[quote="railfanmag"]As much as I'd like to continue answering questions, I have a magazine due out tomorrow night and need to focus on that. I'll let the New Business Model speak for itself.

Steve Barry


Wasn't ARM/TRAIN supposed to have a similar position of advancing rail historic preservation?

Any of these groups will have a long learning curve to promote rail preservation advocacy and funding on a national level. For Government funding, lobbying would play a key role after several years, but where are these groups going to get the funds for a lobbyist?

Then there are the private foundations. Aside from the usual suspects (North American Railway Fund, Dailey, et al), it is extremely difficult for foundations with a "historic preservation" component to give to a rail oriented project, unless the project is in their region, or has someone on the inside advocating for said project.

So, the leaning curve will begin at zero and have nowhere to go but up.

Sort of. More specifically, the point of the merger is to provide a single entity that can more effectively lobby Congress and regulatory agencies to present the concerns of the railroad preservation community. It is intended to be a trade organization more than anything else.

"More specifically, the point of the merger is to provide a single entity that can more effectively lobby Congress and regulatory agencies to present the concerns of the railroad preservation community."

Well, that's a non-starter.

Treasury Regulation §1.501(c)(3)-1(3)(i-iii):

Authorization of legislative or political activities. An organization is not organized exclusively for one or more exempt purposes if its articles expressly empower it:

(i) To devote more than an insubstantial part of its activities to attempting to influence legislation by propaganda or otherwise; or

(ii) Directly or indirectly to participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office; or

(iii) To have objectives and to engage in activities which characterize it as an action organization as defined in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.



http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/26/1.501(c)(3)-1


Errata:

My screw-up. Thanks to the advice received off-line from the party who wishes to remain anonymous.

ATRRM is organized as a 501(c)(6).

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2 ... afb-ZO.pdf

Politicking is allowed for 501(c)(6)'s.

To clarify, here's what ATRRM's by-laws states in Article I about the purpose of our organization:

The Association’s purpose is to be a trade association as described in 805 ILCS 105/103(a)(19) promoting the common interests of organizations engaged in the business of tourist, scenic, historic or excursion railroading, railway and trolley museums and entities engaged in the business of supplying goods or services to the forgoing organizations

The Association is not organized for profit or to engage in activities ordinarily carried on for profit, nor for the purpose of providing particular services for any member or private individual. . The activities of the Association shall be carried on in the manner permitted by section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code. No part of the Association’s net earnings is to inure to the benefit of any private shareholder (the Association has no shareholders) or individual.

Being a trade organization our goal is to work with/for our members. One of the services we provide to our members, besides the mentioned lobby work in Congress and in state legislatures is to help our members with their own vision, mission and goals and with other Museum and operational activities. Thus, ATRRM publishes the Recommended Practices for Railway Museums and convenes semi-annual conferences during which seminars on topics of interest are presented. One of the most useful services that ATRRM provides to its members is the ATRRM Parts Forum in which members can call upon the "movers and shakers" in the majority of railway Museums in North American to get help with everything from a source for Pyle National headlight reflectors to "how to" questions.

For more info on ATRRM and on Recommended Practices, go to our website: http://www.atrrm.org

Thanks!

Hankey essay, part 3:

http://cs.trains.com/trn/b/staff/archiv ... -next.aspx

Why not simply (hah!) meld the railway preservation and heritage functions of NRHS into an already-existing organization with (mostly) that same agenda--- ATRRM??

It seems to me that the preservation aspects of the NRHS "national" are duplicative/parallel to the ARM portion of the ATRRM organization. As I see it, Rail Camp and the Heritage Grants are the primary "assets" that NRHS has to offer the preservation community, and are well worth continuing and expanding.

The list of endangered stuff is merely window dressing--- there is plenty of endangered stuff out there, some of it much more significant than some of the listed items.

I've been active in this railway heritage and preservation thing for over 40 years. I was an NRHS member for one of those years in the 70s. In my opinion, rail preservation/heritage preservation has occurred in spite of the "national" NRHS, not because of it. There are a number of chapters that, as other posters have mentioned, are equivalent to "stand-alone" preservation groups.

Howard P.

Not a bad idea, but....

There's are some IRS tax regulations that comes into play here...

ATTRM is a 501c4 tax exempt trade association and allowed to do political lobbying

NRHS is a 501c3 tax exempt educational organization, not allowed to do political lobbying

Donations to 501c4s are not tax deductible, donations to 501c3s are.

Anybody wanta solicit non taxable donations ?????

Bob H

"there is plenty of endangered stuff out there, some of it much more significant than some of the listed items."

There's another rub. Unless you believe there's suddenly going to be unlimited capital and listing space; and you are going to list EVERYTHING that's "most endangered", then your list by necessity but contain value judgments about what is in danger and what merits preservation effort.

Unfortunately, that significance is in the eye of the beholder.

It is a fact that most preservation has been the result of blind luck and being targets of opportunity. What was systematically saved, was done by the private owners. Check out how many of the 1400 or so remaining steam locomotives were UP, SP, ATSF. For whatever reason, they kept donating engines to municipalities for display, while others waited for Luria Bros. (and others) check(s).

Example: The CNJ didn't save a one of their Pacifics, or more importantly the Mikados that were their bread and butter for freight. Remaining? CNJ 113 by virtue of being sold, and CNJ 592 as a representative of a part of the B&O.

How about the Baldwin double-enders, significant because they were failures, not successes. (There's a reason we go to see the fossils of the extinct as well as the living species in zoos). Steam is an industrial fossil.

