A city park isn't exactly a "museum" in the same sense, but the earlier suggestions that the ATSF or its successors enjoined a right to have a say over the subsequent care and condition of 3463, or other such donated locos or rolling stock, would make such donations exactly that--"conditional donations." And such "conditional donations" are exactly what I suggested that a "Ron Swanson" of Parks and Recreation (or, for that matter, bleedin'-heart "Leslie Knope") would be most prudent in rejecting flatly and unequivocally. Brother Hees backs me up on this, as I believe most museum curators would.

Another relevant example: The Santa Fe, shortly before its ill-fated proposed merger with Southern Pacific, donated to the California State RR Museum its "collection" of historic diesel and steam locomotives, which had been stashed out in the dry desert air of Belen, New Mexico. The locos have apparently been rotting out behind the Sacramento Shops ever since. Do you tell BNSF to take them all back and dole them out to other places, because CSRM hasn't cared for them? Do you approach the CSRM with a proposal to acquire some of them? Or do you support the CSRM's (admittedly pie-in-the-sky by now) goals of a Museum of Rail Technology which would include these locos?

Would you accept a run-down house or car sold to you for $1 and then fix it up and care for it if the seller included a clause allowing him to take it back at any time if he felt you weren't tending to it properly? I don't know about you, but I sure wouldn't.

Solution to our immediate problem: anybody wishing to post advice or (outright indignant commands) about what others should or MUST do with their historic property must first demonstrate they personally have the resources and ability to carry out their own wishes. Then, they can try it themselves and instead report back to us as to how well their proposal worked. At least there would then be a factual basis for their perspectives.

dave

Conditional donations "might" be OK if the donor donated sufficient funds to ensure proper facilities and perpetual care for the artifact in question...

Even then it's asking for a messy situation, particlarly when the donor's heirs come calling.

Steve Hunter

Donor: "Hey State, here are vast scrublands in west Texas I'm willing to donate to you as long as you keep it."
State: "Museum best practice says we don't accept conditional donations."
Donor: "Hey U, here are vast scrublands in west Texas."
U: "Accepted. By the way, we drilled for water and got this big surprise."
State: .......


Depends on the donation. Depends on the conditions.


That failed because CSRM did not do certain particular things that every museum needs to do. They thought they were exempt from "Buy railroad, buy land, build barns".

Because they made a related mistake I call "being cozy". They had a situation that was temporary, unsustainable and downright dangerous -- but it was good enough to reduce the priority on pursuing a real solution, so it doesn't ever happen. ... Like the distant friend who's overstayed his welcome in your guest room. He didn't treat your gentle nudges with the urgency they deserved, because it was cozy. .... Like: Dateline: 1959. IRM, OERM, WRM, ORM and many other museums are looking at buying a 25-ish acre site of farmland on which to develop a proper railroad museum site, ultimately with carbarns and a trolley loop. But IRM, OERM and WRM were living in borrowed sites, suffering evictions and vandalism on a monthly basis, so their pain was pretty extreme. ORM had the 3-acre site at Worthington, not ideal, but livable. So they did not move to a 25+ acre site. History tells the tale: those that did, thrived; and ORM did not. Same applies to museums that own their heritage railroad, and are "cozy" storing their collection in sidings along the right-of-way, which is nowhere near big enough to build carbarns.

Similarly, CSRM was cozy in the SP Shops site, so they did not obtain a site of their own, nor a rail connection other than via the SP shops. Now they are paying the price.

What about the donation of an item or items that have great earning potential, like a working, or even a expensively preserved static, steam locomotive?

Something of great earning potential will always come with some conditions, or the owner would probably sell instead of donate.

Here is an example; Guy Stillman donated his "Paradise & Pacific" 5/12 scale 15" gauge RR in Scottsdale AZ in 1970, along with a parcel of land worth about $30 million, Instead of giving the railroad to one of his own children. Those conditional donations have earned millions (many millions) of dollars for Scottsdale and the RR park is one of the few parks in Scottsdale that have ever turned a profit, and it does so ever year. If the city does not live up to all its conditions, the Stillman aires could sue to reassume ownership, and they should if the city fails to meet Guy's conditions. Those items had great value when donated and the city has profited immensely from their use.

