I am glad to see that this is moving toward an amicable resolution.

There some lessons here that most of us in my business have learned the hard way and wish that our clients would before they learn them the hard way and enrich us for reinventing the wheel.

1. If an operation is on multiple contiguous pieces of property, know where the internal boundaries are. Have copies of the tax maps and descriptions available and if a proper survey was done a copy of it does not hurt. A stake in the ground or some kind of marker and knowing where to sight to can make a remarkable difference. I have visions a store manager saying, "Oops, I thought the property line was over here."

2. A written agreement says what it says, which is not necessarily what you think it means. (My eldest daughter claims that the quote which is going on my tombstone is, "You need to listen to what I said, not what you think I should have meant!") If an agreement prohibits all but certain uses of a parcel then that's that. The fact that you or I may think that something makes perfect sense does not guarantee that the property owner will agree. Even though he is wrong (Of course he is wrong. He disagrees with me. Right?) it is still his property. You have no idea how much money I have made over the years because of somebody's feeling that their good idea somehow gave them a license.

3. While it is sometimes easier to obtain forgiveness than permission, that gets old very fast. Multiple levels of communication really do help. If the district manager had known that this thing was going to be parked there temporarily and that the parking space was not on their property most of this fuss probably could have been avoided. It wouldn't hurt to buy the mangers (even though they sell it) and the Township Committee people a cup of coffee once or twice a year and informally go over what's going on.

4. Edwards' 2nd Postulate of Municipal Government - The smaller the political subdivision the bigger the fuss some jackass is going to make over something that matters in inverse ratio to the degree of the fuss.

GME

politics, more like a soap opera catfight of personality conflicts...

You have to realize the value you have at hand and it work for you and make a way to make it work.

It appears the situation has gotten worse: http://www.southjerseylocalnews.com/articles/2011/07/13/community_news/news/doc4e1dac0909512228506491.txt

Apparently the Trust is banned from the site and they will lose the equipment to the town on July 15th.

The newspaper (sic) is the Community News.

There is another reporter on the BCT that does a full investigation before printing anything but I hear the mayor won't talk to him. Guess why?

But this guy still is perpetuating bad information. I guess the old axiom is supposed to ring true: Tell the same fabrication often enough and people will begin to believe it.

We are agonizing over this situation because of all of the bad press and inuendos that have been put forward. When this is done, I will tell you all exactly what really happened. But be prepared. It will be a long post, so bring a cup of coffee.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Unless the equipment was taken through eminent domain, or downright purchase, I don't think the town is able to confiscate the equipment.
*edit: Seeing it's the 16th, and if the town did indeed take the collection, I hope the town's mayor is ashamed. Petty conflicts between indivuduals are no reason to target a whole group.

I believe that eminent domain is only applicable to real property. Perhaps TrainLawyer could correct me if I'm mistaken. Portable property occupying real property - well, move it or lose it through some means I suppose.

dave

The volunteers are barred from going on the property. That would give them no reason to go to Pemberton, and hence, allow the township to do whatever it chooses without early notice by the volunteers. If they were getting ready to scrap the equipment, and wanted to get it done quick before the volunteers got wise, that would be a way to go about it.

Just a quick correction to the newspaper article. I did confirm with the township that the actual date is 23 July 2011, not the 15th as stated in the article.

The volunteers are only locked out of the restored station that serves as the museum building. The rest of the property is a public walking trail that no one is barred from. The last meeting of PTHT was on the platform in folding chairs. As long as the weather's nice, it's a better meeting space anyway.

There was a work session last Saturday (7/16) to prep and paint the 44 tonner. I haven't heard who was able to attend; unfortunately I could not make it since I'm doing physical therapy three times a week.

-Mark

We are preparing an official statement. We have kept silent in order not to escalate this fiasco but that hasn't worked. Watch for it in a week or so at our web site, www.pthtrust.org. Our adminstrator is very ill so we have to get all of the passwords and another admin to get it up there.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Railpace has reported the equipment at Pemberton will be sold at auction on Friday, August 12th!
See:
http://www.pemberton-twp.com/trainsforsale

Terms of sale include requirement to remove equipment within 60 days.

OK, this thing is DICK JENSEN ALL OVER AGAIN -- I don't want to dilute that by my musings here.

I don't see anything in the documents that claim the township actually owns the equipment. Their claim seems limited to "due notice being given... and the time having expired." What legal interest does that give them in NJ law? Ah, I see in the conditions they definitely use the words "sale" and "property", and call out: "The property shall be transferred by the Township without a bill of sale or other form of title."

That would greatly deter a preservation buyer: haul that locomotive to Arkansas and blam you're servedwith papers claiming ownership. With automobiles, it's cut-and-dried: The innocent purchaser eats the loss and returns the car, in exchange for which the DA declines to press charges for receiving stolen property. Nobody wants to spent thousands to buy and move, can't use the thing, can't get rid of it because the Trust has nowhere to deliver it to, just stuck giving the Trust unlimited free storage, and you're responsible for the vandalism. Great.

Same outcome for the scrapper, unless he scraps it before the process server shows up. Then he's still on the hook for damages, and how will a jury value an irreplaceable object? Depends what they think of you and your actions, you knew ownership was dubious and you scrapped it anyway in a hurry? Hmm... But that suit will never come, losing the equipment will take all the wind out of the Trust's sails, if no hope exists, there'll be no motivation or angle for fundraising.

I suggest heading off the "innocent purchaser" angle by getting about 100 stencils or stickers that say "Property of ____ 123-456-7890 website ____ 7/27/2011" and stick them all over the equipment every day. I say every day because I have a feeling they'd be peeled or painted over mysteriously. Great if you can catch the township doing that.

The stuff could still use paint but the Trust's time is better spent elsewhere. The hour is later than you think. In a situation like this, the single most important thing is ACTION. And even more than that, you need the willingness to be naughty. Too many times I've seen organizations in mortal fear of "breaking rules" because of hypothetical consequences that don't really amount to anything. They watched as their enemy brazenly and maliciously break the law for personal gain, while they refuse to engage in honest and moral civil disobedience.

At the end of the day though, you have a hostile relationship with your landlord, that can only end one way, and that's the equipment leaving. So either cozy up to the county, and get them to want you... or buy some land. If you could show, hey, you have land and a timetable for moving the stuff, they might give you the time.

To muddy the legal waters a bit more, the small "Doodlebug" in the "sale" photos is probably owned by Trolley Valhalla or the Electric City Trolley Museum Association. It was running at Tansboro, N.J. in the late 1960s.

There has been so much going on that I cannot keep track of it all. I know this much. The more we do to comply with them, the more they ask for. I feel that our only course of action is in the courts.

We hope to have our web site up and running with the truth real soon.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Been checking your web site daily. No news. With all going on I'm surprised the society has no press releases on their site.