+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: News and Announcements (/forum-7.html)
+--- Thread: Saving Rich Hill (/thread-1216.html)
RE: Saving Rich Hill - Dave Taylor - 10-30-2013 03:50 PM
I was also trying to think of possible ideas for fundraising when the project is, hopefully, green lit. My mind goes directly to Kickstarter, which is a popular fundraising site for people who need financial assistance to complete their creative projects. Each project sets a period of time between 1 - 60 days in which they have to reach their set fundraising goal, or else the project is not funded at all. While the 1.5 million price tag isn't a reasonable goal for Kickstarter, the Charles County Historical Society could set a more reasonable goal that could be tied to one particular part of the rehabilitation plan. Kickstarter requires their projects to have a finite goal and so the Historical Society could assess the cost of say, redoing the roof on Rich Hill, and then make a Kickstarter project to seek funds for that. Any funding they might receive beyond their set fundraising goal could be allocated for other needed improvements. The main draw of Kickstarter, and what makes it such a popular engine for funding, is the aspect of how donors receive rewards for their help in funding the project. People are far more likely to give when they are given something in return. Regardless if whether or not Kickstarter is an option, I think any fundraising on the part of the Charles County Historical Society would be improved by a similar idea of "rewards'. I would assume they would do the traditional "the more you give, the higher your name will be on our eventual plaque of donors" which is nice, but I feel like they could get more donations with other, more tangible rewards. Perhaps, through an agreement with the Surratt Society, the CCHS could do a project where anyone who donates more than $______ to the Rich Hill fund will receive a free one year subscription to the Surratt Courier. Though the Surratt Society would have to absorb the cost of the added mailings for a year, I would expect that many people who would receive the subscription would purchase their own membership the following year, therefore giving the Surratt Society a boost as well. Perhaps the Mudd Society at the Dr. Mudd house could follow suit and an annual subscription to their society could be included at another tier of giving.
Some of the other ideas I came up with would involve rewarding donors with physical pieces of Rich Hill as they are removed during rehabing. It would be similar to how the Mudd house sells nails from the house glued to pieces of wooden lathes, how Tudor Hall is selling bricks from the old chimney, and how the Parkers give out nails and old shingles off of Cleydael to the BERT participants.
For elite level donors, perhaps the Surratt Society could donate a few tickets for their Booth escape route bus tours.
For smaller sized donations, I'm sure someone at the Historical Society could come up with a logo or emblem containing Rich Hill that could be put on cards, stickers, magnets, shirts, whatever. As long as the cost of production and distribution is taken into account and the donation amount to receive each item is set so that they are still profiting, then the little trinkets can help motivate donors to give what they can.
Of course financially speaking, the best reward for those doing the fundraising, is something that costs nothing or next to nothing. This is why "Lists of Donors" are so common. Perhaps the Charles County Historical Society has other items or resources available to them that they could use to motivate donations.
Regardless, I really pray that somewhere in Charles County right now, a representative of the CCHS is signing the paperwork to acquire Rich Hill.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - KateH. - 10-30-2013 07:04 PM
You could make the "List of Donors" an incentive as well. Perhaps engrave the names on some sort of plaque and put it on the wall. I'm not sure how much you need but auctions can raise a few thousand dollars. I'm a volunteer with the JDRF and at the yearly gala they host a silent auction. You purchase tickets, can pay to advertise in the program, and local businesses donate items (I think for a tax write off?) All profits go to the foundation.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - L Verge - 10-30-2013 07:30 PM
All of these are great ideas that Dave and I can pass on to the Society. Don't forget the appeal that tax write-offs can have for donors either. As for plaques on walls with lists of donors, that is now considered improper in a pure museum setting. However, it does not mean such things can't be shown in a visitors' center area. The list can grow quite long, though, and require the extra expense of plaques (which are not cheap).
The College of Southern Maryland is right down the road from Rich Hill, and its president, Dr. Bradley Gottfreid, is a Civil War author and a firm supporter of restoring Rich Hill. I'm sure he will have contacts. I have already suggested that the Society consider making contact with the University of Maryland, which has a graduate program in historic preservation.
I can already anticipate one drawback: There will be people who will question why a site related to the Lincoln assassination is being preserved. Surratt House has encountered such remarks numerous times over the years. At first, we were accused of memorializing a murderer! We established the policy from the very beginning that we do not take a stand as to Mrs. Surratt's guilt or innocence as part of the museum's mission. We present evidence from both sides and hope to inspire visitors to leave with the feeling that they need to read more and form their own opinion. We have then worked very hard to build respect as an institution of research and learning.
I watched just today as Lindsey Horn (Dave's girlfriend and a member of my staff) gave a two-hour talk and discussion to a woman and her elderly mother. It lasted that long because the visitors were constantly asking deep questions about the whole subject -- and Lindsey knows her history and gave wonderful answers and thoughts. Once we clear the hurdle of finances, the administrators at Rich Hill have the same opportunity to carry on excellent historical interpretation.
As you can tell, I'm really excited about the prospect of saving this great old site.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - Dave Taylor - 10-31-2013 12:10 PM
Any word on how things went, Laurie?
RE: Saving Rich Hill - L Verge - 10-31-2013 12:29 PM
I just got word that it is NO DEAL. There was only one clause that caused it to fall through, and that was the owner's demand that the Historical Society had to finish the work in five years, or it would revert back to him. That is a pretty hefty demand when you are looking at a $1.5 million (estimate) project.
It makes one suspicious that the intent might be to have a major portion of the stabilization, etc. done - but not completed in five years. The owner would then be handed back the much-improved site (by default).
What a shame.
