I would say: yes.
If a tourist railway is depending on railfans, they aren’t going to be around very long.
I don’t think the railroad is going to defeat the tax by challenging the City’s definition of “amusement.” They can call the tax anything they want. What I would like to know is how this tax came to be charged retroactively. That would make it far more galling than just the imposition of a new tax. It sounds to me like this issue quickly turned personal, and now neither side is capable of backing down.
This does raise additional questions, but I think they’re already addressed in many respects during planning and execution of railfan ‘excursions’. The concern I’ve had about this is much the same as yours: whether municipalities or other government agencies ‘wake up’ and find a new revenue opportunity to impose on excursion operators – this being somewhat more pronounced a threat for repeated operations like the Cuyahoga Valley’s recent 'Steam in the Valley" trips.
At present some of the additional costs for ‘government’ presence – increased security, accommodation of road crossings and the like – appear to be handled either by mutual agreement or pre-arranged payment, not by a tax on the actual value of ticket sales (which is what an amusement-tax arrangement would do). To some extent, towns through which excursion trains pass … especially without stopping … have not tried further recouping for their own inconveniences; note that I haven’t even started addressing the weird behavior of railfans chasing inappropriately, setting up for photos dangerously, and the rest of the uncompensated-liability issues that make city attorneys start to chew their nails. I have to suspect concerns like these are part of why Andy and crew are fighting this idea so much on ‘principle’: if you establish a precedent that excursions are ‘amusement’ … and most of them, honestly, are … you also establish the likelihood that all sorts of jurisdiction will want to be part of the pie – or not leave pie on the table, as it were.
If we learned anything from the situation in Port Arthur, it’s that local government, confronted with a potential gain or loss to its taxpayers, may react with what appears greed. While that’s exacerbated in a chronically poor (or tax-limited)
What was “the situation in Port Arthur?”
Port Arthur TX?
I can’t speak for the railroad in question. For us, the answer to all of the questions is no. We handle our own crossings, our crowds at the station don’t usually require any law enforcement attention, and even when we bring in a train of 500 passengers, it’s just that many more people downtown. Trash pickup is nothing out of the ordinary. Just one more dumpster to empty as they make their rounds - and even the taxpayers aren’t charged specifically for trash pickup.
That said, the downtown businesses like to know how many we are bringing - most (especially the restaurants) want to have enough staff available. An occasional miscommunication brings hard feelings when trains show up that they weren’t expecting, or trains don’t show up when they were expected.
At one point, when the businesses realized just how much business we were bringing them, said businesses funded the shuttle busses between the station and the downtown area.
That said, the railroad probably does qualify as an amusement, so in that respect, they ought to be paying the tax.
I really have to question, however, why it took the municipality over ten years to discover they weren
Some facts that may help illuminate this discussion:
If you look at an aerial photo of Jim Thorpe, you’ll see that the large Carbon Co. parking lot - the only one of any size in the vicinity - is on the opposite side of the tracks from the nearest street (US 209). It paralells the tracks on its east side for quite a distance, ~2,000 ft. The grade crossing from 209 into the parking lot is at these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 40.86377 W 75.73680 . There’s no other access into the parking lot - the other side abuts the Lehigh River. The parking lot is big enough to accomodate most train riders, I think. The County charges like $5 a car to park, as I recall. I believe it’s a private crossing, and the railroad protects it when the train is crossing.
A train rider - once they’ve driven into town - could park in the County lot, ride the train, and return, and need never set foot on any other public or private street or property other than railroad and County until they leave. Even the bathroom facilities are in the tourist/ visitors bureau in the train station. It’s only when the visitors cross 209 - which usually has one or two policemen of some type (fire police?) to protect the main crossing by the station - to eat, shop, visit the attractions, etc. that they really go into the town and use any services on a routine basis (excluding emergency services).
- PDN.
Steam locomotive 503. It would take too long to explain; you’ll get a much better idea if you look it up. Vast and wonderful coverage on RyPN, which was involved in both the effort and the aftermath.
At least it appears the business district is a very short walk from the station.
In our case, folks coming up from the Utica area are still about a mile short of downtown Old Forge when they arrive at the station. If they don’t take the time to explore (many do ask) they could easily just turn around and head back south.
Fortunately, a good many are also looking for something to eat, and that’s where most of the restaurants are.
Yes, in Jim Thorpe the (extremely picturesque) business district is right there. We ate at an Irish pub about 50 yards from the depot. And it was good food.
