The newsletter was posted on the members only section of the website and not available on the public website. The Steamer started life as a printed newsletter to communicate amoungst the membership not a public press release. When the members web page was started it was stated that the page was for members only and discouraged sharing it with non-members.

As a member of Mid-Continent I was not pleased to see that link here. Mid-Continent is like any other Museum out there, it has it's problems, and broadcasting them in inappropriate fashions just "OJ" the situation and makes it worse.

just my two cents worth.

Paul Dalleska
Life Member
Mid-Continent Railway Historical Society

pfdx@aol.com

> As a member of Mid-Continent I was not
> pleased to see that link here. Mid-Continent
> is like any other Museum out there, it has
> it's problems, and broadcasting them in
> inappropriate fashions just "OJ"
> the situation and makes it worse.

Just what situation are you referring ?

It makes me warm and fuzzy about an organization when I see quotes from board members in a news letter that say “When the train leaves the station, if you do not like where it is going, then get off the train.”

And just what is the basis for the lawsuit that you are willing to settle ?

And why is it that other local tourism is up in the Dells Area and Mid-Continent is down ?

Or have to many people taken the advice andgotten off the train and gone to Ho-chunk instead?

just my two cents worth.

Paul,

In spits and spurts I am trying to find a way to help museums handle their media and Internet issues.

Mid-Continent has fallen "victim" (for lack of a better phrase) to not understanding one of the basic rules of the Internet: if you don't want everyone to see it, don't post it.

Without any access control (passwords, etc..)-- and even with access control -- anything posted to the 'net can get around pretty fast.

Museums and preservation groups need to control media. There are ways to do this directly (like not posting sensitive information online) and indirectly (by making outside media work for you).

It is not easy, but in the long run... well, good media policies can help ensure there is a "long run" to plan for.

I'd be happy to continue the conversation via e-mail. There is a lot that Mid-Continent could do through the media to help itself in troubled times.

Good luck!

Rob Davis

> The newsletter was posted on the members
> only section of the website and not
> available on the public website. The Steamer
> started life as a printed newsletter to
> communicate amoungst the membership not a
> public press release. When the members web
> page was started it was stated that the page
> was for members only and discouraged sharing
> it with non-members.

> As a member of Mid-Continent I was not
> pleased to see that link here. Mid-Continent
> is like any other Museum out there, it has
> it's problems, and broadcasting them in
> inappropriate fashions just "OJ"
> the situation and makes it worse.

> just my two cents worth.

> Paul Dalleska
> Life Member
> Mid-Continent Railway Historical Society


trains@robertjohndavis.com

Though I feel proper control via Normal media outlets is a must to project profesionalism and worthy goals as well as awarness to the general public. Continually groups do not take proper PR steps to insure that what is printed is

A. Acurate and factual
B. What is happening or being done is portrayed seriously and more than a hobby or big boys ad thier toys persona to the general public.
C. A true preservation/historical endevour.

What alarms me is advocation of what clearly amounts to covering up falsehoods and neglegance and promoting misrepresentation , by management/directors and staff of a museum. I was very suprised at the honesty and openess that the new Director of the Railroaders Museum in Altoona ( Sorry the name escapes me) showed in dealing with the railfan community and restoring some of the faith in what was happening and that it was being rectified. I feel that this is a beter approach to keep faith with donors. While I don't advocate that every piece of dirty laundry is aired or needs to be disclosed, but a certain amount of accountability does need to happen.

How as a community how can we seriously petition railroad enthusiasts and the general public, time and time again for funds or cry dire poverty when there is little or no trust in what is happening at the place of donorship , and they clearly take the stance of doing damage control willfully to misrepresent themselves. Betrayal of donated funds is the absolute worst thing you could do to your own organization and to all others at the same time. I fully admit a large sense of betrayal and resentment in the decission by SLSTA to call it quits. Why/ Because I donated money to fix bearings and put rollers in engine trucks and tenders, and thats in addition to being a member and for a board to pack it up and say they are done, so the whole thing is done, is a slap in the face to all the donors and general membership. As well as to preservation , operation and to community outreach. It makes me seriously question why I gave money when there was no assurance to the committment of longevity to the project.

