I posted a notice on Rail Swap asking people to help the B&O Museum. Quite a few people have contacted me to tell me they appreciated the info, and that they have donated, which is great.

Of course there is always a flipside. I just received this reply:

"They get enough money from CSX,let them fix it on there on,just like every other museum in the country."

I seem to remember that Chessie System did a lot to help get the B&O Museum off the ground. I'm very curious if anyone has a current museum annual report that tells how much this magical "enough money" is that they now get from CSX. I'd consider it great if they get a big endowment. Perhaps it's because they have a first class museum--that truly shows the evolution of US railroading--in an authentic B&O setting. I suspect the truth is that any endowment is a small portion of their budget.

I've been involved before with people who think their museum "deserves" something others have. Maybe those people need to get off their a** and do something to get their share. It's amazing what hard work and perseverance can do!

Rail Swap

> I seem to remember that Chessie System did a
> lot to help get the B&O Museum off the
> ground. I'm very curious if anyone has a
> current museum annual report that tells how
> much this magical "enough money"
> is that they now get from CSX. I'd consider
> it great if they get a big endowment.

I don't have an annual report handy but I can give you the gist. The Museum was founded as the company-owned B&O Transportation Museum in 1953. The Museum was closed for many years as an economy measure, but was reopened by the railroad in 1976 for the bicentennial. In the 70s the RR also put about 1.5 mil into renovating the roundhouse roof and exhibits.

The Museum remained railroad-owned and operated until 1987, by which time of course it was owned by CSX. In 1987 Hayes T. Watkins of CSX arranged for the Museum to be spun off as an independent nonprofit organization. CSX gave the Museum the Roundhouse and the attached buildings along with what is now the front yard and some other acerage. They also gave the Museum an endowment, which while generous in dollar terms generates about enough annual income to pay their utility bills and not much more.

In 1992 or thereabouts CSX gave the Museum the North and South Car Shops (now the restoration shop) and the right of way of the Mt. Clare Branch for 1 mile out to Mt Clare Junction. The railroad still supports the museum by donating equipment, donating movements to and from the Museum, and making modest to mid-sized cash donations from time to time in support of individual exhibits or activities like the Fair of the Iron Horse.

In sum, yes, CSX takes an active and benevolent interest in the Museum, for which all Museum members are very grateful. But no, they do not in any way shape or form pay all the bills, and have not since 1989. The museum very much relies on the gate admissions, memberships, and donations to survive from year to year. Without memberships, donations, and a healthy gate, it cannot make it. CSX is not a magic sugar daddy.

Here it is in raw figures from their latest Form 990 filing (calender year 2000) on guidestar.com:

Revenue
Contributions $1,204,796
Government Grants $170,000
Program Services $684,711
Investments $670,490
Special Events $0
Sales $187,267
Other $147,696

Total Revenue $3,064,960



eledbetter@rypn.org

> I don't have an annual report handy but I
> can give you the gist. The Museum was
> founded as the company-owned B&O
> Transportation Museum in 1953. The Museum
> was closed for many years as an economy
> measure, but was reopened by the railroad in
> 1976 for the bicentennial. In the 70s the RR
> also put about 1.5 mil into renovating the
> roundhouse roof and exhibits.

I can add to the previous post only that the original CSX endowment amounted to $5 million. This was very generous at the time, but the income from $5 million didn't come close to meeting the museum's needs even before the recent disaster. As noted, CSX has since helped with property, equipment, and materials donations, but I don't believe it has put any more cash into the institution.
> The Museum remained railroad-owned and
> operated until 1987, by which time of course
> it was owned by CSX. In 1987 Hayes T.
> Watkins of CSX arranged for the Museum to be
> spun off as an independent nonprofit
> organization. CSX gave the Museum the
> Roundhouse and the attached buildings along
> with what is now the front yard and some
> other acerage. They also gave the Museum an
> endowment, which while generous in dollar
> terms generates about enough annual income
> to pay their utility bills and not much
> more.

> In 1992 or thereabouts CSX gave the Museum
> the North and South Car Shops (now the
> restoration shop) and the right of way of
> the Mt. Clare Branch for 1 mile out to Mt
> Clare Junction. The railroad still supports
> the museum by donating equipment, donating
> movements to and from the Museum, and making
> modest to mid-sized cash donations from time
> to time in support of individual exhibits or
> activities like the Fair of the Iron Horse.

> In sum, yes, CSX takes an active and
> benevolent interest in the Museum, for which
> all Museum members are very grateful. But
> no, they do not in any way shape or form pay
> all the bills, and have not since 1989. The
> museum very much relies on the gate
> admissions, memberships, and donations to
> survive from year to year. Without
> memberships, donations, and a healthy gate,
> it cannot make it. CSX is not a magic sugar
> daddy.