I just learned from a member of the Historical Society's board that they found out just yesterday (tipped off by a high-ranking state government official) that the way the agreement was written with what is called a "reverter clause" would negate any attempt to get public money (bond bills, etc.) for the project.
There is no way that the Society would ever raise that amount of money through donations in five years.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - irshgrl500 - 10-31-2013 01:02 PM
(10-31-2013 12:29 PM)L Verge Wrote: I just got word that it is NO DEAL. There was only one clause that caused it to fall through, and that was the owner's demand that the Historical Society had to finish the work in five years, or it would revert back to him. That is a pretty hefty demand when you are looking at a $1.5 million (estimate) project.
It makes one suspicious that the intent might be to have a major portion of the stabilization, etc. done - but not completed in five years. The owner would then be handed back the much-improved site (by default).
What a shame.
I just learned from a member of the Historical Society's board that they found out just yesterday (tipped off by a high-ranking state government official) that the way the agreement was written with what is called a "reverter clause" would negate any attempt to get public money (bond bills, etc.) for the project.
There is no way that the Society would ever raise that amount of money through donations in five years.
This would be just for Rich Hill? That's awful. It makes one suspicious that the intent might be to have a major portion of the stabilization, etc. done - but not completed in five years. The owner would then be handed back the much-improved site (by default). - Was this "reverter clause" requested by the owner?
RE: Saving Rich Hill - Dave Taylor - 10-31-2013 01:13 PM
Pardon my French, but damn it.
Just to show you all how urgent and needed a transfer of ownership is, here's a video of the inside of the deteriorating Rich Hill taken in June of this year. The video starts upstairs and works its way down.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/yitbzrbe7liebbu/Video%20Jun%2025%2C%2012%2059%2045%20PM.mov
RE: Saving Rich Hill - L Verge - 10-31-2013 01:44 PM
Yes, Karin, the reverter clause was insisted upon by the owner and was specifically set by him at five years as opposed to the ten years that the Society had requested.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - Gene C - 10-31-2013 01:59 PM
There are a lot of things the county or city can do if they want to. The county can condemn the property, come up with a lengthy list of repairs with a short compliance time. Since the owner appears to show little interest in using their own funds for additional investment in the property, he won't meet the counties requirements. The county can take it over to keep it from additional deterioration since it has historical value and in the public's best interest. If the taxes are behind, another reason to take control of the property. There are several things the county can do that can cause the owner substantial legal fees and repair cost to address. It becomes less costly for the property owner to sell it to the county at an appraised value or taxable value, than to keep having to pay legal expenses and reimburse the county for money spent to protect the property from further damage. The county knows how to get tough, when they want to.
In all of this, there needs to be a way of letting the owner save face, by letting the county take it over.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - L Verge - 10-31-2013 02:27 PM
I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect that the county does not want to get into preserving, maintaining, and administering historic properties. They can be a drain on local coffers without a strong agency to back them. Restoration is only the tip of the iceberg.
Surratt House has been lucky to be supported by a State of Maryland-chartered agency, The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (est. 1927), and administered through the Commission's Prince George's County Department of Parks and Recreation. The Natural and Historical Resources Division of that Department oversees about sixty different sites in our county alone. That takes a hefty budget, and that is why our agency loves the volunteers and associates of the Surratt Society, because they do so much to support the museum and agency. Not all of our sites are blessed with such groups -- or with national history that makes it more enticing to the public.
Dave can correct me on this, but I do not believe that the Charles County government administers any historic properties. There are numerous ones in the county, but 90% are privately owned; another is run through the college and the Historical Society, another by State Parks, and another by NPS. I'm not sure what the Port Tobacco Restoration project depends on for financing.
It would be wonderful to get the reverter clause removed or amended so that the property would revert to a foundation or the county government after a certain time if the Historical Society could not get the job done. I don't see that happening, however.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - Gene C - 10-31-2013 02:57 PM
Thanks Laurie, a few years ago around here, our city got very aggressive with rental property owners who did not maintain their property. Several properties were condemned, and the city took them and sold them to people who promised to renovate, maintain and live in them. On commercial property they have been very less aggressive and the city officials have changed, this new crop isn't very business friendly and have very little idea how to promote the downtown and small business. It's a challenging situation for a lot of communities.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - L Verge - 10-31-2013 03:38 PM
Our county has even initiated something called a curatorship, where people agree to live in the property and do restoration (with tax credits) often for life tenancy; but the property remains in public hands. We also have incentives for businesses to do adaptive use restoration.
In at least one case that I know of, a developer bought one of the few large colonial grants for development, but agreed to restore the exterior of the mansion to its original appearance while bringing the interior into the 21st century. It now sits in the middle of McMansions, but is back to being one itself. That could be a good alternative for Rich Hill, since the land around it is slated for development. That would hinder our hopes of incorporating the site into a full stop on our Booth tours, but it would serve to protect it somewhat.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - L Verge - 02-03-2014 02:35 PM
FINALLY! I just received good news on saving Rich Hill. The Charles County, Maryland, government finalized the sale of the property last week. It now belongs to the people! I'm sure that bond bills will be presented in the upcoming session of the Maryland legislature which convenes in March. They will have a long ways to go, however.
The project has three strong supporters, however: The President of the Maryland State Senate, the College of Southern Maryland, and the Charles County Historical Society.
RE: Saving Rich Hill - BettyO - 02-03-2014 02:55 PM
Wonderful news, Laurie! Wonderful news..... what a great way to start the new year!
RE: Saving Rich Hill - Dave Taylor - 02-03-2014 04:09 PM
Awesome to hear! I'll be even happier when there's a plan in place on what to do with the house from here.