Nov. 2 -- A controversial Santa Fe memorial is the center of attention once again, four years after it was torn down during a protest that ended in several arrests.

Santa Fe city councilors voted Wednesday on a resolution to consider moving the Santa Fe Soldiers' Monument, also known as the obelisk, to the Santa Fe National Cemetery.

The city council and mayor voted 5-4 to begin the process of reconstruction and possibly relocating the monument to the National Cemetery.

Prior to moving the monument, the proposed feasibility investigation would test whether the federal Department of Veterans Affairs would accept the monument at the cemetery. The investigation also formally asks that city managers hire experts to evaluate the costs and services required to rebuild and move the monument.

"After we receive those reports, the governing body will determine next steps regarding the Soldiers' Monument," said Councilor Carol Romero-Wirth, who proposed the resolution with former Councilor Renee Villarreal. The resolution was proposed in February 2023 and has had four amendments since.

"This was an idea that was brought to me by constituents in the spring of 2023, and at the time, I felt like the community was too polarized to pursue the idea," Romero-Wirth said in an interview. "What changed for me was last year, about this time when in Española, the county commission there tried to put the (Juan de) Oñate statue near a county government building, and it resulted in gun violence. Because of that event, and also I think the community is really tired of the status quo, that it would be time to have a conversation."

Three of the four panels on the monument are a memorial to the unnamed Union Army soldiers who died in New Mexican territory during the Civil War. The fourth commemorates soldiers who died in battle during the American Indian Wars.

The proposal would also remove the fourth plaque on the monument that refers to Indigenous people as "savages". The fourth plaque says it commemorates those who died "in the various battles with savage Indians", The word was scratched off the obelisk prior to the 2020 protest.

"The resolution also says that while we don't think we have to, we are willing to consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer and go through the process that set out," Romero-Writh added.

Prior to the removal of the obelisk by protesters, Santa Fe Mayor Alan Webber filed an emergency proclamation in June 2020 that called for the removal of three controversial monuments in the city: the Soldiers' Monument in the Plaza, the statue of Spanish conquistador Diego de Vargas in Cathedral Park and the obelisk dedicated to American frontiersman Kit Carson at the federal courthouse.

In the proclamation, Webber stated, "As a result of the emergency, events have caused or are causing danger of injury or damage to persons and property within the City."

In 2020, protesters tore down the 512 year-old Soldiers' Monument on Indigenous Peoples Day after occupying the Plaza for three days, stating the statue represented violence toward Indigenous people and was a symbol of oppression. Since then, the remainder of the obelisk is in a box in the center of the plaza.

Spanish fraternal organization Union Protectiva de Santa Fe filed a lawsuit against Webber in June 2021 in state district court, claiming the emergency proclamation violated the 1989 New Mexico Prehistoric and Historic Sites Preservation Act, an act that protects New Mexican historic sites.

The lawsuit argues that the Santa Fe Plaza is listed as a historic place on the National Register of Historic Places, qualifying it for protection under the act.

"Mayor Webber and the City of Santa Fe therefore may not spend public funds in any way that harms the historic character of the Plaza," the complaint stated.

The lawsuit also maintains that Webber was warned by a concerned citizen the day before the obelisk was torn down and failed to take the warning into consideration.

The defense states in court documents that the registration list does not explicitly mention the monument and is not listed on the list as a historic.

The "Soldiers' Monument is not mentioned or referred to in the Significance section of the Property Nomination," according to the findings from Webber's attorney Stan Harris.

In any case, Romero-Writh feels the resolution has everyone meeting in the middle.

"I think where we landed was a compromise," said Romero-Wirth. "If it ultimately goes to the National Cemetery, I think that's a compromise because it's preserving the monument, it's allowing for it to be rebuilt, and it's putting it in context for one of its two original purposes, which is to honor those who fought in the Civil War.

"By putting it in context, the resolution specifically calls out putting it near the graves of the Union soldiers who the monument was originally, by the territorial Legislature, funded to honor. Maybe that's a way; a path forward."