> Here it is in raw figures from their latest
> Form 990 filing (calender year 2000) on
> guidestar.com:

> Revenue
> Contributions $1,204,796
> Government Grants $170,000
> Program Services $684,711
> Investments $670,490
> Special Events $0
> Sales $187,267
> Other $147,696

> Total Revenue $3,064,960


herbhar@yahoo.com

Thanks for the background! Another friend replied with 2001 Annual Report info summarized below:

Several CSX executives donate at $2500+ and one at the $5000+ level. I'm sure there are other people at these levels, too, not just CSX people.

Total income was $2.85 million of which $682,432 (23.9%) was from Donations and Grants. Income from the endowment was $242,741. The Balance Sheet lists $5,329,137 in "Investment Securities", which I guess is endowment fund principal.

$5 million is a lot to you and me, but it's not that big an endowment. Rarely can (or will) a museum touch the principal, so the result is an annual income from it which varies greatly with yields on investments. Would anyone call $250,000 income "enough money"? Part of the problem with the Altoona Museum is that it has insufficient endowment to guarantee operating funds. You have to make sure you can keep the lights and heat on, even if no one visits or donates. $250,000 is barely going to cover that!

As for them supporting the museum with transportation, equipment donations, etc., Conrail did as much for many MUCH SMALLER groups...

As my friend says very well:

Bottom line: Yes CSX and some of its former executives have continued some financial support, but it comes nowhere near to covering the damages. I'm sure CSX will make an extra contribution toward the repairs, but in no way should anyone expect that CSX has any obligation or intention to foot the whole bill.

Please, if you haven't already, make a donation. Let's make the Grinches of rail preservation truly in the minority.

http://www.borail.org/roundhouse_restoration_fund.

I hope this doesn't sound too hostile, but as a railroad worker first and preservationist second, I've seldom had enough available funds to help out the many needy preservation projects I write about. In nearly 25 years of employment, however, I've seen top rail executives continually plunder, rape and starve the industry that feeds them, to workers' detriment. After the damage is done they retire with a huge golden parachute, leaving lives and sometimes entire communities in tatters.

We employees have always been told that we make too much money and do too little for it, and we should give back most of the hard-fought rights and wages that have been gained over the last century. It gauls us to be told this by executives who don't work outdoors at -10F at 3AM, yet who make more money in a year than we'd make in several lifetimes.

With that in mind, it is little wonder that workers often don't show up at company picnics, or even employee appreciation excursions powered by steam locomotives. If the highest CSX donor to the B&O Museum only donates $5000, I'd say that was pretty pitiful. This is just a guess, but I'll bet if CSX took 10% of each of its top five executives' salaries and gave it to the Museum, the whole restoration could be done top notch and quickly --- and it wouldn't make a bit of difference in their personal lifestyles.

> Thanks for the background! Another friend
> replied with 2001 Annual Report info
> summarized below:

> Several CSX executives donate at $2500+ and
> one at the $5000+ level. I'm sure there are
> other people at these levels, too, not just
> CSX people.

> Total income was $2.85 million of which
> $682,432 (23.9%) was from Donations and
> Grants. Income from the endowment was
> $242,741. The Balance Sheet lists $5,329,137
> in "Investment Securities", which
> I guess is endowment fund principal.

> $5 million is a lot to you and me, but it's
> not that big an endowment. Rarely can (or
> will) a museum touch the principal, so the
> result is an annual income from it which
> varies greatly with yields on investments.
> Would anyone call $250,000 income
> "enough money"? Part of the
> problem with the Altoona Museum is that it
> has insufficient endowment to guarantee
> operating funds. You have to make sure you
> can keep the lights and heat on, even if no
> one visits or donates. $250,000 is barely
> going to cover that!

> As for them supporting the museum with
> transportation, equipment donations, etc.,
> Conrail did as much for many MUCH SMALLER
> groups...

> As my friend says very well:

> Bottom line: Yes CSX and some of its former
> executives have continued some financial
> support, but it comes nowhere near to
> covering the damages. I'm sure CSX will make
> an extra contribution toward the repairs,
> but in no way should anyone expect that CSX
> has any obligation or intention to foot the
> whole bill.

> Please, if you haven't already, make a
> donation. Let's make the Grinches of rail
> preservation truly in the minority.


ryarger@rypn.org

If
> the highest CSX donor to the B&O Museum
> only donates $5000, I'd say that was pretty
> pitiful.

As one member of the Museum I am grateful to anyone who wishes to give in any amount regardless of their affluence or lack of means. I do not spite the donation by weighing it against the income of the donor or the wage structure of his/her employer.

One can argue about whether the wage structure in railroading and corporate America is just or unjust, and everyone is free to his or her opinion, but I for one would really appreciate it if we could have that argument as a separate issue and de-couple it from the B&O Museum.

