First, I want to thank all our board members leaving the board. Greg Molloy (President/District 6), Patrick Molloy (District 5), Claude Doane (District 7) and Robert Neman (District B). All have worked tirelessly for the good of the NRHS over many many years. I say "Thank You" on behalf of all members of the NRHS.
Our new 2015/2016 board will be seated at the Fall Conference held this year in Johnson City, TN, on November 15, 2014. As always, please give them your comments, ideas and support. Along with the Advisory Council, they are your way of getting your input into the organization.
The New Business Model that was presented at the special board meeting in September was defeated. It has many items that your board will consider implementing over the next several years. We appreciate the New Business Model committee for their time and effort in putting this plan together, even though it did not pass, many gains for the society will come from it.
The 2015 NRHS Convention in Rutland, VT, is up and running. The events will provide an excellent view and experiences of the railroad rich area between Burlington to Rutland to North Walpole to North Creek. We will be riding on many different historical railroads and visiting very interesting sites. Hotel space is also starting to be reserved. Info on the hotel package is also on the NRHS.com web site. You can order your tickets now on our web site >http://www.nrhs.com/2015_Convention Please do so as some of the events and trips are selling fast and I would not want you to miss out.
The NRHS NEWS will be coming out in the future as an electronic document like the NRHS TELEGRAPH is now. This will allow more content and much more current content. The next issue is to be released soon.
Your officers are discussing whether to continue publishing the Bulletin. After reviewing the financial situation, the board will decide how many issues will be produced annually and how it will be delivered to members. We also want to bring back the Annual Activities issue but on the WEB so it can be accessed at anytime and updated quickly.
We need volunteers for RailCamp! This is one of the NRHS key programs and has been very successful over the years. The time spent is very rewarding and advances our commitment to education of railroads and rail history to young students. I have been involved for the last few years on the committee. We have members that are doing the administrative tasks and will continue but we need new volunteers to help as camp counselors and other tasks. Please consider this opportunity to assist the society by volunteering and making a difference in a young person's life.
We are also need volunteers for the Historic Grants committee. I have had a few volunteer so far but we need a few more. This work is again one of the key parts of the NRHS. Volunteers on the committee review the applications and make the grants. What could be a better job than doing that for railway history preservation.
Al Weber2015/2016 NRHS President
Posts: 711 | From: Santa Ana | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I dropped my NRHS membership several years ago and simply subscribe to my former Chapter's newsletter and show up at one or two meetings a year - usually those that do not entail a marathon slide show or a late night (danger zone for drunks) drive over two lane highways. While the quality and timeliness of The Bulletin appears to have improved recently, they simply piled up. So with the significant dues increases of late, I had to question cost-benefit, and the result was the Adios drumhead went up.
While it is not my intent to be negative, simply the NRHS does not represent a segment of the industry in which my interests lie. My interests are simply those of how this revitalized industry can play a role in meeting contemporary transportation, including passenger, needs.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Several things bother me about this letter:
1. President Weber made absolutely no mention of the lawsuit that may well bankrupt the NRHS. I am well aware that they are not allowed to talk about any of the particulars of this suit while it is ongoing, but he at least could have been honest enough to admit it exists and is a huge threat to to the financial survival of the NRHS.
2. He never once mentioned anything about the huge annual expense of the NRHS' contract with Fernley & Fernley, and what plans, if any, the NRHS has to deal with this huge expense.
3. He stated that the Board is essentially ignoring its own vote against the New Business Model, and is considering implementing a number of the items in it. I know it is much too soon to know exactly what will happen, but President Weber should at least have given us members some specifics on what, exactly, the Board is planning to do to help the NRHS to survive.
On a happier note, I am very pleased that the NRHS is at least seriously considering bringing back the Chapter Activities issue. This was my favorite NRHS publication. It is absolutely fascinating to me to see the great variety of newsletter names and activities the various chapters do. This issue is the best way I had to find out where other chapters were.
President Weber did say that the NRHS plans to publish the News -- and other publications -- only in electronic form. I am glad all the publications will finally be available on the web, but Mr. Weber never said how the NRHS intends to deal with the needs of the many members who do not have access to computers.
What this letter omits is very telling, and shows that the present management of the NRHS may well not have what it takes to help the NRHS survive.
Posts: 211 | From: California | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Margaret, what I'm at a loss to understand is that I thought the NRHS by-laws now require an outside audit. Part of such requires disclosure within the Notes of any material contingent liabilities. While such reporting need not include more disclosure than a simple recitation of the facts and circumstances, and certainly none of any party's position in the matter, any litigation that has the potential to bankrupt an organization certainly meets a standard of materiality.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Nornan: Even though I have been a member of the NRHS for 31 years, I have not read our By-Laws yet, so I did not know that such a disclosure was required.
On Oct. 25, I posted a comment on the NRHS FaceBook page, similar to what I posted here, and I have yet to get a reply. I will post here what I learn from them -- if and when they reply to me.
So far, the first reply I got (today, Oct. 27) was that I was wrong to state that the members would not have gotten to vote, because if the Board had passed the NBM, it would have gone to the members for a vote.
But -- because the Board did not approve the NBM (12-10, FWIW), we members never got a chance to vote on it. But now President Weber has stated in his letter that the Board is considering implementing a number of the items in the NBM. They are acting as though they had actually approved the NBM, and if so, they really should allow us members to vote on it.
As I stated in a further Comment on the NRHS FaceBook page, I think that the NRHS is about 100 times too small in members to have had any real impact on railroad preservation, and I stated that this may not at all be the fault of the NRHS.
