In the post about the TSRR there is an assertion that that operation and perhaps others would benefit by "outsourcing" operations to the private sector, that various economies and efficiencies and improvements of operation would result.

Generally, I support the concept that the free market is more dynamic and responsive to meeting the publics needs. However, that does NOT translate to that governmental operations SHOULD be run as businesses, as that has been the trend-certain unfortunate consequences are occurring.

However, in Pennsylvania, the state is busy selecting sites that will be "awarded" gambling casinos. Since 2003 or so, the implementation of this has been priority one for both the executive and legislative branch. As a part of this, one David LeVan (yes the very same one) is leading an effort to establish a gambling casino near Gettysburg PA. They have a strong promotion. Perhaps a purely market based consideration would dictate the opening of a casinmo there. For many people, petty games of chance should never obscure this area, for to do so, is an affront to the area. Perhaps some opponents have finance as their primary concern, rather than preservation. I'll use the term "abomination" that there would be any consideration that this ground be defiled by petty games of chance. Mere coincidence I'm sure, is a stepped up effort by the State, using uniformed officers of the PSP to crack down on unlicensed games of chance as the launch draws near.


What is clear is that the Commonwealth isn't an impartial arbiter here, because it has very clear financial interests in future gaming revenues. The market may very well dictate the placement of a casino with a gettysburg address, but maybe this decision shouldn't be made solely on the basis of economic concerns.

So its fair to ask, if we turn over a government operating museum to a private operator, how much control do we wish to cede to that private operator. Will we let them do what ever makes economic sense and find that in 2050, all steam locomotives are fueled by something other than coal and stopped with electroneumatic braking systems, thereby producing an experience that lacks any semblance of historic authenticity? Any interpretive effort is an approximation to be sure, some compromises will be made-but should they be made soley on a dollars and sense basis?

Obviously, the government entity must retain some oversight-but letting a private operator come in cedes the core asset-technical knowledge of the operation. What happens when the private operator decides not continue in the business? Are the locomotives to be left as they are? Or do we insist that a surety bond is in effect to ensure a return to some prior state?

Anybody who's worked in government AND the private sector knows that running a business like government would be a recipe for disaster-but running government like a business presents perils as well. Should your police be running a DUI checkpoint because it provides "revenues" or chasing down that "cold case" because it meets their objective of addressing the worst (admittedly subjective) cases of injustice?

I rather like the fact that there's private operators-who's primary mission is to provide enjoyment in a historic context-and public operations that provide historical content with enjoyment as an adjunct.

-Beware of those who know the cost of evcrything and the value of nothing.

Mr. Superheater poses some interesting questions. This is discussed from several angles in the Texas State RR thread and some very thought provoking posts are contained therein.
Seems to me that perhaps the best of all worlds would be to let the Gov't. provide the capital needed to establish the physical plant and restored equipment with the big investments needed that could not be justified in the private sector, and then let the operation be handled by a savy private sector firm that knows how to sell entertainment.
This model is used extensively with gov't. owned/developed ski resorts and works very well.
Doesn't take much imagination to envision the dramatic improvements in attendance/ridership that would occur at say Steamtown if the Strassburg RR became the designated operator!
IMHO-Ross Rowland

The popular comparison between "government run" and "private enterprise" is biased by the available information. Government actions are all public. When a government enterprise makes a mistake, it quickly becomes public knowledge. Private businesses have no obligation to reveal their failures, unless they injure someone or go bankrupt.

When private businesses are entrusted with public assets or artifacts, there is no transparency or public information on the management of those entrusted assets. Do you recall the last commercial operator at Cumbres and Toltec? The public interest is not limited to just government titled property, many privately held assets have an implied public obligation. New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal provide case studies both for those who agree with me and those who do not. Documented not too long ago in this forum is the loss of the sidewheel rail ferry Lansdowne. It was privately owned, but in the public's mind it had been "preserved" as an artifact of the Detroit scene.

Next time you are headed to Scranton, look at Montage-a government/private sky resort (about MP 182 I-81), its had problems for years because its on the wrong side of the mountain and gets more sun thanit should.

I visited Montage over the weekend of March3/4 and it was humming with activity. The lodge area was packed with people and there were big crowds skiing, snowboarding and tubing. The restaurant/snack bars/cocktail lounge were all very busy. Granted it was a beautiful weekend weather wise and snow conditions were ideal,and I do not know the history of the place, but it sure was going great when I was there!
Ross Rowland

Super,

i think you have failed to mention the middle of the road approach: the private non-profit. That does more preservation work in thais country than all of the governments agencies combined.

I will work this weekend for a non-profit tha is turning 60 this year.
The work and the dreams of a handful of traction enthuesiasts here in California, has led to a collection of equipment and smaller artifacts, a Library and archives, a railroad bookstore an green picnic area and other facilities to keep them going. Plus 22 miles of preserved Interurban.

Another non-profit that I will be visiting in a few weeks is the Smithsonian Institution. It is in Washington, DCbit it is a private non-profit chartered in order to use a fortune left to the Unitd states by Smithson. In fact I will wave at his crypt when it am there.

Ted Miles

There is no magic organizational structure that will serve all situations best all the time. Certainly, I can point to victories and defeats, sometimes at the same place in different times, caused by the actions or inactions of both public and private sector management schemes, as can almost anybody who has boomed around in this business for a couple decades.

The one area in which the private sector seems to have a constant advantage over the public sector is flexibility - the ability to adapt and evolve more quickly to changes in the marketplace or regulatory climate.

On the other hand, public sector operators are not as prone to need to adapt quickly, as their subsidies are, generally speaking, less prone to immediate fluctuations - budgets are voted on months if not years in advance. Fiscal crises in the public sector can be planned for, generally.

So much of it boils down to the personalities involved, be they enterpreneurs ranging from milkers and scrappers to for profit preservationists, or bureaucrats in government positions ranging from impediments waiting for their retirement to genuinely interested historical interpreters.

I am watching (with one foot in the door) an unfolding drama going on out west as a little public / private tourist operation evolves in the midst of political interference, with some pretty impressively ignorant expenditures made by clueless government officials without consultation with their private contractors, which, if studied in years to come, might be a great textbook for "things to watch out for", including some attempts to contravene a few laws of physics.

Point being, I don't think any attempt to come up with a universally applicable model is going to bear edible fruit. There are far too many variables involved, and many of those are extremely subjective.

I think the best we can hope for is well intentioned people from all points of view, who can join together, put aside all political or institutional prejudices, and rationally consider the constantly changing climate around any of our businesses, and agree on an evolving course of actions that makes the best use of all approaches in partnership.

dave

I like Dave's comment.

I too have to agree with Dave's remarks. It overall seems like a good concept, but I don't think that there ever will be an over-all formula to make something like this work.

I didn't address it, because the assertion was that for profit enterprises should be involved with government museums. I have no opposition to non-profits, have served on one board, am aware of their strengths and weaknesses and see them as one more arrow in the quiver.

Seems to me that Daves post has hit the nail on the head. The success stories are when both the private and public sectors are permitted to marry their respective strengths for the combined good of the whole product!
Ross Rowland.....no s please......