Impugning the motives of individual donors to the B&O Museum at a time when it needs all its friends does the Museum no good, and this Museum member and donor frankly doesn't appreciate it.

eledbetter@rypn.org

I agree Erik. Mr. Yarger sounds disgruntled. Perhaps he should buy some railroad stock and voice his opinions about the execs at a shareholder's meeting. Rypn is not the appropriate place.

> If

> As one member of the Museum I am grateful to
> anyone who wishes to give in any amount
> regardless of their affluence or lack of
> means. I do not spite the donation by
> weighing it against the income of the donor
> or the wage structure of his/her employer.

> One can argue about whether the wage
> structure in railroading and corporate
> America is just or unjust, and everyone is
> free to his or her opinion, but I for one
> would really appreciate it if we could have
> that argument as a separate issue and
> de-couple it from the B&O Museum.

> Impugning the motives of individual donors
> to the B&O Museum at a time when it
> needs all its friends does the Museum no
> good, and this Museum member and donor
> frankly doesn't appreciate it.

> I agree Erik. Mr. Yarger sounds disgruntled.
> Perhaps he should buy some railroad stock
> and voice his opinions about the execs at a
> shareholder's meeting. Rypn is not the
> appropriate place.

Well ,Bob is the founder and editor of RyPN and can and does say what he feels is appropriate. I just wanted to offer a counervailing viewpoint: that all donations to the B&O Museum are welcome right now and will be gratefully received, irrespective of the means of the donor, the donor's employer, or any other issue.

eledbetter@rypn.org

I presumed my comments would raise some eyebrows. Though I was very briefly a CSX employee after the Conrail breakup, I hold no grudge against the company (many others did though, as some wages and benefits were lost). I'm sure that B&O Museum officials and members must tread lightly on this issue, but it pays to examine the "Why can't CSX pay for it?" argument.

CSX is a profitable company, at the expense of thousands of rank-and-file workers, and its executives do very well -- soon to be better if the huge tax cuts go through. If I were a top executive there, I'd gladly donate a couple million from my $20+ million annual compensation toward this worthy cause, and "encourage" those just below me to do likewise. Considering this museum is the cradle of the industry that has enriched them, I think that is reasonable.

Unlike, say, a mainline steam program, the B&O Museum does nothing to interfere with modern rail operations, so there should be no controversy about supporting it in high corporate circles. It can and should remain a non-profit separate entity, but the company and its officers could easily be more generous. The current situation seems analagous to the Rockefellers turning some of their mansions over to the National Park Service to maintain because they "can't afford it".

I don't have the answer of how to achieve more support from the corporation and I'm sure comments like I've made above aren't the way to do it, but it seems that if the top person at CSX can only send the Museum $5000 as one of those "1000 points of light", his light is pretty dim.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/business/ceo/MGB5JJSXX1D.html
ryarger@rypn.org

> I presumed my comments would raise some
> eyebrows. Though I was very briefly a CSX
> employee after the Conrail breakup, I hold
> no grudge against the company (many others
> did though, as some wages and benefits were
> lost). I'm sure that B&O Museum
> officials and members must tread lightly on
> this issue, but it pays to examine the
> "Why can't CSX pay for it?"
> argument.

*Well, we examined it fairly. CSX might have some good-faith obligation to help out, but as we pointed out, the Museum is no longer part of the CSX budget. That alone is enough to completely negate the "let them pay for it" remark, which is the result of a mistaken assumption (or worse) on the part of that speaker.

> CSX is a profitable company, at the expense
> of thousands of rank-and-file workers, and
> its executives do very well -- soon to be
> better if the huge tax cuts go through.

*IF.

If I were a top executive there, I'd gladly
> donate a couple million from my $20+ million
> annual compensation toward this worthy
> cause, and "encourage" those just
> below me to do likewise. Considering this
> museum is the cradle of the industry that
> has enriched them, I think that is
> reasonable.

*IF you choose to donate 10 or 20 percent of your pre-tax income to this cause, more power to you. Many people similarly tithe to their churches. But be aware: most of that income is not direct, but deferred over long periods. And much of that deferred pay has been taking a beating in the stock market the past couple of years. In addition, the lynch mobs are already forming at stockholders' meetings over such executive compensation.

We don't really know John Snow. If he's like a lot of executives, he sees CSX as a well-paying job with enormous responsibilities to the stockholders and the company. If he wants to become a railfan like the Claytors were, fine. But no one dares to suggest that Wal-Mart employees contribute 10% of their pay to a Sam Walton Museum of American Retailing. No one tells Old Bay crab seasoning that they have top support the Chesapeake Bay; it's just good PR to do so.

Besides, John Snow just took a HUGE cut in pay to become a government official. THAT's a real sacrifice to a country, if you think about it. Now, Michael Ward, the new CSX head, on the other hand, IS a railfan.........