Does anyone expect the "Eureka" owner Dan Markoff to donate that loco to anyone or any group unconditionally?

If its worth something its worth some conditions.

My only comment is that it breaks my heart to see what happened to the two ATSF steam locos from Belen.
1522 Out.

I agree. I wish the Santa Fe had done a better job in making sure the CSRM had the resources available to care for their collection.

On the other hand, and involving another CSRM, the Santa Fe donated several cars to the California Southern Railroad Museum in Perris in the early '70's. This was a small group with limited resources and little potential for caring for the equipment. Yet they did a pretty good job in keeping the donated cars painted and in good condition until OERM took them over a few years later. At the time, I had been told that the Santa Fe had placed a condition on the donation that the cars had to be maintained in good shape or else the Santa Fe would take them back. I don't know if that was true or if it was something that the museum told us for motivation purposes. Perhaps one of the OERM old timers could confirm or deny this.

Does anybody know the details regarding the donation of the CSS&SB/NICTD line car #1100 to the Line Car Preservation Partnership group? This is a classic case of an item that was donated with conditions attached. When those conditions were not met, the car was taken back by the NICTD and donated to another museum (IRM).

"Scrublands in West Texas" would NOT fall under "museum" curatorial management; they would instead fall under parkland, nature preserve, or other "Bureau of Land Management" administration, which has an entirely different set of protocols with regard to access, "preservation" (what are you preserving? the rare green-bellied roadrunner, a rare plant, the scenic view, a buffer zone around the Alamo, or just "green space"?), and the like. Even then, the administration can be subject to negotiation--see leases of land in certain National Parks and the long-debated proposed drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Furthermore, in a typical situation of surrendering land to preservation, there are conditions on both sides--states, feds, etc. agree to specific treatment (it will always be a farm/trail/green space/a park) in exchange for such things as tax breaks or credits, or another entity such as the Nature Conservancy buys it and donates it for said use. These things don't happen in vacuums.

To All

Does anyone have access to the agreement between the City of Topeka and the AT&SF deeding the locomotive over? If not I believe we need to refrain from speculations of any context or intent of one to enforce it. For instance, SP 3420 was put on display with several conditions as to how and where it was to be displayed. As a point of history the City of El Paso, Texas, has been in violation of that agreement since the fall of 1980. Southern Pacific chose not to request that the agreement be maintained. Because of their leniency the locomotive got the opportunity to operate and is safely stored today but no one sees it. Is 3420 or any other old locomotive still relevant if no one knows it exists?

With 3463 the discussions are missing several points including the following.

First, is 3463 a historic piece of railroad history?

Second, is the restoration plan reasonable?

Third, does it prove what it intends to do about steam propulsion in an objective way? Translation, the plan includes enough modifications that can the effectiveness of each change be quantitatively measured good or bad?

Fourth, does the plan have other obstacles that would keep it from being economically viable such as EPA regulations or the lack of water in many areas?

Five, what will be lost by this proposal that only 3463 posses or represents?

Six, what happens to 3463 after the modifications?

And finally, what does this say about the civic pride of Topeka that the locomotive is leaving. Somebody approached the AT&SF and got the locomotive in the first place. Now a new generation does not see the value in it or is someone not aware of the needs and responsibilities of having such of a display that the preceding generations of a local organization either did not anticipate or can no longer fulfill? For example 3420 was donated by the SP to the City of El Paso by the El Paso County Historical society which still exists but has not been involved with the locomotive for some time. How do we as a society ensure that historic are continued to be preserved after the initial push to save it is over?

3463 has raised a lot of questions for me. There are questions here that many park engines already have or will have to face. Are we ready to work with others to help preserve these giants of the transportation and technology of times past?

Robby Peartree

Charlie -

I'll try to answer your question.

