I see nobody has commented on the numbers floated by (Mayor?) George at the interim meeting, where simply providing the panel track is "45,000" or more, and preservation with a little 'trainport' would be $200K-250K (he gets these numbers from Rusk, a connection which I believe was winkled out of Jason and Nick).

I find the whole production put up by Councilman Doucet dismaying at best, starting with 'this council meeting couldn't come fast enough'. He seems to think that the only 'closed door' arrangement that was made involved oil floating on floodwaters onto adjacent properties. I hope he will be made to explain Tuesday how Inland was given 'authority' (for supposedly $24K, just under the threshold) to get rid of the problem, how it was funded, what members of council acted to approve it, who made the arrangements, etc. A coherent timeline would be nice.\

At this point I think Jason and Nick should make tentative plans to have cranes and truck transport 'lined up' for as close to the 6th as possible. At the meeting they should offer the council about $21K for the engine (or whatever value for un-cut-up and undelivered scrap the locomotive actually represents) with the understanding that it will be immediately removed, paint and all, with no further $45,000 expense for panel track and greased rails... that is by far the least expensive and best alternative for cash-strapped Port Arthur. One potential fly in the ointment: it will be interesting to see if Inland Environmental comes up with 'remediation' costs that are higher than the "contracted" amount for the balance of the TCEQ-mandated work, especially since they have been paying overhead and other costs since the supposed 'sale arrangement' date.

I am highly alarmed ... perhaps for no good reason other than the-sky-is-falling hysteria over events so far ... at the form this meeting on Tuesday is supposed to take. Note how smoothly and suavely it was established that this is NOT a public meeting (which would 'have to be published in the paper' -- there will be public comment, all right, but no assurance whatsoever that council needs to or even will abide by any of the comment that does not suit their perhaps-already-decided priorities. Or will continue debate on 'who knew what when' to get scrapping equipment on site without -- regardless of Councilman Doucet's whining -- any particular public knowledge.

Not to derail the thread but the L&N 2132 is an 0-8-0 not an 0-6-0. Though Wasatch did do work on a certain 0-6-0 in Kentucky, but we all know what happens when we mention that little project don't we.

I can't find the link to the article anymore but they also hit up the city of Corbin for an additional $20,000 over their original estimate and ended up getting $10,000 before leaving town.

Whaaat?!? The interstates?!? Bbbut, don't you know the interstates killed the railroads?

Joking aside, I was going to respond with ARPANET.

I post to this thread mindful that it may be read by interested government and community members in Port Arthur and with an eye towards, at worst, being neutral as to possible impact on Mr. Sobczynski's and Mr. Hovey's efforts to arrange a professional and proper preservation plan for 503. The people of Port Arthur have lost a lot with these storms. It is not unreasonable that there may be a segment of the community that may not want to loose another piece of their local identity and so they deserve a chance to have their concerns addressed and for them to be provided with a transparent view of the economic ramifications of the various scenarios considered. Mr. Sobczynski and Mr. Hovey have been dedicated to the well-being of 503 since they heard of its plight. They have a great appreciation for 503's significance to the history of the area, a good framework for a plan to properly care for 503, and the ability and dedication to implement that plan. It is good and proper that those in the community that are interested in 503 have an opportunity to see this for themselves.

The numbers the mayor is tossing around for track panels and moving have been pulled
out of someone's bodily orifice.

I was part of a group that did a track panel job 5 months ago. It involved site preparation, all materials, building and transporting the 2 panels nearly 200 miles,
laying, lining and leveling the panels and installing joint bars and ballast. The whole thing
was less than $20k.

Cranes should be a fraction of what the mayor is touting, as well.

Whoops, my error.

Truthfully, I'm surprised that they were able to win the bid for the project considering the close proximity of Stearns to Oneida.

Overmod - It is my limited experience that the most successful preservation efforts are, not coincidentally, also the ones that work best with the local communities and local governments. Very little is gained at the early stages by being adversarial, being unsympathetic to the circumstances or needs of the community, or by making government officials look bad in the event of minor administrative errors. A smart government employee or elected official who knows the community well, such as Councilman Doucet, can often be one's best asset and ally in guiding the process. In this particular case, as so often happens, this public session was preceded by a closed executive session in which the entire council (including the Mayor) was fully briefed as to their legal situation regarding 503 by the City Attorney.

