# VERY LARGE Scale for sale: M&LK RR in Oregon



## silverstatespecialties (Jan 2, 2008)

I remember reading posts about this operation here over the past 2 years or so; it appears that the GuvMent has won and the whole railroad is now for sale.... $135K if the owner dismantles it, or a bargain $120K if you dismantle & remove yourself:

*Grand Scale RR for sale (Deadwood, OR)*

Hmmm....if I had access to a 50' or 53' trailer, I'd be interested!!!


----------



## Dwight Ennis (Jan 2, 2008)

I've followed this online and know some of the history, both pro and con. I know the owner didn't "follow the rules" with permits, etc. but I still think it's a damn shame and a demonstration of what can happen to private property when government gets involved. A man can't follow his dream and do what he wants on his own property with his own time and his own money.


----------



## blueregal (Jan 3, 2008)

Hear Hear Dwight!! I agree with you, and I have had some email contact with the fellow himself. If you want the whole story, get ahold of him through his email. He does answer you, and you will get the "Whole" story by contacting him yourself. It is a shame!! Regal


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

Of the People, by the People, for the People. They have lost sight of the fact that they are here for us not us for them. There is no excuse for the Mean Vindictive and rude way they came down on this guy. There is no reason for it. There no reason why something could not have been worked out.


----------



## Dave F (Jan 2, 2008)

I vaguely recall the story on this guy. Is there a link anywhere to the whole backstory on this?


----------



## xo18thfa (Jan 2, 2008)

This guy "has a past". 

The story in the newspaper

Couple this with his numerous violations of forest and wetland zoning and that he was into hauling the public, including the youngsters. If I was a Gov't official, I would certainly want specs and permits for those bridges he built. That's a 1/3 scale operation, that equipment must weigh tons. Could you imagine the backlash on the county if there was an accident and someone was hurt or killed. And seeing the legal trouble Train Mountian is in right now, I would not be surprised if this guy's legal entity is not quite kosher as well.

Everything we see is how wrong the Gov't was. I bet there is a lot more to this story.


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

This has been discussed several times here in the past. He sure did build a beautiful RR, in almost total disregard for the law. 



Does anyone here think the State should do nothing about an uninsured, uninspected ride-on attraction, built in a watershed without permits, _run by a convicted child molester_? As the parent of a five year old girl I think yes, there are some issues there that I'd want the state to investigate/regulate 

And he didn't pay his taxes, which is the reason it's being sold--he dodged paying taxes for years, they caught up with him, he has to pay the tax bill.


Suppose I stopped paying my real estate taxes, and used the money to build, without permits, licenses or insurance, an amusement park in my backyard. The I started inviting large groups of strangers every weekend, and some of the equipment broke and somebody got hurt. Do any of you seriously think the State has no responsibility? 


I'm sorry for him personally, but he ignored the law in a bunch of ways.


----------



## Ralph Berg (Jun 2, 2009)

Posted By silverstatespecialties on 29 May 2010 09:12 AM 
I remember reading posts about this operation here over the past 2 years or so; it appears that the GuvMent has won and the whole railroad is now for sale.... $135K if the owner dismantles it, or a bargain $120K if you dismantle & remove yourself:

*Grand Scale RR for sale (Deadwood, OR)*

Hmmm....if I had access to a 50' or 53' trailer, I'd be interested!!!



If I had $135,000, I don't think a 50' trailer would be a problem!
Ralph


----------



## John J (Dec 29, 2007)

One day I did have a inspector stop by on his way to a neighbor. I was out on a rented tractor re aranging the dirt and some rocks for my RR He told me I needed a permit to do grading. 
I told him I was working on my model rail road. I said I do not need the county involved my my hobby. That was about 5 10 years ago and they have not been back.


----------



## blueregal (Jan 3, 2008)

Bob, you and Lownote should email him, and get his side too, not defending what he did, as I used to arrest people for the same!! But how would you like to try to turn your life around and after 27yrs. still have your past brought up AFTER you have paid your dues, and tried to change your lives????????? People CAN and DO change! sometimes! AGAIN email him, instead of speculating and putting all yer coins in one hand from what you read which is also an OLD story!! You may have a different opinion!!!!!!!!!!!!! Buy the d--n railroad or leave the guy alone!! He has NOW pretty much paid all his dues except the final chapter of his life!! 

Please NO bashing until you have emailed him yourselves!! Regal


----------



## Gary Armitstead (Jan 2, 2008)

It seems we rehash this story about every six months here and it eventually turns into a food fight.


----------



## xo18thfa (Jan 2, 2008)

I've said my piece. The rest is a matter of public record. I am done.


----------



## Pete Chimney (Jan 12, 2008)

Bob

In your post you mentioned legal problems at Train Mountain. I was not aware of any problems up there in Oregon, can you elaborate? There is no mention on Train Mountain's website of any legal problems.


----------



## Ray Dunakin (Jan 6, 2008)

I've heard the argument before that the guy's past criminal conviction, and the potential for future misconduct, make it acceptable for the government to use these alleged "permit" and "environmental" issues to shut down his hobby railroad. The problem with that is, it sets an ugly precedent that will now be applied to anyone wanting to build a miniature railroad on their own property. 

If there's a problem with the individual's alleged sexual proclivities, then it should be dealt with directly, not by draconian permitting rules that will affect everybody.


