Folks,

Doing a piece for our Preservation column for March issue about railroad museum boardsmanship and wonder how many of our museums require a minimum donation for a board seat?

If you can help, drop me a note at jwrinn@trainsmag.com.

Jim Wrinn
Editor, Trains magazine

Branford Electric Rwy./Shore Line Trolley Museum requires that to be eligible, you either pay dues at a higher rate of $75.00 per year or [just repealed?] make a one-time payment of $500.00 in addition to regular yearly dues of $40.00. However, if nominated by the president and confirmed by a super majority of the Board, no dues are required.
Electric City Trolley Museum Association requires that to be eligible, you make a one-time payment of $100.00 in addition to regular yearly dues.

The danger of requiring a large donation is that the incumbents who write the rules might have to match the donations of a more eager challenger!

The board members of the Pacific Locomotive Assn (Niles Canyon Railway)are the elected positions (pres, vp, treasrer, membership sec, recording sec) plus the general manager. We do not have any monetary requirement other than the yearly dues. Since the board members donate a lot of their free time it would be unfair to expect them to pay any extra. The idea is to get good people in the positions, not the people who have the most money to spend.

At a seminar attended in Elgin IL a few years ago it was STRONGLY suggested that the role of a museum Board member include significant financial support. That may be in the form of personnal donations, or perhaps in fundraising efforts.

Regrettably that concept just does not fit in with most preservation operations of our type. Not that it could not, just that it does not.

Most of the active volunteers that are elected to Board positions have various qualifications and maybe importantly for us, a PASSION for the movement. But most are not independently wealthy or have any experience in fundraising, grant writing, or networking to try to raise funds.

In our more or less democratic form of government it is a big step to think that a Board seat on a museum can be 'bought'. Yet it apparently routinely happens in other museum venues. But perhaps those are more 'honorary' or 'letterhead' board members, lacking the insider knowledge and participation to intelligently make project and operating decisions. So the day to day business of a museum must fall to a group entrusted with that responsibility, and who are not Board members.

This is a very important and overlooked area which could well serve to stabilize and ensure a future for many operations, which are ever being squeezed financially.

But how do we get there??

Bob Kutella

In the art or history museum world the phrase "give, get, or get off" has been used. The implication is that board members should give money, get money or get off the board; meaning that board members are part of the money conduit to the organization.

While this may work with the high-end, gallery type museum, there is a disconnect with the volunteer driven museum. In the high-end museum the board and officers have a vetting process of selecting and nominating board members; in the volunteer museum none of this exists -- it is often a popularity contest.

I contend that the giving part should mean giving time, knowledge or money to the organization. Anyone serving on a governing Board needs to bring vision and purpose to the museum.

The way I see it is that there are two fundamentally different forms of governance for not-for-profit museums, INSIDE Boards and OUTSIDE Boards.

Most traditional museums are organized to have outside Boards, made up of prominent members of the community who are interested in the success of the organization in question and able to help the organzation raise money, but not experts in museum operations, or in the museum's particular subject matter. Althought technically elected by the membership, these individuals are actually chosen by the senior staff and the existing Board, much like public for-profit corporations (those with publicly traded stock). There is seldom any contest for Board elections. Prominent citizens who are willing to accept a Board nomination know they will not be embarrased by losing the election.

The only railway museum that comes to mind that has an outside Board is the B&O Railroad Museum. Most railway museums have inside Boards, made up of workers at that institution, very knowledgeable in the subject manner and familiar with that organization's operations. Board members are typically elected directly by the membership, and the elections can be hotly contested.

Each goverance style has its advantages and disadvantages. I always thought it would be ideal to combine the two into a mixed arrangement. Unfortunately the difference in how Inside and Outside Boards are elected makes that arrangement very difficult.

When the Baltimore Streetcar Museum was organized 40 years ago, it started with a mixed Board. The inside Trustees made up the majority and constituted the Board's Executive Committee. It met monthly and conducted the Museum's business. Those members appointed several outside Public Trustee's, chosen for their interest and prominence in the Community. The full Board only met once or twice a year and discussed issues like fund-raising. Although the public trustees had full voting privileges, they always went along with management recommendations.

I was on the Board in the mid-seventies (as an inside member!) and this approach worked great. Unfortunately it turned out that Maryland law does not allow Trustees to be elected by other Trustees, and it was not reasonable to assume the Public Trustees would be willing to subject themselves to a truly democratic election by the Museum members, so the By-Laws were changed.

I concur with Brian's observations. I think the goal is a blended board where each member contributes money, expertise, or in-kind services as is appropriate for his/her abilities. In that respect everyone should give (something), get (something) or get off.

At National Capital Trolley Museum we have had decent success with adding a community member to our board. The goal would be to have one community member in each rotating three-year class. But we're not there yet.

