Starting next year, Pittsburgh will officially recognize Indigenous Peoples’ Day on the second Monday of October, the same day as Columbus Day. City Council passed a bill 6 to 3 to establish the holiday — a vote that came just a day before the city fights another round in its legal battle to take down a statue of Christopher Columbus in Schenley Park.
Establishing the new holiday is an attempt to "better understand the complete history of European colonialism and its impacts on Native American communities, as well as Native American resilience and contributions to our society in the United States,” said Councilor Barb Warwick, who sponsored the bill to establish the holiday.
Pittsburgh will join nearly 200 other cities that mark Indigenous Peoples’ Day on their official calendar. More than a dozen states have also embraced the holiday.
But not all council members were on board Tuesday. Councilors Anthony Coghill, Bruce Kraus and Theresa Kail Smith voted against the bill. Each expressed concern that the measure didn’t receive enough public scrutiny without a hearing. The bill’s passage was expedited after it was first introduced last week.
Coghill said such a divisive issue called for a “public robust conversation,” that includes indigenous Pittsburghers as well as those against changing the city’s calendar.
“I certainly support indigenous people. They should have their day,” Coghill said. “But the perception is that this is to replace Columbus.”
Warwick opposed holding up the effort for a public hearing. She argued that such an event would subject indigenous people to “racist and disparaging” comments.
“I really don't think that our Native American communities need to sit and listen to more of that,” she said.
Indigenous Peoples’ Day is not a federal holiday, though Columbus Day is. Some argue that Columbus Day is a celebration of Italian-American heritage, while others contend it glorifies the genocide of Native Americans and the slave trade in the Americas.
Kail Smith revealed that council members had received a letter from Pennsylvania state Senator John DiSanto that urged them to vote against the change. The letter touted DiSanto's recent resolution to dedicate the month of October to honoring Columbus’ role in Italian-American history, and criticized council members.
“I oppose this action because it is an attack on Americans of Italian heritage, for whom Columbus Day was designated a federal holiday,” DiSanto said. “I believe the City of Pittsburgh has made a grave mistake in adopting this change.”
But Warwick dismissed those concerns, noting that her bill doesn’t remove Pittsburgh’s recognition of Columbus Day. She added that honoring indigenous communities on the same day as Christopher Columbus was intentional.
“The purpose of having it on the same day is to acknowledge that for over 200 years, we’ve been celebrating the ‘discovery of America’ without acknowledging the impact that it had on indigenous populations,” she said. “It’s [about] making space for indigenous people … these days are inextricably intertwined.”
After members passed the bill Tuesday, Kail Smith motioned to hold a public hearing anyway. That motion carried, though the hearing has not yet been scheduled.
Meanwhile, the city is scheduled to appear in Commonwealth Court Wednesday to defend its effort to remove a statue of Christopher Columbus from Schenley Park in Oakland.
The city’s Art Commission unanimously voted to remove the towering, 67-year-old bronze statue in 2020 amid a nationwide racial reckoning that triggered the removal of dozens of statues of confederate generals and other controversial figures. But three years later, Columbus still stands in Schenley, though covered in plastic tarps.
That’s because attorneys for the Italian Sons and Daughters of America (ISDA) filed a lawsuit against the city to prevent the statue’s removal. The lawsuit alleges that a 1955 ordinance that directed the city to build the statue means the city must also pass an ordinance to remove it.
The city argues it has the authority to remove a statue from city property. A Common Pleas Court judge agreed a year ago, citing a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that governments have the right to regulate monuments that represent “government speech” on public property.
But the ISDA appealed the ruling, setting the stage for Wednesday’s proceeding.