> Unlike, say, a mainline steam program, the
> B&O Museum does nothing to interfere
> with modern rail operations, so there should
> be no controversy about supporting it in
> high corporate circles. It can and should
> remain a non-profit separate entity, but the
> company and its officers could easily be
> more generous. The current situation seems
> analagous to the Rockefellers turning some
> of their mansions over to the National Park
> Service to maintain because they "can't
> afford it".

*And, in my opinion, the NPS is free to decline such offers, or defer to an independent non-profit, or just let Donald Trump buy it. "The Government" isn't always the answer.

> I don't have the answer of how to achieve
> more support from the corporation and I'm
> sure comments like I've made above aren't
> the way to do it, but it seems that if the
> top person at CSX can only send the Museum
> $5000 as one of those "1000 points of
> light", his light is pretty dim.

No doubt about it, it would be nice. But last I heard (Department of Homeland "Security" notwithstanding), it's still a free country. CSX executives can invest in the future via supporting the B&O Museum, opera, PBS, AIDS research, American education, or just buying all the networks and eliminating "reality TV". But it has to be THEIR choice, for THEIR reasons. Bluntly "insisting" or pressuring such people in the wrong way (which I think Yarger's digs do) will do more to ensure that donations WON'T be forthcoming than any Museum policies or management.


lner4472@bcpl.net

> I don't have the answer of how to achieve
> more support from the corporation and I'm
> sure comments like I've made above aren't
> the way to do it.

Indeed, they are not. Therefore the necessity for making them continues to escape me, unless it is to serve other causes perceived to be of greater importance. But let's not pretend that this line of argument serves the B&O Museum or advances its cause in its time of need, because it does not.


eledbetter@rypn.org

My Grandad started with the "Bums & Outlaws" in '46 and worked MoW up through the early 80's.

His greatest complaint was that the big brass's attitude, especially after the Chessie merger, was for short term profitability rather than long term health of the company - Especially as to what he called "gutting" the MoW department.

The family used to hear almost weekly stories about a supervisor's idea that was "applying a band-aid to a patch" and "borrowing time and begging for trouble".

The REAL problem isn't confined to CSX or even railroads. The upper management makes that big $$ because they do things to keep the stockholders happy. Unfortunately keeping the stockholders happy often means a good quarterly dividend, at the expense of a sound foundation 5 years down the road. The steel industry didn't reinvest, now US Steel is an oil company, but the stockholders still make money.

For the board of CSX to commit to a huge infusion of cash to help the B&O museum there would have to be something in it for the company (stockholders). A photo op, and 10 seconds of publicity simply might not be enough.

As for what individual officer's donate, I think that should be entirely up to their personal conscience. And yes, others will probably always judge them over such small issues, rightly or wrongly.

If only Bush would appoint Erik to negotiate with Saddam we wouldn't be talking about war. Thanks for your most diplomatic responses to what might have deteriorated into another flamefest.

Dave

I'm sure by this point everybody is worn out, but I'll add just a bit more: One must remember that back in 1987-88, when CSX set up the museum as an independent foundation, it had no real obligation to do so, or to endow it and turn over the collection, buildings, and other property. And in fact, there was considerable upper-level opposition to the museum at the time -- the old "we're a modern corporation and don't want to be associated with all this old stuff" attitude. Happily, CSX's chief railfan happened to be Hasys Watkins, its chairman, and so it all happened. But it could well not have. (Well sure, it got a tax writeoff, but that was just an incidental blessing at the time.) All things considered, the company has been pretty generous and tolerant since then. We all hope that it will now help a good bit more, but I don't think it's really fair to demand it.

herbhar@yahoo.com

> I hope this doesn't sound too hostile, but
> as a railroad worker first and
> preservationist second, I've seldom had
> enough available funds to help out the many
> needy preservation projects I write about.

As a fellow railroad worker and preservationist my budget as well is pretty stretched working on my pet projects. But not once have I ever looked at a "wealthy individual or corporation" with disdain for their lack of supporting my causes. It is mine and the organization's responsibility to find the funding to accomplish our goals, and if our goals do not coincide with the interests of the wealthy, then they do not participate. This is how things are meant to be in our free market.

Why must there be such class envy in our country. I just do not understand it. All that I want is the same opportunities that everyone else is given, to make as much of my lifetime as I care to invest my hard work into. I do not want to work hard and become successful only to have some people turn on me because I have worked hard and became successful, and to penalize me for all that hard work.

Perhaps someday Bob's and other like minded people's wishes will come true, and the most successful of us will not be permitted to reap the benefits of their labors. When that time comes, and its fast approaching, what will be the motivation for people to achieve?

Instead of lowering those at the top to our level, why not try elevating people at the bottom toward the top?

Tod Engine Foundation
jrowlands@neo.rr.com