Now that's just what the Dr. ordered! Thanks for the great video! See what I mean about a magical place? I too want it to stay that way!

Steve

No real news in this Classic Trains post except this one update:

Wandering 2-8-2 deserves a new home
Posted by Kevin Keefe
on Monday, February 20, 2017
http://cs.trains.com/ctr/b/mileposts/ar ... -home.aspx

And the saga continues...

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/20 ... -continent

More like the insanity continues. MC had spring members meeting on 4/1/17 which is no joke, very fitting other than it is not a joke as far as what is happening here.

Some notes: a couple of years ago there were some bi-law changes made and voted on by the membership. The BOD recommended some of these bi-law changes and many members who are not very aware of what goes on voted the changes in. Now takes something like 66 or so voting members to have a quorum. Well unless there is some sort of divine intervention to try and get that number of voting membership present would be an "act of God". So the BOD is not beholding to listen to the membership period. The BOD makes no qualms in letting the membership know that they are in control and they do not have to listen to the membership. After many members bringing up points that the lawsuits could of been prevented, that we the members want steam and the #2 to stay, "to stop the childish BS" and sit down and iron out the differences we were treated to statements such as "you people are misguided" and "we have the facts and you don't". There are no term limits for BOD president who has been in office since about yr 2000. The owner, "Skip" is about the only mechanic of the property who has the knowledge to repair almost anything on the property and then see the repair through to completion. We have many mechanics who can start projects, but often lack the follow through to finish them.

The owner of the #2 has twenty-two organizations who want him and his locomotive to come to their property. Think about who other than MC would not want a ready to run FRA compliant 2-8-2 logging mike that came with its own mechanic and can probably tackle other projects at your property? Only MC who has all the facts but has not shared any of them that hold water would push away the #2. Along with spending a pile of OPM {other peoples money} in the process. There may be a minority of people who agree with the BOD but most of the active membership does not. We only had 56 voting members at this last meeting but it was clear nobody is impressed with the BOD handling of this situation. There is much to celebrate in other areas of MC. New building going up for car storage badly needed, some sorely needed track repair, possible bridge work? But the power behind MC has always been steam. To send the #2 and Skip packing is a victory to no one. To take the attitude the BOD has taken is a victory for no one. To squander OPM and MC reputation is a victory for no one. The personal vendettas and ego based actions have been going on for years and this is the reward.

Would someone please supply the link to the Bill Parkers {the arbitrator} final report on the arbitration? I had it but couldn't open it and don't know where is? It is supposed to be public information and is not a secret document. It is worth reading and would dispel any thoughts about "sour grapes". But in all seriousness, as long as this BOD is in power I think the #2 and Skip leaving is the best for the both of them, and the worst thing to happen to MC and all that has been accomplished by this organization over the years.

Regards, John Risley.

PS Forgot to mention the positive movement on the 1.5-2 million dollar restoration on CN&W #1385. With a experienced boiler shop and GB involved maybe just maybe this will run again. She is not the best locomotive for MC to use very often, but the work is progressing and to see another parts kit come back together is progress.

A few bits of information:
The article is behind the paywall so I have no way to know what has been said there.

Taken from the bylaws page:

The day of the meeting the necessary number was 66. The Bylaws were last re-stated in November of 2014. The rationale behind the change was to prevent any small, vocal group from foisting its' wishes upon the rest of the Society. I'm not arguing good or bad here, just passing along what was offered and you can decide for yourself which is right.

While I believe a majority of the crowd at the meeting was displeased I find it difficult to believe that anyone can state with much accuracy how "... but most of the active membership does not. ..." without some sort of survey or canvass of the membership (which hasn't happened).

I'll offer this final bit as food for thought: Whenever a negotiation fails I've always found that it is the result of both sides having said No.

I do thank John for mentioning the positive points as we sometimes even manage to make progress in spite of ourselves. mld

I'm having a hard time figuring out what the news is in that one? I guess the fact that they've actually made payment? Everything else seems like it's already been posted in earlier news stories?

Doesnt the MC still need to pay for the eventual transport of #2 to wherever it's new home will be?

Thanks for clarifying the number of voting members needed Pete. I had heard both numbers and have corrected my post to read "66". True enough I guess one would need to take some sort of survey to who is for or against MC handling of this affair. But being that 56 or so voting members showed up and spoke their piece says a lot in my book too. I won't pick nits over this. But for me anyway after reading the outcomes and going back point to point I find the whole thing obviously avoidable and mishandled from the beginning. I knew this from first hand time spent on the ground and seeing some of this first hand, but others obviously may have a different view.

Have been told these links are public and if anybody is confused or unsure of the whys and why nots of this ordeal, I suggest grabbing a beverage of your choice and read the links. It is kind of long, but the arbitrator I think nailed it pretty accurately from my experiences at MC in the last 15 years or so since rejoining the organization. You can try to whitewash this if you want but it is all in pretty much plain English. Others can draw their own conclusions. But not a good thing for anybody involved. Maybe we can agree on this much. Not sure if anybody is learning anything from any of this? Most organizations I hope would of nipped some of this negativity in the bud long before things went this bad.

I tried the links and they worked sometimes. I removed them after getting an email from a friend who questioned what good would come out of this? He referred to this as "dirty laundry". I disagreed and did not see it that way. But I trust the mans judgment and thought maybe I ought to listen up. So I changed course and removed the links. Guess at this point there is nothing good that will come out of any of this. The links are available somewhere and maybe someone else will feel compelled to share them? Hard for me not to get worked up about this whole ordeal but guess it is all over but the crying for now. Regards, John.

Deleted Links. Unable to delete post.