I agree and wanted to add that Port Arthur, Texas has an appointed City Manager because the City operates under the Council-Manager form of government.

There's a page about the position on the City's website: Port Arthur, Texas - City Manager.

I could not agree more with the idea of having friendly relationships with all government parties concerned. And I am glad that Jason and Nick and Rick are the ones conducting the negotiations, not me.

I would be delighted to work with Port Arthur to save the locomotive at the least cost or obligation to the City, or to volunteer to assist with any arrangements that have to be made around or after the 6th. It would be nice, though, to have better assurances of good faith dealing on the part of the responsible individuals in City government, going forward.

Too easy: Conrail.

Any other trivia?

Back to #503... 1,200 of us (myself included) gave our proxy vote to Jason. We all contributed to save and move the locomotive. I still believe that will be the outcome. Jason still has my proxy to do what is best for the locomotive.

I don’t have time to waste with “what if?” worries. If the save doesn’t go as planned, so be it. I will still be happy to have been a contributing donor and I will still be grateful for Jason and Nick’s effort. It’s fun for us to pontificate upon our keyboards, but those guys have been making the 4-5 hour drive to be on site and meet the people involved.

Remember, despite the long process, the only other outcome would have been a cut and loaded #503 prepped to melt... and that would have happened already.

This effort has already won a battle or two with the reaper and the clock.

Rob

Still, I'd like to hear about what's going on straight from the horses mouth. The lack of news leads to speculation which leads to the "what if" scenarios. A simple update would go a long way towards squashing these scenarios.

Jason posted an update four minutes ago: Update 17

There has just been an update http://nextgenrail.com/
"
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CITY OF PORT ARTHUR

Dear City of Port Arthur,

I am sending this letter to you on behalf of the supporter of the “Save 503” campaign and on behalf of all others who value historic preservation in our country.

Had we not taken steps with Inland Environments on Wednesday February 14th, 2018, the locomotive would have been scrapped starting Monday February 19th, 2018. By the time the disposition of the locomotive was initially made an issue of, beginning Wednesday February 21st, 2018, the locomotive would have been largely demolished.

As a historic preservation community, we have raised $67,084 via contributions from some 1,253 people from at least 6 countries around the world.

Secondly, the locomotive has sat a victim of mother nature for some 61 years and as a result has experienced much damage. Damage which will largely continue to occur even if the locomotive were to be placed under a roof due to the effects of the coastal, humid, salt ladened air. Given the current amount of decay, long term preservation would placing the locomotive into a climate controlled structure.

Thirdly, we ask that you support the opportunity which stands before this piece of history. Before us stands a defined path upon which will not only see this locomotive preserved, but restored to operation.

Together, we can see the hands of time turned back so that no longer will people have to look at a deteriorating machine and wonder what it once was, but rather people will be able to again experience what it is.

Thank you for supporting this endeavor.

Sincerely,

Jason Sobczynski and Nick Hovey"

I thought you'd say Steamtown National Historic Site.

I think a discussion is good as long as posts do not potentially diminish the possibility of completing the purchase and are written from the point that Mr. Sobczynski and Mr. Hovey know what they are doing and are working well with the other stakeholders towards completing the transaction. This situation with park engines will continue to come up, so it is good to explore the issues in real time. Mr. Glueck's reflections on his experience with 470 have been particularly insightful and helpful to me in my understanding. Mr. Webster's recent post pointed out a very interesting nuance in the structure of Port Arthur government. So there is a lot of opportunity to learn here from folks who have been there, done that and who can provide information not available anywhere else. Does the discussion mean that we are not cognizant that there has already been a significant accomplishment here with the loco not being cut up? Speaking for myself only, absolutely not. Due to Mr. Sobczynski's and Mr. Hovey's herculean application of dedication and skill, 503 still exists with the potential to teach future generations about our industrial heritage.

Great update, not unexpected but not a game ender. Got to get off RYPN and write some emails.

And here is the latest from Port Arthur News. Mr. Jason is quoted several times.

http://www.panews.com/2018/03/01/rr-rep-unsure-of-city-of-port-arthurs-locomotive-intentions/

Wow, that was fast service!

I am curious about his claim that Inland Environments owns the locomotive when the city is adamant that they retain ownership.