Kansas bill to change ownership of Shawnee Indian Mission fails. Here’s what that means

The Kansas House Committee on Federal and State Affairs voted against a bill that would have transferred ownership of the Shawnee Indian Mission historical site from the state to the Shawnee Tribe.

Known as HB 2834, the bill called for the Kansas Historical Society to convey the property in Fairway over to the Shawnee Tribe. It restricted gambling or gaming on the property and required the tribe to report to the Joint Committee on State-Tribal Relations every two years for a 10-year period regarding the rehabilitation of the property and consult with other tribes impacted by the National Historic Site.

Since the bill failed, the Kansas Historical Society and its local partners will remain the owners and operators.

The 12-acre site sits in present-day Fairway — formerly 2,000 acres near Turner — and served as a boarding school that housed students from 22 tribes, including the Shawnee Tribe, which required them to perform manual labor and assimilate into white Christian Culture.

Ownership has been a point of tension and debate in recent years as the Shawnee Tribe has attempted several times to obtain ownership of the site, claiming that the state’s ownership has left the three remaining buildings deteriorating, the historical interpretation leaves out key pieces to the site’s history, and the city’s use of the site to host recreational events like yoga classes is inappropriate.

“We are obviously disappointed in the vote today, but we’ve known from the beginning that this might be a long road. We remain undeterred,” Shawnee Tribe Chief Ben Barnes told The Star in an emailed statement. “The Shawnee Indian Mission is a national landmark that deserves to be preserved and protected, and we will continue working to educate leaders about our vision to save this historic site for future generations.”

The City of Fairway, which oversees the daily operations of the site, said in a written statement that it’s grateful to the House Federal & State Affairs Committee “for overwhelmingly voting against HB 2384.”

“We, along with the Kansas Historical Society and the Shawnee Indian Mission Foundation, look forward to continuing and expanding our collective efforts with many Tribal Nations and leaders to grow our knowledge of the Mission and work collaboratively to share its many stories,” the city said.

Concerns about a casino, loss of public access

During Tuesday’s hearing, many committee members spoke against the bill, sharing concerns about loss of public access to the site and fears that the Shawnee Tribe would establish a casino on the site — despite the tribe’s statements in the past that the site would remain open to the public and that the bill’s language prohibits gambling on the grounds.

“I oppose this legislation, primarily because the Shawnee Indian Mission, while not in my district, is very important to the residents of Johnson County,” said Rep. Stephanie Sawyer Clayton, a Democrat who represents Leawood, and parts of Overland Park and Prairie Village. “It’s important we support all of our historic sites because they are important to all communities in the state. I want to see us add more funding to preserving parts of our state’s history”

Brooklynne Mosley, a Democrat who represents Lawrence in Douglas County, voiced her support for the bill.

“Any site that requires kids to cut their hair, lose their language …I’d love to think that Kansas had the kinder and gentler boarding school, but I know that is not necessarily the case because assimilation is violence in itself,” she said. “We are lucky that they just want this site.”

‘I have to support the status quo’

Wyandotte County Representative Louis Ruiz said that the comments during the hearing sent “signals that the tribe can’t be trusted.”

“To insinuate they can’t be trusted because they would put a casino on the land is insulting,” he said.

Johnson County representative Dan Osman, a Democrat who represents parts of Overland Park, also voted against the bill because he believes the state and local partners have done a good job in the site’s upkeep, and that many tribes and people are impacted by the site.

“When you look at whether the Shawnee Tribe has sole claim to it, I don’t think you can come to any legit argument that they do,” Osman said. “For me, I have to support the status quo as the historical society is the best course for this.”

This story was originally published March 18, 2025 at 12:29 PM.