Save America's Treasures, the Department of Interior presentation and conservation-oriented grant program that funded the repair of the B&O Museum and the Chapel Car project at the Northwest Railway Museum, among other rail-related preservation projects, has been permanently canceled.

First among many, I fear. Expect the cross hairs to land on Transportation Enhancements when it comes up for its overdue re-authorization.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/inside-washington-pork-barrel-politics-kills-off-historic-preservation-program/2011/03/31/AFsr2X7B_story.html

It was a good program but funding cuts are the rule of the day nationwide. In Pennsylvania and Nevada state universities are facing cuts that many call unthinkable (50%). Some cities in the Northeast are making cuts to police and social services just as murder rates set new records. Finding money for preservation in changing times is just another hurdle to add to the list.

Well, it may be sad on a national level, but the loss of transportation enhancements in Texas will mean squat to real preservation in general, and rail transportation preservation in particular. The money was administered by TxDOT(aka the Highway Department), and rail projects didn't even rate hind Teat status. As far as preservation, enhancement money was used to destroy several historic bridges on little used thoroughfares. So, nope, not gonna effect us down here in the land of Gubner Goodhair at all.

This was news back in October. It was axed from the budget last year.

Yes, it was axed from Obama's proposed budget FY2012 budget in October {correction--I was not quite right about this, see later post] but the President's budget is just that, a proposal. Congress is not bound by it at all. Being left out of the budget was not good, but it was the opening bid not the last hand of the game.

However, on March 18 as part of the continuing resolution to fund government through April 8, Congress took Obama's proposed FY2012 program terminations, brought them forward and applied them immediately in FY2011.

In short, the program was indeed truly terminated three weeks ago, not last fall.

It was axed last fall, since no submissions were even requested for 2011.

From the Washington Post article:

Respectfully, no--the program was not axed in 2010, it actually was extended last fall despite the President's request. It really did die on March 18, 2011.

Even the article Sandy extracts above somewhat botches the real sequence of events. The actual play by play was as follows:

1. February 1, 2010-President proposes elimination of SAT in FY2011 Budget request
2. May 21, 2010--deadline for FY2010 SAT proposal submissions
3. October 10, 2010--Congress approves a continuing resolution allowing government to operate in FY2011 at FY2010 levels, includes $25 million for SAT in FY2011
4. February 1, 2011-FY2010 SAT grants awarded
5. February 18, 2011-President proposes elimination of SAT in FY2012 Budget request
5. March 18, 2011--Congress brings President's FY2012 cuts forward into FY2011, rescinds $25 million appropriated for SAT in FY2011 in the October continuing resolution. This terminates program and cancels the May 2011 award cycle.

Sad news that, there is precious little help over here for any preservation related projects. It would be fabulous if we had something on a par with the national lottery in the UK, whih has helped unbelievable projects happen and allowed the preservation movement to flourish and become a huge source of tourist income for the country.
Still its uncovering and restoring things like my latest ceiling panel on the car that bring satisfaction thats priceless to a project on a shoe string budget......thats why we do this wonderful hobby.
Mike Pannell
Car 57 Cheyenne

Under SAFETEA-LU it put $10 million Federal into the Texas State Railroad. It does seem that other than TSRR the SAFETEA-LU grants were not especially preservation friendly.

ISTEA and TEA-21 were more generous, funding about 30 Texas rail preservation projects since 1991. You can pull all the Texas grants from the TE Clearinghouse database:

http://www.enhancements.org/projectlist.asp

The loss of Save America's Treasures is an example of where an expanded mission for ARM and TRAIN might have been effective. My personal perception is that the railway preservation movement is not very visible, if at all, in the corridors of government at the national and local level.

Please see discussion here. http://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=31173


Wesley

I was able to get a local freight house listed as a Save America's Treasures site. We were authorized to use the name and logo in our fund raising promotion. It was a nice touch although I am convinced we got the listing because FDR wheeled off his train onto the freight house platform to visit Lucy Mercer Rutherford!