I think Jim Wrinn nailed it in his blog of 2/28/17 where he wrote:


Yes,Most everything is avoidable until "emotions & passions" enter in. mld

If museums did not cooperate with private owners many of the operating steam locomotives and a lot of other equipment would not be running today. Maybe the best example that comes to mind is 4449 which is owned by the city of Portland. And there are too many more examples to list here, some of those work well and some don't. A well written lease that is negotiated by reasonable and honorable people who have a common interest and goal of preserving and operating historic equipment is needed. If either the organization or the individual owner believes that large amounts of money can be made by running tourist or excursion trains than they are fooling themselves. The glitz and the glammer of operating railroad equipment causes many people to be blinded to the huge amounts of hard work and money that are involved. Your assets need to be covered by a sensible lease that can be honored by both parties.

Mid-Continent is not the only railroad museum with these types of problems and "all" do not revolve around "privately owned" railroad equipment as Mr. Wrinn seems to think.

mldeets "Yes, most everything is avoidable until "emotions & passions" enter in."

There is another part to this "Power and Control". I know of a railroad museum that has had the same president for over 40 years and he runs the place like a dictator, his way or the highway.

The Indiana Transportation Museum in Noblesvile, Indiana is having it's problems as well.

The problem here is, that not only, that the internal battle may well destroy the ITM, but it may also lead to the removal of the rail line that they were operating on, and it's conversion to a trail.

Previous quote; "The rationale behind the change was to prevent any small group from foisting it's wishes upon the rest of the society".

If the answer is to change the Bi-laws to prevent this, then how do you control the Board of Directors?

The ITM also had a change in it's bi-laws and from what I have read. The courts became involved and the ITM was ordered to hold elections for their BOD, but the court left open for the BOD to determine who could vote, as to who was a member in good standing and thereby eligible to vote. As reported on another site, they could not put together a quorum, so no vote.

From my past views of Mid-Continent, it started and it's operations were based on the operation of steam locomotives. As anyone in the know, knows, steam locomotives have become a very costly machine to not only purchase, but to rebuild, maintain and operate today.

Mid-Continent had within it's membership and base, not only a member that had the drive, but the willingness to purchase and rebuild a steam locomotive to fill the gap within there operation. It is very sad that, that "Passion and Willingness" could not have been used for the best of all concerned.

Still not sure if I was letting my "passion and emotions" run too wild or not? But one of the reasons I think people interested should read the arbitrators report is it goes from the very beginning back in 1982-1984 time frame to the almost present time. You get a history of events and situations that explain how things happened and why. One of my problems with the so called steam program at MC was nobody wanted or was willing to see why failure after failure was happening? This was not to rub anybodys face in it, but to try and see if we could stop the confusion and waste of money and resources. The problems like the steam program failures could of been avoided or certainly lessoned had we as an organization put on our big boy pants and tried to be objective on what we were trying to accomplish. This all goes pretty far back. But the end results is what we have now with a trail of disillusioned membership and donors. Not to mention credibility as a museum.

I like Jim Wrinn. He came out to help us a couple of times on the #2 and bought me lunch. That makes him a good guy! But I disagreed with his statement about leased equipment then and still do. In a perfect world I agree it is better if you can own your own property and equipment. In the case of MC if it hadn't been for membership leased equipment we may or may not of been able to be what we had become. By that I mean a respected RR museum. If you go back and read the history of the arbitration you will see how much the museum and the owner benefited from the lease agreements. Nobody got rich and nobody was going to profit had MC leased and ran the locomotive #2. The choice has been made and that is that, but it wasn't like Skip or MC was benefitting one more than the other. Except MC had a pretty good deal going for them in my humble opinion. To operate and maintain a steam locomotive is not cheap regardless of ownership. Maintaining the locomotive is the cost of doing business regardless.

The arbitration to me makes MC BOD look pretty questionable and I am being nice here. I will also counter this statement that the BOD are volunteers like me. They work very hard to keep the ship afloat. They often donate much more time and personal money to the place than some of us can imagine. Some of the BOD have donated large pcs of their lives to MC like Skip has or some of the other members still plugging away. Most of us as individuals have at one time or another have made huge whopping mistakes and then continued on to add to our self created pile. Some are white as newly fallen snow and never drifted {haven't known many like this}. Few have probably made as many mistakes as I have. I do not hold my self in shame or anything odd like that, but the point I am trying to make is we all live in glass houses and am not being critical for the sake of being critical here. But to keep continuing on like this is suicide and who wins? Pretend none of this ever happened? I am still searching for answers myself.

Regards, John

John -

I know that, through the years, Mid-Continent used a number of different steam locomotives. I wonder if you, or someone else from MCRM, might be able to give us a list of those locomotives, what years they were run and whether they were owned by the museum, or by private owners?

Les

Why was the link to the arbiter's report deleted?

The lesson from this and what's happening at the Indiana Transportation Museum is that bad decisions by your organization's governing body often have consequences that last for decades beyond the date of the decision. Continual bad decisions compound upon each other.

What happens if your organization has been mismanaged for decades? It is stuck in an abyss that's nearly impossible to dig out of.

A lot of our organizations have been poorly managed for years by members or volunteers that thought of it as a train club than a real non-profit educational organization. What we are seeing in North Freedom and in Noblesville are examples of that. It appears that both organizations are now run by cliques who are not accountable for the membership, due to bylaw changes and other shenanigans.

I'm also afraid that this is just the tip of the spear. What should be a wake up call to all of us to examine the business governance side of our organizations will likely be ignored by most. There is a reckoning coming in railway preservation and in the end, there will be many fewer organizations than before. Only the well-managed will survive.