purchased it, put it on federal land, and the feds gave us the land,” she said.

There were carveouts for some other structures, including the federal courthouse, “but there was not a carveout for anything on the Plaza,” she said.

No documents indicate the state believes it owns the property, she added.

A 2023 City Council resolution calling for restoration of the obelisk in an updated form was withdrawn following widespread criticism.

Garcia said he is not aware of plans for new legislation regarding the obelisk but said taking action on the monument is “the next step” for the council after making a decision about two controversial statues.

The city announced plans last month to place a city-owned sculpture depicting runners from the 1680 Pueblo Revolt, never before displayed, outside the Santa Fe Community Convention Center and to temporarily place the de Vargas statue in the New Mexico History Museum until a more permanent location is chosen.

A resolution on the plan was introduced before the council May 29, when a number of people spoke out in disagreement. The resolution is scheduled for a final vote Wednesday evening.

Vigil said it is likely some members of his organization will show up at Wednesday’s meeting to speak, but the group believes the measure has enough votes to pass and does not expect that to change.