A statue intended to recognize local Native American tribes won’t go up in Burlington’s Battery Park after the city council voted to reject the gift on Monday night.
The 11-1 vote came after councilors heard overwhelmingly from people who believe the four tribes recognized by the state of Vermont are illegitimate. The most outspoken on that point have been members of the two Western Abenaki nations based in Québec: Odanak First Nation and Wôlinak First Nation. Supporters of their cause crowded city hall on Monday and derided the statue, which was intended to replace one of Abenaki Chief Greylock.
“A public monument is not neutral. It tells the public whose voices matter and whose identities are recognized,” said Denise Watso, a member of the Odanak Abenaki who lives in New York. “This proposal, this proposed statute, is offensive to Greylock’s descendants.”
The new statue was meant to replace a large piece that had been installed in Battery Park in 1987. After decades of exposure to the elements, the work had degraded to the point of collapse. The sculpture, made by former Soviet artist Peter Wolf Toth as part of his “Whispering Giant” series, had become associated with 18th-century Abenaki Chief Greylock.
In 2022, using funds dedicated by the Burlington City Council, the Abenaki Nation of Missisquoi commissioned Jay artist Brandon Wilson to create a large-scale public piece of art. Once it was determined in 2024 that the Toth statue needed to be removed, the Missisquoi Abenaki offered the city Wilson’s $20,000 wooden sculpture to replace it. Another $25,000 in city funds was set aside to install the piece. The wooden pillar prominently features the sculpted face of an Indigenous man above the words “Missisquoi Abenaki” and below an image from the Abenaki flag.
But a contentious fight around the legitimacy of the Missisquoi Abenaki has grown more intense during recent years. The Québec-based Odanak Abenaki have repeatedly alleged that the Missisquoi are not true descendents of the Abenaki tribes indigenous to the region, and that their claim is itself an attempt to dispossess the true descendants of the Abenaki. The Missisquoi Abenaki have strenuously denied these accusations.
While councilors seemed poised to accept the statue in February, they ultimately punted the decision to their Racial Equity, Inclusion and Belonging Committee amid objections from members of the Odanak Abenaki and Wôlinak, as well as state Rep. Troy Headrick (I-Burlington).
The REIB committee ultimately recommended that the council accept the statue, but the committee’s chair, Councilor Laura Sánchez-Parkinson (P-Ward 3), said on Monday that she would be voting “no.” The decision before the council was the consideration of a gift, she acknowledged, but also a chance to reconsider the 2022 resolution that paid for the statue.
Without taking sides on the legitimacy of either tribe, Sánchez-Parkinson said that such a fraught work of art could not be accepted without more community input and consideration of its full impact.
“My vote tonight is not to run away from this difficult conversation, but instead to lean in,” Sánchez-Parkinson said. “I would welcome anyone who would be open to discussing how our community can engage in deeper learning on how to move forward towards engaging and supporting our Indigenous communities.”
Her fellow councilors tended to agree. While careful to emphasize they were not taking sides, they were also unwilling to support the gift amid what they described as legitimate questions around Indigenous identity. Councilors repeatedly emphasized that they wished to avoid causing harm to any community by installing a piece of art.
Councilor Allie Schachter (D-East District) bemoaned the drawn-out decision and said she wished there were a better process in place for working through complicated issues before they reached the council.
“I think we need to continue to wrestle with how we honor the histories of this land and this place, and the role that we, as a city, have in doing that,” she said.
Councilor Sarah Carpenter (D-Ward 4) was the only councilor who voted to accept the gift. She said the council’s role was to give perfunctory approval. It was not, she said, the council’s role at this stage to consider the broader implications of the work after it had already been vetted by Burlington City Arts.
Colin Storrs, public art manager for BCA, said the advisory committee that approved the statue did so under a narrow set of guidelines that did not take its stormy political context into consideration.
Headrick, Watso and University of Vermont history professor Daniel Massell, an advocate for the Odanak Abenaki’s claim, once again on Monday urged the council to reject the statue. More than a dozen Burlington residents echoed their call, citing the claims of the Odenak Abenaki that the Missisquoi Abenaki are illegitimate.
Many speakers argued that there was no neutral position to take on the issue and that the artwork needed to be rejected on the grounds that there was little genealogical evidence that the Missisquoi Abenaki were descendents of Indigenous people. They also criticized the statue itself for its “cartoonish” and “stereotyping” depiction of Chief Greylock. A member of the Odenak Abenaki tribe who claimed to be a descendant of Chief Greylock even spoke in opposition via video.
A handful of Missisquoi Abenaki defended the project during the meeting’s public comment period. They defended their status and pointed to their official recognition by the state of Vermont. Missisquoi chief Brenda Gagne pointed out that the sculpture was built with city funds for a tribe recognized by the state.
“Remember the harm you didn’t want to cause?” Gagne called out to the council as she left the room following the vote. “You just did.”
Also on Monday, councilors gave final approval to two new city ordinances. One allows increased oversight over the University of Vermont and Champlain College dormitories following complaints brought to the council by UVM students. Another forbids gas stations from placing excessive holds on credit or debit cards, and requires privately owned parking garages and lots to clearly indicate the price of parking along with other information.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