Where is my incentive to donate to an organization that is using my hard earned funds to settle lawsuits? They would not be settling if there was not some liability involved. When or ever will donorship be told that 10,000.00 was spent in defense of a lawsuit and that further funds are still needed to settle ( As stated : " An offer to settle was submitted" not neccessarily accepted)
I am not saying there has been cover ups, damage control or malfeasance on the part of Mid- Continent this is mearly an objective observation with commentary .

Now, one can clearly state that this is does not portray Mid-Continent in the best light and only furthers the damage. But hopefully it raises awareness of the situation there before the worst happens and the preservation community looses what was or could be forever.

Not knowing full disclosure of all the facts first hand , it seems ( IMHO, the subjective portion of this ) that things have been amiss for quite some time and that damage control has already been in effect. In other threads concerning Mid-Continent persons were very quick to dispell rumors conjectors and negative comments. My own observance of the museum first hand clearly shows a decline in operations and membership.

Troubling also, is the comment about " if you don't like where this train is going , get off" A place where even as a volunteer/member you have little no right to question decissions or are allowed any imput to direction is he first step to a mass exodus. Talent lost , contacts broken , willingness to be involved either there or elsewhere destroyed At length it has been discussed the debate over appointed or elected boards , and the virtues and draw backs of each and whom does the electing. What system does Mid-Continent use ?

LLW 8673u

My understanding of Mid-Continent's board situation is that they are all rank and file railroaders and foamers who are not necessarily board material and fear experienced directors, fundraisers and curators from coming in and assisting. They want to just play train and not manage a non-profit the way it ought to be run. No lawyers, doctors or bankers on this board. This is typically the problem of most railway museums who fear the professionals will march right in, take way their toys and things won't be fun anymore. Balderdash! The cold hard reality is that museums who modernize with the times survive, and those who resort to the "same, old, same, old" are destined to fail. I hope this comes as a wake up call.

> Just what situation are you referring ?

> It makes me warm and fuzzy about an
> organization when I see quotes from board
> members in a news letter that say “When the
> train leaves the station, if you do not like
> where it is going, then get off the train.”

> And just what is the basis for the lawsuit
> that you are willing to settle ?

> And why is it that other local tourism is up
> in the Dells Area and Mid-Continent is down
> ?

> Or have to many people taken the advice
> andgotten off the train and gone to Ho-chunk
> instead?

> just my two cents worth.

> This is typically the problem of most
> railway museums who fear the professionals
> will march right in, take way their toys and
> things won't be fun anymore. Balderdash! The
> cold hard reality is that museums who
> modernize with the times survive, and those
> who resort to the "same, old, same,
> old" are destined to fail. I hope this
> comes as a wake up call.

AMEN ... and they ain't alone !

lamontdc@adelphia.net

> My understanding of Mid-Continent's board
> situation is that they are all rank and file
> railroaders and foamers who are not
> necessarily board material and fear
> experienced directors, fundraisers and
> curators from coming in and assisting. They
> want to just play train and not manage a
> non-profit the way it ought to be run. No
> lawyers, doctors or bankers on this board.
> This is typically the problem of most
> railway museums who fear the professionals
> will march right in, take way their toys and
> things won't be fun anymore. Balderdash! The
> cold hard reality is that museums who
> modernize with the times survive, and those
> who resort to the "same, old, same,
> old" are destined to fail. I hope this
> comes as a wake up call.

Excuse me, but didn't I read that Mid-Continent HAD a professional as Executive Director? And that he had been recently let go in a move to cut costs? As a "professional" shouldn't he have seen the coming problem? Or perhaps he did, and the Board failed to heed his warnings? Perhaps this is part of the story.


midlandblb@cs.com

So the only "worthy" career persons to be on museum boards are lawyers, doctors, bankers, etc? How about teachers, engineers, nurses, law enforcement officers, small business managers,etc? You have a rather narrow and elitist skew on what skills are required to operate a museum.

And just how are "professional" railroad museum managers groomed? I know of very, very few who have university degrees in museology or museum minors from accredited programs. By far, most museum professionals have the same types of educational, hobby, and hands-on experience as the rank-and-file members. These "professionals" either worked their way into a museum career or wheedled their way into it politically.

There may be a small patrician core of accredited "professionals" in the railroad museum business but I'd say most came up from the very ranks of people who constitute the member/volunteers of museums and like railroading as history, hobby, or technology.

> No lawyers, doctors or bankers on this board.
> This is typically the problem of most
> railway museums who fear the professionals
> will march right in, take way their toys and
> things won't be fun anymore.

