Author Topic: W&Q and WW&F Relationship  (Read 6682 times)

Ken Fleming

  • Museum Member
  • Fireman
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« on: May 09, 2010, 07:11:06 AM »
Being relatively new to the WW&F, I want to better understand the relationship of the two corporations, the W&Q and the WW&F, in today's terms and not the historic terms.  Which one owns what? Does the W&Q have more than a BOD, i.e. membership or shareholders? Which one actually owns the ROW?  Are the BOD of each the same people or different individuals?  Does the W&Q have a long term plan or does it just exist to support the WW&F or is it the other way around? How does the station restoration, track work, etc. at Albion fit in? Where are the BOD meeting minutes of each available for view?

Jason M Lamontagne

  • Operating Volunteers
  • Dispatcher
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,197
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2010, 08:37:29 AM »
I'll try to summarize...

The W&Q is a for-profit corporation which admits to making no profit and having no desire to.  They own the majority of the RoW that doesn't belong to abutting land owners.  The museum does own some RoW; this section is north of the current end of track.  The museum has a 99 year lease agreement for the W&Q-owned RoW that we operate over.

The W&Q can mainly be viewed as a RoW holding company; it was Harry's view was that in the event the museum ever failed, the W&Q was still an entity which could continue to hold the RoW intact under (essentially) one owner. 

The two boards share no members, as a way of making it clear that there is no profit motive on the non-profit side.  We have a good working relationship with the W&Q, however their activities are limited and as such interactions between the two are not required very often.  WW&F meeting minutes are open to our members, and I suspect W&Q meeting minutes are available to their shareholders- of which there are few and I don't believe further subscriptions are available.

In all honesty- part of the reason for continuing the W&Q, I believe, was the historical connection.  Their board members proudly proclaim that they are something like the 4th oldest corporation in Maine.  They are not, however, looking for attention or PR (I don't believe, anyway). 

Thanks for asking.  We want our members to feel comfortable with this relationship.

Jason

Ken Fleming

  • Museum Member
  • Fireman
  • ****
  • Posts: 382
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2010, 08:55:28 AM »
Jason, thank you for your rapid response.

James Patten

  • Global Moderator
  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,412
  • Loco for 6
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2010, 03:13:54 PM »
If you hold uncanceled shares from the W&Q, then you can vote at their annual meeting.  I believe they still sell shares at $100 each, although the shares are essentially worthless.

The W&Q pretty much knows what it owns on the southern half of the line, and isn't certain what it owns on the northern half.  There are indicators that they may own much of the ROW in Albion and north of there past (yes I said past) the junction with the B&ML line.  I believe this is being researched off and on.   Beyond that they have no involvement with the Albion group.

Ed Lecuyer

  • Administrator
  • Trainmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,579
    • View Profile
    • wwfry.org
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2010, 06:48:26 AM »
Thanks Jason and James. Even as a "somewhat longer term" member of the WW&F, there are still questions I have from time to time regarding the WW&F & W&Q relationship.

For example:
1. If the W&Q is a "for profit" co., does it pay property taxes? Does the WW&F essentially reimburse the W&Q for this expense since the W&Q has no revenue source?

2. When easements are negotiated between landowners of the RoW and the railroad, is the easement granted to the WW&F or W&Q? Which organization handles those negotiations?

3. Who owns the non-RoW land around Sheepscot station, (Shop/Yard, Percival House, etc.): WW&F or W&Q?

4. I *thought* I heard that flatcar 118 was technically owned by the W&Q. Is that true, and do they own any other assets besides the ROW?

5. If I wanted to buy a share of the W&Q, just to say I had one, who would I speak with?
Ed Lecuyer
Moderator, WW&F Forum

James Patten

  • Global Moderator
  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,412
  • Loco for 6
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2010, 09:21:23 AM »
1. The W&Q does pay property taxes, our lease with them was originally set up (by contract) to essentially reimburse them for the right of way that we used.  We are now negotiating our payment of their entire property tax burden with certain guarantees in return.

2. The short answer is "It depends".  For instance Jayne's Way Xing was negotiated with the W&Q because they own the ROW there.  However whenever the WW&F needs to lease ROW, the lease is in our name.  There's also ROW that we own in Wiscasset, Alna, and Whitefield because the owners came to us and wanted to donate to a non-profit so that they could take the tax write-off. 

3. Technically the W&Q owns the land under the shop building.  The property line is in the middle of the coal pile, approx. 90 feet off the centerline of the track.  Where the property line goes once we get past the NW corner of the shop nobody really knows (other than it works its way back to 33 feet of the centerline somewhere past the section house).  West of that property line it's owned by the WW&F.  Essentially when the house belonged to Harry, Harry would deed over land as appropriate to the W&Q.

4. I believe 118 is still owned by the W&Q.  They originally owned Bay 1 of the car shop, but I think we bought that from them many years back.  Why they still own the flatcar I don't know, other than they've never pushed us to buy it and we have other uses for the money.

5. In order to buy a share of W&Q stock, you can contact Les Fossel of Restoration Resources: www.oldhouserestoration.com.  Les is the W&Q treasurer.  His email is under the "Contact Us" link.

James Patten

  • Global Moderator
  • Superintendent
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,412
  • Loco for 6
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2010, 06:08:30 AM »
The last question that Ken asked was regarding Board of Directors meeting minutes for each of the organizations, which didn't appear to have been answered.

For the WW&F, you can inquire to Roger Whitney, WW&F Secretary, via mail or email.  For privacy and spam reasons, I won't post his email here but he is a member of this forum so you can contact him through the Members page in the forum.  Let him know which minutes you want to see.  Please remember that our last minutes get finalized at the following month's meeting.

For the W&Q, the Secretary is Douglas Baston.  He lives in Alna not far from the Museum.  I don't have his direct contact info at this time but you should be able to look up a phone number on Whitepages.com.  The State of Maine website also has contact info Maine's corporations, including the W&Q, I think under the Office of Professional & Financial Regulation.

Henry Stahle

  • Museum Member
  • Engine Wiper
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2010, 03:11:16 PM »
What exactly is the meaning of 'owing the right of way'?  My Randon House dictionary has 'the strip of land acquired for use by a railroad for tracks' as a definition of RoW.  If the WW&F wanted to extend from Head Tide to Whitefield, would they have to purchase the land or the RoW from the current abutting landowners?   

Dave Reed

  • Museum Member
  • Gandy Dancer
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2010, 04:58:18 PM »
They own some of it, have land use agreements with some of the owners, and there are some parcels that they neither own nor have any sort of use agreement.  At least one part of the RoW is now a state road.

If they wanted to expand all the way to Whitefield there would need to be a large amount of negotiation with many interested parties.

Vincent "Lightning" LeRow

  • Museum Member
  • Hostler
  • ***
  • Posts: 207
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2010, 08:18:46 PM »
It's going to be no small feat to get to head tide...
A spike saved is a spike earned.

Mike Fox

  • Museum Member
  • Superintendent
  • ********
  • Posts: 4,417
    • View Profile
Re: W&Q and WW&F Relationship
« Reply #10 on: May 12, 2010, 08:01:57 PM »
It's going to be no small feat to get to head tide...


Two Feet to Head Tide. That will be the title of the book we can write when we get there.
Mike
Doing way too much to list...