> "The only reasonable choice for a dissatisfied volunteer is to walk"

And there you have the reason so many volunteer organizations have issues. People volunteer for a combination of reasons - they support the cause and they enjoy the time spent supporting that cause. When it is no longer enjoyable, they walk.

Rather than stay and work together to make a stand, good people, the people an organization needs to survive long term, will simply move on to something else or another organization with an equally enjoyable opportunity. We see this not just with railroad museums, but with churches, little league organizations, etc. Again, using NJMT as an example, as good people chose to leave over a period of decades, it empowered those who stayed behind to play fast and loose with the by-laws, the finances, and legal agreements that keep the doors open such as leases for the property. No one is left to hold the rogue board accountable.

With MTM, something set this whole thing off. It did not occur over night and the details have not been provided. Rather than stay and fight, people chose to leave, a rogue election held, by-laws ignored, and then more good people left. In the end, what was best for the collection has been lost. Its time for the camps to sit down and work this out like adults.

J.R. May

I agree with Mr. May.
Have never been there but looked up the site and it is an amazing operation with some great artifacts. It is well worth fighting to keep active.
I hope it is not too late for all parties to press the reset button and start afresh.

Agreed - a long period (years?) of downtime, maybe without utilities at Jackson Street, and you now have a ruined building with damaged contents.

The reason to fight is that the corporate entity owns outright assets like the collection and the Jackson Street roundhouse, which can not simply be replaced by a new volunteer group.

Every individual is different and putting up a fight against internal Bee Ess is a valid option.

But people don't generally get involved in this kind of organization because of the opportunity to participate in a political soap opera. Maybe some would stay and fight, but most rational people are not going to put up with that nonsense, especially if it is volunteer time.

I do not have a dog in this fight, but seeing this and other similar situations is exactly why I have never joined or been involved with a rail historical organization except during a brief period of my high school time when I was active with a the Wilmington (NC) Railroad Museum back in the mid 1980s.

BTW, I checked out this groups website, just a heads up to anybody involved the links to check out their equipment (steam, diesel, passenger cars, etc) are dead links.

Correction to the above: the website is active and you can access all of the equipment lists. See:

https://transportationmuseum.org/

Fabulous museum. I hate to hear about all of the issues and hope they get successfully resolved.

Correction to the above: the website is active and you can access all of the equipment lists.

Does MTM own "Dan Patch?" I do not see it listed in the diesel list. Does it still operate?

Wesley

Unless several items of rolling stock have moved out since I visited the Roundhouse and the Osceola & St Croix operation back in 2011, the listings of "the collection" are not complete. None of these locos/railcars that I photographed at the Roundhouse are listed there....

I can't speak to the accuracy of the current website, but to briefly answer your question, two of those pieces are no longer at Jackson Street Roundhouse. The GN 400 is owned by the Great Northern Railway Historical Society and is currently at LSRM in Duluth. The Armco B-71 diesel is at IRM. The balance of the equipment is at MTM and the Dan Patch engine is still displayed in the roundhouse.

Among the communications sent out by “MTM Concerned Members” before the “recall” vote was a plea from the family of the late Emeritus Director, Art Pew III. It is the only communication sent by "MTM Concerned Members" with any attribution, and it is worthy of consideration.

Four members of the Pew Family signed the letter, which expressed their concern at the direction MTM was taking and urged members to vote for "recall.” The lengthy letter described, in some of the following excepts, their view of the situation at MTM:

- We’ve watched in despair as the rich egalitarian history of this beloved institution is being torn apart.
- This museum ... has been losing ground to what, without exaggeration, increasingly feels like an angry authoritarian ruler pursuing absolute power.
- A couple of months ago we began hearing grumblings of an increasingly hostile workplace.
- We heard news that the board chair was increasingly and improperly micromanaging day-to-day operations of MTM staff.
- We then learned that an increasing number of non-emergency decisions were being withheld from the larger board and kept in the hands of the “Executive Committee.” The broader board wasn’t just being doubted, it was being shut out.
- The intelligence and wisdom of those we have long admired was increasingly being criticized and doubted.
- Fundamental disfunction was taking over.

The Pew Family letter also contained the following excepts, which described their aspirations for the future:

- [A] moral obligation to ... see that the integrity of this wonderful and respectable organization is honored and upheld.
- The time and energy given by legions of committed, honorable, passionate heroes who selflessly volunteer their time to sustain and grow the institution … is important.
- [It is] important that you … protect the spirit with which this esteemed and beloved institution was founded and, we hope, will continue to operate.