We have lost too much of our irreplaceable history to the scrapper's torch and the wrecker's ball. There is very little left of our industrial heritage.
Posts: 211 | From: California | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got 2 replies from the NRHS today (Oct. 27, 2014). They said: "Sorry, but there will be no comments on outstanding litigation, either here or on the website." I scanned the NRHS By-Laws, and saw no mention at all of audits. I did read the 2013 audit and saw no mention anywhere of the lawsuit. Are such things required by some law to be disclosed as part of all audits?
Posts: 211 | From: California | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Margaret, let me try that as an ex-Tax Auditor, with a degree in Accounting. Generally accepted accounting/auditing standards REQUIRE a statement regarding any pending litigation that could have a MATERIAL impact (pro or con) on a corporation's balance sheet. Perhaps the question is one of materiality, but I would think that there should be at least a footnoted reference to the litigation in any published financial statements.
Posts: 1530 | From: Ocala, FL | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wholly concur with Mike's immediate statement.
Now what I don't know is if the Financial Statements circulated in the past by NRHS are or are not Audited Financial Statements.
Requirements for an Exempt Organization to have an audit vary between the states, which is where jurisdiction lies. In Pennsylvania, a Charitable Organization qualifying for exemption under IRC 501(c)(3) is required to have an independent audit if they have received $300,000 or greater in charitable contributions (Membership Dues not included) per year.
GBN, CPA (Illinois #16011)
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, the NRHS does have regular audits done by an independent firm.
I just now looked at the NRHS "2013 Audit Report", and they list total contributions as slightly less than $100,000, so they are not required by Pennsylvania law to have an audit done -- but they did it anyways. Good for them.
As far as disclosures in the Notes are concerned, I did not see any mention of the ongoing lawsuit, but, since they are not even required to have an audit done, then are they required to disclose the lawsuit in the Notes? Also, none of us has any way of knowing how much the NRHS is being sued for. My statement that the lawsuit could bankrupt the NRHS may have been in error, as neither I nor anyone outside the immediate parties to that lawsuit knows how much the NRHS is being sued for.
Please note that the NRHS 2013 Audit shows that their "Total Support" is a bit less than $1,000,000, while their "Total Expenses" are a bit more than $1,000,000. I have no idea what their insurance coverage is, nor do I know what their liability premium costs them each year. So: Please forgive my bombastic statement that the NRHS could be bankrupted by this lawsuit. I should first have gotten what facts were available to the public, and factored in the fact that no one outside the NRHS Board knows the limits of their liability policies, before I made that statement.
I praise the NRHS for having an independent firm audit their books, even though, under Pennsylvania law, they do not have to do that.
Googling the phrase "NRHS 2013 Audit" will give you the PDF of that audit. It is public information.
Sorry for any worries I may have unintentionally caused.
I hope for the best for all involved with the NRHS.
Posts: 211 | From: California | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
There is no disclosure of any contingency, such as pending litigation, that could materially affect the financial position of the Society.
Of greatest impact to me is this captioned Auditor's Note:
8. Operating Losses The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Society will continue as a going concern. As evidenced by the deficit in unrestricted net assets, the Society has incurred net losses in current and prior years. The Society’s management has taken steps to increase revenue and reduce operating expenses. Management believes that actions presently being taken to revise the Society’s operating and financial requirements provide the opportunity for the Society to continue as a going concern.
This is an ominous Note that an Auditor is required to include in the Report if they are questioning an auditee's capacity to remain a going concern.
Finally, there is interesting and mature discussion at this linked site regarding the NRHS:
posted
December TRAINS has an informative article that is "just the facts Ma'am" regarding the challenges faced by NRHS. No mention of any pending litigation. Possibly the reports of such, which "I'd heard of" from sources other than Margaret, are simply, and hopefully, unfounded.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reports of litigation against the NRHS are true. The lawsuit is mentioned in the January 11, 2014, "Meeting Minutes" of the NRHS Board of Directors, which minutes can be found here in their entirety:
Please go to Page 3, where you will see this statement:
"General Counsel: John Fiorilla reported that he continues to work on the litigation surrounding the lawsuit brought against the NRHS regarding the 2012 vehicle accident in Washington state."
A Google search led me to the above link as the second "hit". Further information can be found by Googling "NRHS lawsuit". This lawsuit is also mentioned in the Winter, 2014, newsletter of the NRHS Suncoast Chapter.
The NRHS refuses to even acknowledge publicly that this lawsuit even exists, even though the outcome could threaten the economic viability of the NRHS.
Posts: 211 | From: California | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Margaret, I certainly have to agree "there's something happening out there".It is hard to believe that there is inadequate insurance to cover potential liability for an incident such as what is described.
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
A Collis P. Huntington Chapter newsletter appears to have a "Just the facts, Ma'am" recitation of events occurring at the 2012 Rail Camp.
Other than providing a link to the previously noted Suncoast Chapter material, that is presented here without further comment.
I can only hope that the National had, in addition to Director's and Officer's (E & O), they also had insurance for losses incurred by volunteer auto drivers. Any large charitable organization that has occasion to use volunteer drivers for their programs has such coverage. They will require a level of Public Liability insurance, often in excess of a locality's minimum, to be carried, and if the amount of that coverage proves insufficient, this "umbrella" coverage will pay.
If the National, with their name emblazoned on a youth educational program, failed to have such coverage, than someone was, sorry for the metaphor, "asleep at the switch".
Posts: 9975 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