Let the Mayor know you were there because of the Lehigh Gorge RR and you spent money in town that you would not have if the Lehigh Gorge RR was not operating.
But be careful not to send the wrong message: that you spent a lot of money because of the Lehigh Gorge. Then they’ll think that a leetle more admission price for their tiny nominal amusement tax per ride is easily in your budget…
Whether or not the tourist train is an amusement, or not, is immaterial. Local jurisdictions are able to tax tourist operatons such as amusements, hotels, and yes, transportation (look at your rental car taxes/fees) and airports.
Answering both posts. The railroad has the upper hand in this case. They have not been providing the passenger service to earn money. The money comes from the freight business. They have been providing it as a service for the community to benefit the economy of the coummunity, and to have some fun themselvres.
The taxes you mention on are facilities that earn money. The airport fees and rental-car fees at airports also serve in a manner of renting property and paying for services the profitable operation uses.
The railroad has every right to simply shut down the passenger operation that they were providing as a public service transportation mode to and from a scenic location. As far as back taxes, where are the dated invoices of have received notice of being taxed?
The railroad provided transportation, not amusement. The amusement was provided by Mother Nature, and I would call it education, not amusement.
Regarding where the 10 year tax bill figure came from, many states have a 10 year look back limit on tax collections. I’m guessing that is the case in PA. Something could have been happening for 20 years or more, but the maximum that can be collected on is 10 years.
I honestly doubt that. While they may not be getting rich off of it, I doubt it’s a charity case.
And a roller coaster’s amusement comes from gravity. So I guess they shouldn’t be taxed, either?
With all due respect, you are really reaching for some of these points, Dave.
Local residents, and businesses that cater to them, pay local taxes. Municipalities also tax tourist businesses additionally to capture some money from tourist to pay for services provided to them such as police, fire, EMT, roads, parking, parks, water, sewer, garbage, administrative costs, etc. Most successful secinic railroads seem to have an interesting anchor town to be based out of. For example Lake Placid, Saratoga, Durango/Silverton, Banff/Jasper, and yes-- Jim Thorpe. I doubt he would get as much business based out of Penn Haven Junction.
As far as the scenic portion goes, there is no wild land left in the continental US. Everything is developed or protected in some way. Either as a government reserve, or by a landowner who wants it kept natural and pays the taxes. In many states, the state or federal government pays a “swamp tax” to help support local government services. Mr. Klepper seems to think the scenery was provided free, and that the railroad should not have to pay for this, as they are just providing a nice amusement passtime for the passengers. I wonder what the park ranger would say if he used that arguement to try to bring a bus-load of friends into a national park for free.
Penn Haven Junction is accessible (barely) only by a rough cinder road from the northwest (aside from the Lehigh Gorge State Park’s rail-trail). But neither is a public road.
White Haven - northern end of the Lehigh River Gorge - would prove your point better. More easily accessible off I-80 (and PA 940) than Jim Thorpe, and a nice little town (borough, technically), it doesn’t have near as much ‘cachet’ as JT. But I don’t know if RBM&N has rights that far north, or if it’s NS only (little rusty on things that far upstate).
- PDN.
Median Mike, you are 100% wrong:
Viewing scenery is not an amusement. It is education. Otherwise we would not have the Nastional Park System and all the Government-funded facilities to view Nature’s wonders.
The specific railroad is in business to provide transportation. It earns money from freight transportation. Obviously the extent of the subsidization of the transportation of passsengers to view the scenery would require detailed analysis of the books of the railroad, but it is very clear that the passenger operation was not a money-maker and was provided as a service and contribution for and to the community.
And the railroad pays real-estate taxes and other taxes to the community to support the services it and its employees receive. Additional expenses to the town due to railroad operations are not only supported by those taxes, but also by the additional taxes received because of the increased business in all sectors of the town the railroad has made possible.
There is no precedent of any railroad operating an excursion passenger service that was successfully taxed with an amusement tax.
Just to head further taxation “off at the pass” (Short-Line RR Association, are you listening?), riding an historic train is not an amusement. It is education. It teaches the kind of transportation our granfathers and grandmothers and those who “Settled the West” had when they were alive and active. Rick Laubscher, of San Francisco’s Market Street Railway Association, coined the term “Museums in Motion” to describe the E and F streetcar lines’ and Cable Car lines’ vehicles. This also obviously applies to vintage trains. And museums are not taxed with amusement taxes. They are providing education. And Steamtown is part of the National Parks System.
A circular railroad in an amusement park is not a common carrier. It usually is more of a character