You are right on this count: RR museums do have to change and adapt to new ideas. They also need to discriminate between good and bad new ideas in the process.

While the "Big Boys with their toys" mentality will surely stunt the growth of any RR museum, having so-called "professionals" is no fullproof guarantee that a museum is free from lawsuits, financial problems, embezzlement, member discontent, or bad ideas. Haven't we seen examples of such on this discussion board already?

I perceive a trend in some museum managements that they don't know how to manage members so they downplay, denigrate, and deny their potentially valuable role. It's a headache for them so they just try to drive or wish them away.

What happened to the notion that a well-run museum can result from the combined efforts of happy volunteers and "professional" managers?

> The cold hard reality is that museums who
> modernize with the times survive, and those
> who resort to the "same, old, same,
> old" are destined to fail. I hope this
> comes as a wake up call.

I certainly agree that museum boards should not be exclusively all professionals, but should have some rank and file people onboard for well-roundedness. The problem is that the typical railway museum board is unevenly stacked with few or no professionals at all. My point is that it is these professional people that have the important connections to give large amounts of their own money to the museum or have valuable connections to the money givers in the business community. Simply put, board members have a fidiciary responsibility to go out and get money for the museum. Let's face it, without money, there's not too much a museum can do to grow. But the money givers are usually scared away from most railway museums because: 1) railway museums tend to attract an unsophisticated audience (i.e. the dysfunctional foamer crowd) whose presence completely turns off donors; 2) many railway museums still conduct their business as the "old white men's railway club" and are in reality run more clubs than museums, which turns off potential donors; and 3) many railway museums lack programmatic acumen, an under-developed physical plant and no professionally-trained paid staff to guide the day-to-day business affairs. Many boards also fail to understand that their job is to formulate policy, NOT run the museum. Running the museum should be left to the Executive Director. I have little faith in the locomotive mechanics, motormen or brakemen at the museum who serve on the board and make the big decisions because that tells me that the old boy's club is in full force and there's very little happening there in regard to organizational growth or community outreach. Most railway museums I been involved with have board members who show up meeting after meeting and passively rubber stamp the Director's proposals and contribute very little to the development of the organization at the policy-formation level; many of these folks would not even know whom to cultivate in the business community to ask for contributions, much less know how to write a letter to a foundation to ask for funds. They may be good volunteers and good people at heart, but they are not board material. Much of the fundraising then falls into the Executive Director's lap, who is busy enough with managing the operation of the museum. I've been involved with enough of these outfits now to say that the field is very insular from the rest of the museum community, takes a conservative approach on most issues and still refuses to change with the times. The next ten years, in my opinion, will bear my points out. We will see a precipitous decline in the overall number of railway museums. They will either grow with the times or fail miserably. The lack of young blood in our organizations constitutes the biggest threat to our survival and we should be worried more about that than anything else.

> You are right on this count: RR museums do
> have to change and adapt to new ideas. They
> also need to discriminate between good and
> bad new ideas in the process.

> While the "Big Boys with their
> toys" mentality will surely stunt the
> growth of any RR museum, having so-called
> "professionals" is no fullproof
> guarantee that a museum is free from
> lawsuits, financial problems, embezzlement,
> member discontent, or bad ideas. Haven't we
> seen examples of such on this discussion
> board already?

> I perceive a trend in some museum
> managements that they don't know how to
> manage members so they downplay, denigrate,
> and deny their potentially valuable role.
> It's a headache for them so they just try to
> drive or wish them away.

> What happened to the notion that a well-run
> museum can result from the combined efforts
> of happy volunteers and
> "professional" managers?

I agree with many of your points. Having professionals (however defined) in a museum requires hiring them as staff or having them volunteer their talents on the board. Since railroad museums are generally not cash rich, volunteering rather than hiring professionals is the usual avenue of their involvement.

What I view as more important to donors than the professional head count on any museum board is a record of honest professional behavior, a plan, and a record of preservation achievement no matter what the social make-up of the membership or the account balance in the bank.

My particular experience with a railroad museum is one that touts professionalism in name only but acts very unprofessional otherwise (unless Enron is the role model). Believe me, you can have a "good ole boy" mentality on a board of "professionals" even after the railfan foamers and many hard-working volunteers have been driven off. You hear the same hackneyed excuses for years about projects not being completed by a staff who claims to be overworked and blames nearly all misfortunes on railfan members. Meanwhile, the board rubber stamps nearly all the phoney business presented to it by the staff. You can hoodwink the professionals too.