Pete - I'm not sure about what Maryland law you describe re: trustee self-elections. It happens all the time with the non-profit groups I'm involved with here in Montgomery County, MD.

Wesley

Hi, Pete.

I believe the Lake Superior Railroad Museum in Duluth has an outside board, or at least a blended board. For what it’s worth, they have secured a wonderful display space in downtown Duluth, almost all of their collection is either indoors or under cover, and they adhere to a collections policy that keeps the place from looking like the typical railway museum junkyard. The museum displays have enough explanatory signage to be useful to the average visitor. In all, the place ranks second on my list of railway museums I’ve visited, right behind CSRM in Sacramento (which also has an outside board, I believe) and just ahead of the B&O Museum (although my impressions of that institution were formed more than twenty years ago, and may be out of date).

The San Diego Ry Museum (Pacific Southwest Railroad Museum Association) for a while had an outside board. When this was instituted PSRMA was trying to copy the organization of the museums in Balboa Park (and hopefully their success). In time this created problems and the volunteers had to result to legal action and a monitored election to regain control of the Museum.

=====

As mentioned elsewhere there have been combinations of inside and outside Board members. In most cases, the actual administration is done by the inside members and the community representatives are utilized for their experience, connections and name recognition.

At one time, Seashore Trolley Museum had both kinds of board members.

Actually, this concept can fit into virtually any of our operations if it is structured properly.

I serve on a number of Boards, some involving railroad museums, some involving other nonproft organuzations, and some corporate Boards as well. In the nonprofit area, while I have seen a few of various types of organizations requiring Board Members (Directors) to pay a higher level of dues for the Board seat, they tend to be a rarity. Only one organization where I am a Director requires a financial committment over and above regular membership dues, and that is enforced by requiring each Director to sign a pledge form, stating they will make a "donation in cash or in kind" during their term of office. The requirement does not specify any amount, nor does it mandate a financial gift to the organization.

Most of the organizations represented here at RyPN appear to be volunteer groups, so this might prove a reasonable formula for anyone contemplating such a pledge from their Directors. Giving in kind is often just as important as financial contributions, and we all give in kind simply through our efforts as volunteers.

Well, yes, I think it is a given that a Board member in a volunteer based museum will spend significant time on behalf of the organization. At the seminar, we piped up that some Board members spend 40 hours per week or more, doing Museum business.

The reply was no, that does not count - it is expected. What is looked for is contribution affecting the bottom line - dollars. In fact when applying for some grant money recently we were asked to fill out that same question for our directors.

It is a common measure of their committment to the organization, and others are looking at it.

Bob Kutella

We share a level of frustration in this, Bob. I have heard this same faulty theory advanced by others, and all it really shows is a lack of understanding of the situation on their part. I only hope the rest of this message does not sound like me ranting on about that.

Unfortunately, the so-called "bottom line" is the only thing about business anyone cares to understand lately. I preach that as well, but I also know cash is not the only measure to be used in calculating it. Contributions in kind can be a HUGE part of it, but since that cannot be measured in some arbitrary dollar amount, it is overlooked as "what is expected from members" or Directors in this case.

Okay... Rant off for now... We are not going to change this idea here on just the RyPN website, but we can put it into practice for ourselves, avocate it to others, and hope for the future. I know the contributions in kind by our members and Directors are well recognized, and we shall continue to do that.

That's applying the Big Business Model, both profit and non-profit. Directors and executives are supposed to govern, raise money, build value, and delegate, not do the work of the lesser paid ordinary employees. This way, an unrelated college degree is worth more than practical experience when qualifying for the higher paid positions.

Interesting that your three top picks all have "outside" boards or some version thereof. It is easy to see the link. Managing boards seem to focus on the organization's perceived needs rather than realizing that by meeting the needs of their audience, those internal needs will more easily be met through increased $$, public interest and volunteer pools (to name just three). Outside directors who genuinely care can provide community support when funding is needed or development encroaches. They also make great liaisons to resources possibly unavailable to those closely tied to and spending all of their free time at the museum.

When Boards are composed of worker bees (active voilunteers), typically they are primarily blue collar people. They also tend to get bogged down in trying to micro-manage details.

Outside directors usually are white collar people. They are much better at asking for donations from people who control money who usually are also white collar. They relate to other white collar people better than do blue collar folks. They went to the same colleges and belong to the same business clubs. Usually they are willing to delegate micro-managing to staff.

Some museums have attempted to solve this problem by recruiting white collar people from their membership to serve on their boards. These members often are not the most active ones in the organization.

I suspect that the most successful railway museums are those with the highest proportion of white collar people on their boards. I know this is classist, but I'm afraid it is reality.