Once we were listed it gave us the "right" to compete for SAT grants. We never did as the rules were really geared for high end projects - you had to have paid staff, extensive visitor hours, etc.

My complaint looking at their budget is that they spent a lot of money getting the word out and giving the SAT designation and a much smaller part for actual preservation - to me those numbers should have been reversed.

I am not sure how much of a loss this really is.

Looking over the response to this thread gives me a lot of food for thought in relation to the other thread on a national coalition for railroad heritage.

Here's how I'm starting to see the lay of the land.

We are facing a climate in which public resources will be tight and getting tighter for the foreseeable future. Looking at proposals that are on the table in national politics right now, it seems private resources may be tight and getting tighter too (for example, if retirees or retirees and workers both have to pay much more for healthcare, families more for college, etc.) So there will likely be pressure on private charitable support, too.

So it seems we have a choice: go big, or go small. If we go big, we get our act together as nearly every other national interest group does and fight for our place at the table. If we go small, we take a hard look at our individual operations and begin restructuring them right now to survive in a climate of indefinite scare resources. What we can't do is stay where we are--with a lot of middle-sized organizations with too much capital intensive stuff and a business model that does not throw off enough retained earnings from operations to restore and maintain all the stuff.

When I have talked with folks in the field about going big, the reaction is usually something like I have seen in this thread. Some of us are politically fiscal conservatives, and are happy to see public preservation funding cut as part of a larger philosophy. A lot of us seem to be essentially parochial, focused on our own institutions and projects and looking at national funding issues strictly on a "what's in it for me" basis. Maybe this reflects that the emotion that gets us into this work is somehow tied to nostalgia and really only operates on a local or regional basis--we love our region and our stuff, not railroad preservation in the abstract. Some of us seem to have a "Trenton Makes, the World Takes" world-view, in which we stay in touch with our industrial and blue collar roots and thumb our nose at politics and "highfalutin'" preservation like the National Trust or the national museum associations. There are a lot of potential reasons, I guess, different for each person. I'm sure I haven't exhausted the list.

But thinking over the conversations I've had, I'm thinking Go Big is not in the cards. We are too fractious and too parochial to follow with any success a model like the National Trust for Historic Preservation or the American Association for State and Local History. For myself I've pretty much concluded that go small is the only road forward.

I think the future therefore belongs to groups like the Fort Collins Municipal Railway and the WW&F and maybe the ELDCPS--groups that right-size their collections and physical plant, rigorously control their operating costs, and put a huge amount of work into recruiting, organizing and motivating volunteers. Stuff like mainline steam excursions I wrote off for my own hopes and work years ago, and there are a lot of mid-sized tourist lines and museums I am not sure I would invest my time and money in at this point, either.

And yes, I will be putting my money where my mouth is and bringing this same thinking to the museum I do give to and volunteer at--for one thing, I intend to be a real pain in the ass before I approve additional collections acquisitions.

All in all, I really do think the only thing that's gonna be left in the middle of the road are yellow lines and dead armadillos. Get big, or get small, but brace yourself for a rough ride either way. To me, it looks like small is the better bet.

Erik,

While I certainly understand how you have reached this conclusion, I am disheartened by it as I have felt that professionalization and organizational development are both necessary and inevitable.

It is worth considering however, that some organizations have been doing a decent job of "getting big," and that the participants at this board are not completely representative of American railway preservation.

A lot of people have left the conversation. Because this is the internet, this board has come to be overwhelmed by a certain kind of voice that is aggressive, opinionated, and alienating.

I have heard plenty of folks here bemoan the relative failure of the railway preservation movement to garner the respect and influence of other non-profit causes. What they don't understand is that respect and influence are earned through organization, outreach, and programs. Ultimately, if they don't want to do these themselves, they need to encourage and support those that will.