There's an inherent assumption tht a "new" NRHS can issue missives and people will just accept their judgment. It reminds me of the days when I was harassed by the promotion-conscious types that "volunteered" to shake me down, er I mean visit me on behalf of the United Way.

Inherent in the idea of the United Way is that a small cadre of self-selected "experts" would select the only or the most meritorious charities, and rationally allocate funds to them. Of course as we know, he who has the gold makes the rules and that gave United Way Board members a lot of status.

I'm still wondering why the M&E FL-9's and the Tioga Alcos didn't get some mention. Were they not perceived as in danger or not worthy of preservation effort?

Not a bad idea, but....

There's are some IRS tax regulations that comes into play here...

ATTRM is a 501c4 tax exempt trade association and allowed to do political lobbying

NRHS is a 501c3 tax exempt educational organization, not allowed to do political lobbying

Donations to 501c4s are not tax deductible, donations to 501c3s are.

Anybody wanta solicit non taxable deductible donations ?????

Bob H[/quote]

Okay, one last comment...

The National Trust For Historic Preservation's Endangered List is one of the most popular programs of that organization and has raised awareness for dozens of projects and has made a difference. There is no reason why a similar program cannot work for rail preservation.

Now, before my final statement here, let me make this clear that I am speaking as me personally and not as a board member of NRHS or as a representative of the magazine. Clear? Okay -- The recently departed FL9s, in the grand scheme of things, were not significant. There are dozens of rare nearly one-of-a-kind surviving freight cars that really need to be preserved more than those FL9s did (but rail preservation is heavy on the glamour stuff -- locomotives, parlor cars and cabooses). In fact, right now one Amtrak HHP8 would be more important to preserve than the 20th-22nd surviving FL9. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

Steve Barry

"ATTRM is a 501c4 tax exempt trade association and allowed to do political lobbying"

No, it's a 501c6. Their 990, shows this box checked off, even though I initially failed to check that.

"Donations to 501c4s are not tax deductible, donations to 501c3s are."

Anybody wanta solicit non taxable deductible donations ?????

While it is true that Donations to 501c6s are not tax deductible, and donations to 501c3s are-this is not a dead end. There are such things as "companion organizations" -the complexities of which are beyond this article-that could overcome this limitation.

Taxation like medicine is best practiced by the appropriately trained and licensed.

"The National Trust For Historic Preservation's Endangered List is one of the most popular programs of that organization and has raised awareness for dozens of projects and has made a difference. There is no reason why a similar program cannot work for rail preservation."

Then why not have the NTHP expand it's scope? Even better, start fresh. I'm always wary of people that tell me the car is going to run better after they take it apart and put it together again.


"Now, before my final statement here, let me make this clear that I am speaking as me personally and not as a board member of NRHS or as a representative of the magazine."

What does that even mean? You are clearly representing a specific position that was arrived at as a result of your participation in a deliberative process. I know you aren't speaking for Carstens, they're gone and your new parent wasn't involved.

"Clear?"

No.

"Okay -- The recently departed FL9s, in the grand scheme of things, were not significant. There are dozens of rare nearly one-of-a-kind surviving freight cars that really need to be preserved more than those FL9s did (but rail preservation is heavy on the glamour stuff -- locomotives, parlor cars and cabooses). In fact, right now one Amtrak HHP8 would be more important to preserve than the 20th-22nd surviving FL9. Sorry, but that's the way it is."


As we see, such decisions inevitably involve judgment. Others might disagree. Others might argue that this is among the last of a long line of successful revisions to the "diesel that did it" every last one should be saved.

Of course, this is a red herring because the salvation of an HHP8 (which I agree should be saved for it's massive shortcomings, but others disagree) isn't and wasn't conditioned on scrapping FL9's.

The decision was scrap the FL9's (and the RS11) or maintain them, but it seems that these locomotives were acquired and left exposed by one of your committee members? (And as a believer in private property, I support anybody's right to do what they will with their stuff) Given what's being done with the PA, I find it hard to believe that they were "too far gone", certainly for static display.

Does anybody think that SMS would leave a Baldwin to vandals or that the Delaware Lackawanna would leave an Alco to such ignominy? Surely, they could have been tucked away like the Sharks?

"Sorry, but that's the way it is."

That is an opinion, completely subject to alteration or dispute by any other person, not a statement of fact.

My comments on the FL9s were not made as a member of the NRHS New Business Model committee and were a personal opinion not to be construed as an official stance of NRHS or R&R. Everything else I have said in this thread can be taken as me explaining stuff on behalf of the NRHS New Model Committee. That is all. I just wanted to separate my personal opinion on the FL9s from everything else. However, I will argue that simply storing something somewhat intact has a cost in potential liability, future cost of removal and even lost revenue from scrap. Sometimes scrapping makes sense.

Steve Barry

Sometimes scrapping makes sense.

I agree. It does not however show the dedication exhibited by SMS or the D-L.

The line between "dedication" and "obsessive-cumpulsive disorder" is often a might fine one.

I would make the case that "enough" NH FL9's were saved by other preservationists, and that the key to survival for the ones scrapped would have been commercial use--just as SMS, D-L, and Georges Creek justify their preservation-oriented diesel acquisitions. Honestly, we have a "glut" of usable "vintage passenger power" out there. Those FL9's were picked up more or less "on speculation," a speculation that proved not to pan out. I'm about as disappointed in their scrapping as I would be if PRR GG1 4876 were to be finally put out of its misery.