Railroad museums do indeed need new and younger blood to fill out the declining and aging ranks of those who started many of these museums and to displace the ranks of deadweight individuals (particularly board members) claiming to be indispensable to the organization but whose contributions waned years ago.

George,

I agree with all of your points 100%. As the old saying goes, "When the board goes, so does the Museum too."

Jim

> I agree with many of your points. Having
> professionals (however defined) in a museum
> requires hiring them as staff or having them
> volunteer their talents on the board. Since
> railroad museums are generally not cash
> rich, volunteering rather than hiring
> professionals is the usual avenue of their
> involvement.

> What I view as more important to donors than
> the professional head count on any museum
> board is a record of honest professional
> behavior, a plan, and a record of
> preservation achievement no matter what the
> social make-up of the membership or the
> account balance in the bank.

> My particular experience with a railroad
> museum is one that touts professionalism in
> name only but acts very unprofessional
> otherwise (unless Enron is the role model).
> Believe me, you can have a "good ole
> boy" mentality on a board of
> "professionals" even after the
> railfan foamers and many hard-working
> volunteers have been driven off. You hear
> the same hackneyed excuses for years about
> projects not being completed by a staff who
> claims to be overworked and blames nearly
> all misfortunes on railfan members.
> Meanwhile, the board rubber stamps nearly
> all the phoney business presented to it by
> the staff. You can hoodwink the
> professionals too.

> Railroad museums do indeed need new and
> younger blood to fill out the declining and
> aging ranks of those who started many of
> these museums and to displace the ranks of
> deadweight individuals (particularly board
> members) claiming to be indispensable to the
> organization but whose contributions waned
> years ago.

After reading this extensive thread, I just have to ask a couple of questions:

1) What's the problem with the members having fun?
2) What are these "foamers" who scare off respectable donors like? I'm not sure I've ever met one of them.

It also seems to me that we have a successful example of both professional management and happy members/volunteers - MOT. (Or maybe that's because Molly didn't work in the "musuem community" long enough to be properly indoctrinated before taking over there, and of course she went and married a railroader, too.)

pnichol6@prodigy.net

> George,

> I agree with all of your points 100%. As the
> old saying goes, "When the board goes,
> so does the Museum too."

> Jim

After reading all of the above it becomes clear to me why I have decided to phase out of this crazy business, after 35 + years of beating my head against a wall ... what remains of life is too short and maybe there is a use somewhere for some of the "stuff" I have dragged along.


lamontdc@adelphia.net

Boy, could I write a book on this subject !!! I speak as a person who some sixteen years with a certain organization that shall not be named here.

First, I do not make the connection between the so-called "foamers" and the active volunteers. The foamers were the folks who would seem to show up out of thin air when a project was completed-grab a few shots-and then disappear. No doubt, their only interest was being first to print in their favorite buff book. Once in a while, if they
lingered and started what we called the "allz ya gotta do" harangue (which was a reference to a project that THEY wanted to see completed) what we would do is ask to volunteer or give a few bucks. Presto-chango, they would gone like the proverbial flash !!!

In contrast, volunteers were (and are) a much more diverse lot. Some bring a tremendous amount of skill of some sort to the table-others not so much skill but a tremendous amount of energy. Some are very interested in the railroad subject-while others like to use their hands (and brains) in a constructive fashion otherwise unavailable to them in their daily lives. Herein lies the challenge-to integrate these folks into a cohesive whole and come with some bucks to pay for materials so everyone can do their thing and feel good at days end.

Perhaps this is just too much of a challenge (not just for rail museums-by for any non-profit) for the average board to deal with.

> After reading this extensive thread, I just
> have to ask a couple of questions:

> 1) What's the problem with the members
> having fun?
> 2) What are these "foamers" who
> scare off respectable donors like? I'm not
> sure I've ever met one of them.

> It also seems to me that we have a
> successful example of both professional
> management and happy members/volunteers -
> MOT. (Or maybe that's because Molly didn't
> work in the "musuem community"
> long enough to be properly indoctrinated
> before taking over there, and of course she
> went and married a railroader, too.)


vze46wzm@verizon.net