Assess these excerpts with a critical eye; is the situation post-recall such that the museum has been saved?

This is in no way to disparage the Pew Family. Their hope for MTM’s future of honoring integrity, protecting the institution, and valuing the service of all volunteers is an endorsement of values core to MTM’s success. The family wishes great things for MTM and hopes it has a bright future. They are also equally right to call out actions which tear apart the institution, create a hostile workplace, or concentrate power in the hands of an unaccountable few. They are wise to promote seeking intelligence and wisdom, and equally wise to warn against letting fundamental disfunction take over.

MTM's next board meeting is tonight.

It is always good to hear from both sides in a dispute.

That said, if this kind of squabble boiled up at the organization that I volunteer with, I would probably find something else to do with my time.

The events of the past few weeks have raised many questions about MTM’s character as an organization and its future outlook. The single public statement from MTM about the situation contains few answers and almost no specifics. MTM Board members and the MTM community MUST consider the following vital questions about our future:

Foremost: What is the legal basis for the recall vote?

MTM’s corporate counsel has provided opinions to the board that have not been shared with MTM membership and the community. MTM’s board is attempting to replace the current attorney with a new attorney. What was in those opinions? Do they pertain to the recall vote? Do they pertain to the legitimacy of MTM’s current board? Why is current counsel being replaced?

How do these actions affirm MTM’s commitment to transparency as a nonprofit?

Does MTM’s board condone actions which violate the bylaws?

Are MTM members, especially board members, above the rules or are they bound by them equally?

Does MTM’s board condone sending anonymous emails to members?

Why is MTM deleting social media posts made by MTM members asking legitimate questions about current actions?

Why wasn’t more effort given to MTM’s existing internal process for handling dissent?

What is MTM’s plan for transferring responsibilities from the resigned Treasurer to a newly elected Treasurer? Is the new Treasurer legitimate? Is MTM’s board following the advice of corporate counsel on this matter?

Does MTM’s board have a plan to replace the large amount of talent lost in the fallout from the “recall”? If there is a plan, what is the timeline?

How much will it cost to replace mechanical, wheel work, air brake, restoration, IT, and marketing talent? Are these costs in the 2022 budget?

Is MTM’s board committed to completing the $2.4M EDA grant application process, and how will they fulfill the requirements for that? What is the timeline for completion?

Will the board continue to allow tenants to occupy space at MTM without a contract?

Is there still a proposal to give away ~250 free MTM memberships? If so, for how long?

What is the plan to continue restoration of GN 454-A? Will MTM meet the deadlines associated with grant monies from BNSF and Emery Trust, or will unspent funds be returned under the terms of the grants?

What is the plan for the restoration of GN 558? Will donor monies be returned?

What is MTM’s plan for the Ranch Car? If the Ranch Car acquisition is cancelled, when will donor funds be returned?

Who will be monitoring security and fire systems? Is there a plan for emergencies?

What are the longterm consequences of a wholesale loss of institutional knowledge, and what is the board’s plan to mitigate this loss?

It is clear that there are issues surrounding almost every aspect of this recall. From the questionable legitimacy, the lack of compliance with the bylaws, the misuse of MTM member contact information, the anonymous emails, the divisive fracture within the organization, the loss of talent, the need to hire expensive contractors to replace the lost talent, and a potential hit to MTM’s reputation – it is impossible to see how any of this is good for MTM.

To MTM board members: Failure to question or renounce illegal or damaging actions is a sign of your approval. You will have full ownership of the outcome, good or bad. To MTM members: your vote really does matter. Consider all possible outcomes and gather as much information as you can before using it. MTM’s future depends on it.

Airing all your dirty laundry out in public isn't doing anyone any favors when it comes to looking like "the good guys".

Not only do you have a governance problem, but you now have a PR problem.

The issue is not that they HAVE a PR problem; but how long ago did the problem develop?

Interesting reading. Unfortunately, I do not see much about adherence to/deviation from mission statement, proper stewardship of the artifacts in their care, or duty to provide safe environment for volunteers and visiting members of the general public. I also sense an undertone of aversion to correctly memorializing agreements using legally binding documents. It is much cheaper, easier, and much less time consuming to pay the attorney upfront to ensure all the necessary legal documents are properly executed than to pay several attorneys to haggle/litigate out a solution afterwards. Just ask the URHS.

Take all the political wrangling and marking of territory you see here and add a federal bureaucracy and one can begin to understand STEA.

As much as I still enjoy working in 12" to the foot scale, these types of threads make the Lionels in the basement look more attractive than ever.