First of all, CSS&SB/NICTD line car #1100 was built in 1926 by St. Louis Car Company as a combination baggage/coach for the Indiana Service Corporation (ISC) as part of a 5 car order and was numbered 376. ISC operated an electric interurban line from Ft. Wayne to various other Indiana cities. In 1930, ISC became a part of the Indiana Railroad (IRR), a statewide electric railway system centered out of Indianapolis. IRR #376 operated over a number of IRR's routes. In September of 1935, IRR secured a mail contract for two routes with included Railroad Post Office (R.P.O.) service and car 376, along with two sister cars, were modified to handle these routes with sorting of mail handled by Post Office clerks while the cars were enroute. After abandonment of the Indiana Railroad, ISC equipment, including 376, was returned to that line and the car and its two sisters were eventually sold to the South Shore. In 1947, the CSS&SB rebuilt the 376 into its line car #1100.

Knowing the historical importance of the 1100, NICTD (which had acquired it when it took over South Shore passenger operations), asked for proposals to preserve and restore the car. A meeting and inspection of the car were held in Michigan City. Myself, and two other members of the Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum attended as we thought that the 376/1100 should remain in the state of Indiana were it had run almost exclusively its entire active service life. A representative of the Illinois Railway Museum was also in attendance at that meeting, along with a coalition of Indiana organizations. After that meeting, the coalition contacted the HVRM Board and asked the museum to join its efforts to keep the car in Indiana, which the museum did. Besides HVRM, the coalition consisted of the Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, Indiana University Northwest, the National Park Service/Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, the South Shore Heritage Foundation and the National New York Central Railroad Museum. Eventually NICTD, apparently with some political "pressure" from some of its Board members, awarded the car to the coalition. As I understand it (I was not part of the effort after the initial meeting at Michigan City), the 1100 would be moved into HVRM's Shop building in North Judson for restoration. While in the Shop, it would be available to museum visitors for inpection, but only in the company of a qualified member of the museum and depending upon the restoration work being done at any particular time. After the restoration was completed, the plan was to move the car to the National NYC Railroad Museum in Elkhart, Indiana for display. I should mention here, that HVRM was obviously an important part of the success of the coalition as it had the only building in place, which could house the restoration. But, number 1100 never made it to North Judson. The South Shore Heritage Foundation (which was apparently the key organization behind the coalition) instead, moved the car to a location in Michigan City. NICTD had specified that the restoration had to be completed within a set period. Obviously, SSHF failed to meet that requirement and NICTD subsequently had the car moved to IRM in Union where it joins a number of other pieces of South Shore equipment.

Les

Les, thanks for the explanation. It answers a lot of questions I had. Given the number of organizations involved, the effort seemed doomed from the start. At least it's in good hands which is the most important thing, even if it's not in Indiana.

Jeff, if you mean Santa Fe 2925 & 5021, they are owned by CSRM. It's just they don't have any place to put 'em.

From ARM Recommended Practices (italics added for emphasis):



http://railwaymuseums.org/Static/documents/RecommendedPractices.pdf

Wesley

As a past trustee and chairman, I can agree with the ARM recommended practices. However, as an owner of equipment I am a fan of conditions. When I sold my little Porter, I wanted assurances up front that there was indoor storage available. I suppose long term I have no way to enforce this, but it was of primary concern to me before making the deal happen, and at a very reduced sale price.

My other observation is that equipment that is purchased by a museum seems to receive more attention than equipment that is donated regardless of the cost to move it.

I am looking at finding a home for some other much smaller equipment that I own and you can bet that I will have strings attached to any potential deal. I would look at a donation with conditions, a lease with conditions, or a sale at a hefty price.

The bottom line is that you can not look at this situation only from the museum perspective. You need to keep the owner's perspective in mind. In addition, it is up to the owner to enforce those conditions.

Again, the above is based on first hand experience, both good and bad. I have seen how well leasing of equipment can work. I have seen first hand how well purchases of equipment can work. Unfortunately I have seen way too examples where donations of equipment did not work.

J.R. May