After resident outcry, Independence says it won’t sell pair of historic mansions
After initiating plans to potentially sell two major historic properties earlier this year, the Independence City Council is changing course.
During a study session this week, council members heard a new resolution stating the city’s intent to keep ownership of the Vaile Mansion and Bingham-Waggoner Estate, two opulent homes built in the 1800s in downtown Independence.
The Mansion and Estate anchor Independence’s historic district, which both council members and volunteers have described as a highlight of the city’s tourism economy.
While some of the city’s other historic sites don’t currently bring in any revenue, Independence City Manager Troy Anderson said in April, custodial societies at both the Vaile and Bingham-Waggoner properties run frequent tours and throw summer festivals.
City officials initially reviewed a historic sites master plan in April that would have seen some historic properties around Independence potentially sold to private landlords, while seeking conservatorships for others, to offset the rising costs of maintaining the buildings.
Instead, officials are now pivoting to “intent to retain ownership” of both properties. The text of the resolution references a future General Obligation Bond that will be presented to Independence voters, which would be used to cover the cost of deferred maintenance needs at both sites.
First District Councilmember John Perkins said Monday that “nobody up here [on the council] has an appetite” to sell the two properties.
“With this, that should put a pause and bring some comfort that we’re not going to offload those sites willy-nilly,” Perkins said.
High maintenance costs
The Vaile Mansion was built in 1881 by a Kansas City architect and donated to Independence in 1983. Its daily maintenance is coordinated by a team of volunteers but partially funded by the city.
The French-inspired Victorian home, which at one point sat on a 630-acre property, recently hosted its annual Strawberry Festival and is currently gearing up for an Independence Day celebration marking the United States’ 250th anniversary.
Meanwhile, Independence has owned the Bingham-Waggoner estate since the 1960s. The city also pays for a portion of the maintenance costs for the 19-acre home built in 1850, with the Bingham-Waggoner Historical Society coordinating upkeep and improvement projects. The mansion played host to an antique and craft fair Thursday and will be open daily for tours through the end of July.
In April, the city retained PGAV Planners, a St. Louis-based firm specializing in urban planning, to build a proposal for rehoming the historic sites. PGAV Planners President Andy Struckhoff said at the time that despite the large pool of volunteers associated with both sites, they’re not enough to keep both buildings running on their own.
Struckhoff previously said that selling off the two main properties would open up funding for the city to better maintain its other historic sites. According to Anderson, the city currently spends up to $150,000 a year on maintenance costs for historic sites.
A general obligation bond would authorize the city to borrow against future tax revenue in order to fund capital repairs and improvements at both properties. A similar bond proposal, which would have put $7 million into the mansion and estate along with the Truman Memorial Building, went before voters last year but did not pass.
Independence Mayor Kevin King said Monday that it would be a “real tragedy” to see the two sites “continue to deteriorate”.
“Each one of us up here is going to work their tail off to make sure that those are protected,” King said.
About $8,000 worth of urgent repairs is currently needed at both the Vaile and Bingham-Waggoner, Anderson previously said. Capital improvements at both sites, he said, would cost an additional $12-15 million.
The city has also considered establishing a conservatorship to oversee the properties’ financial future.
‘Save our sites’
Both historical societies are currently mounting a “Save Our Sites” campaign on social media, urging residents to warn the city against both the potential perils of private ownership and the ongoing possibility of “demolition by neglect”.
Bingham-Waggoner Estate Board President Steve Euritt wrote in April that those who love the city’s historic sites “cannot allow them to be lost to private development or permanent closure.”
City officials met with representatives from both historic sites in May, Perkins said Monday.
The resolution cited a 2023 “Citizen Satisfaction Survey” finding that 92% of residents were in favor of using city resources for historic preservation.
The Vaile Victorian Society declined to comment on the ordinance, saying they’re holding out for a more concrete action plan from the city.
Vaile Victorian Society volunteer Pam Fulmer previously told The Star that the structure could quickly deteriorate beyond repair without municipal dollars and attention, whether from the city or from an external group.
The Vaile Victorian Society keeps the inside of the building clean, updated and period-accurate, while the city maintains the exterior and pays for landscaping and electricity, Fulmer previously said. The costs of major repairs, like updates to the eroding south porch, are split.
The resolution was sponsored by Councilmember John Perkins, whose district includes both sites. Perkins is currently the subject of an active recall effort by neighbors reacting to his vote in favor of $6 billion tax breaks for an incoming $150 billion hyperscale AI data center, among other decisions made throughout Perkins’ 18 years representing the district on and off.
First District residents learned this week that after two rounds of signature collection, they had successfully rallied 8% of registered district voters to sign a petition calling for a vote on his removal. Their certified petition will be presented to the full council Monday, with plans for a districtwide election to follow.
The historic sites ownership resolution will be presented again on June 15 before the full council.