----------



## Pete Thornton (Jan 2, 2008)

And now check out Marty's thread about the guy who built a small house that everyone is talking about in his neighborhood. Meets all the code requirements, but the locals don't think he should be allowed to build whatever he wants on his own property. 
http://www.mylargescale.com/Communi...f/4/aft/115888/afv/topic/afpgj/1/Default.aspx

I seem to remember this dude upset some neighbors who turned him in...


----------



## takevin (Apr 25, 2010)

....


----------



## lincoln pin (Feb 24, 2009)

RE: Train Mountain, they have a Tax Lien (IRS issue) regarding the transfer from the previous owner now deceased Quentin Breen, 

This is from their 2009 annual report 
"Our major challenge is the estate of Train Mountain’s founder, Quentin Breen. The IRS thinks Train Mountain is part of Quentin’s estate. On August 27th the IRS filed tax liens in Klamath County totaling over $13.8 million on all the Train Mountain real estate except the Farmer 20 acres. We do not know how these will be resolved, but we are worried. We have altered our direction due to the tax liens and their implications."


----------



## lownote (Jan 3, 2008)

Posted By Ray Dunakin on 31 May 2010 07:23 PM 
I've heard the argument before that the guy's past criminal conviction, and the potential for future misconduct, make it acceptable for the government to use these alleged "permit" and "environmental" issues to shut down his hobby railroad. The problem with that is, it sets an ugly precedent that will now be applied to anyone wanting to build a miniature railroad on their own property. 

If there's a problem with the individual's alleged sexual proclivities, then it should be dealt with directly, not by draconian permitting rules that will affect everybody. 

Ray, it's not that there were "draconian permitting rules." the guy ignored ALL permitting rules. Here's the narrative


Guy buys land in rural area, starts building railroad
Guys starts inviting guests to ride
Former friend of the guy complains about him to the County
County comes and takes a look--hey, this was built in a watershed with no permits or licenses whatsoever, and it's uninsured, and people are being invited to come ride.

County tries several compromise approaches to bring the thing up to spec 

County discovers guy is in arrears by a lot on his taxes. 
Guys decides to sell to pay taxes.

If you look at the actual documents--and I did, it's part of what I do for a living as a historian--you'll see that the County was not that unreasonable. Mr Robinson's anti-govt. rhetoric is a little bit of a smokescreen here--the County, for example dramatically reduced the fines and penalties over the permitting issue, recognizing and accepting his argument that he had in effect improved the land.


The tax issues--which is what finally sunk it--is different from the permitting/licensing/insurance issue.

If I ignore the law, it's my fault, not the law's fault.


----------



## xo18thfa (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By lincoln pin on 01 Jun 2010 09:41 AM 
RE: Train Mountain, they have a Tax Lien (IRS issue) regarding the transfer from the previous owner now deceased Quentin Breen, 

This is from their 2009 annual report 
"Our major challenge is the estate of Train Mountain’s founder, Quentin Breen. The IRS thinks Train Mountain is part of Quentin’s estate. On August 27th the IRS filed tax liens in Klamath County totaling over $13.8 million on all the Train Mountain real estate except the Farmer 20 acres. We do not know how these will be resolved, but we are worried. We have altered our direction due to the tax liens and their implications." 

The IRS may be right on this. From what I heard Breen transferred the TM assets over to group of interested persons and died shortly after. A major transfer of personal assets within 3 years of death can be considered a "death bed" transfer and be voided. Bad timing. $13.8 million. That's probably what owed to the IRS plus penalties. Breen must of had some rather significant income to a produce a number like that.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Well I know the right guy to get in touch with if your in need of an 18 wheeler to move the RR







He post over here every so often. Later RJD


----------



## xo18thfa (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By lownote on 01 Jun 2010 10:57 AM 
Posted By Ray Dunakin on 31 May 2010 07:23 PM 
I've heard the argument before that the guy's past criminal conviction, and the potential for future misconduct, make it acceptable for the government to use these alleged "permit" and "environmental" issues to shut down his hobby railroad. The problem with that is, it sets an ugly precedent that will now be applied to anyone wanting to build a miniature railroad on their own property. 

If there's a problem with the individual's alleged sexual proclivities, then it should be dealt with directly, not by draconian permitting rules that will affect everybody. 

Ray, it's not that there were "draconian permitting rules." the guy ignored ALL permitting rules. Here's the narrative


Guy buys land in rural area, starts building railroad
Guys starts inviting guests to ride
Former friend of the guy complains about him to the County
County comes and takes a look--hey, this was built in a watershed with no permits or licenses whatsoever, and it's uninsured, and people are being invited to come ride.

County tries several compromise approaches to bring the thing up to spec 

County discovers guy is in arrears by a lot on his taxes. 
Guys decides to sell to pay taxes.

If you look at the actual documents--and I did, it's part of what I do for a living as a historian--you'll see that the County was not that unreasonable. Mr Robinson's anti-govt. rhetoric is a little bit of a smokescreen here--the County, for example dramatically reduced the fines and penalties over the permitting issue, recognizing and accepting his argument that he had in effect improved the land.


The tax issues--which is what finally sunk it--is different from the permitting/licensing/insurance issue.

If I ignore the law, it's my fault, not the law's fault. 





Go to his webite and look at the layout. That's a significant watershed he's on. You simply can not alter the drainage of your property with out permission from the authorities. Yes, it's his personal private property and he has "rights" The people upstream and downstream have rights too. If he alters the drainage and it affects someone else, he's wrong PERIOD. 

Look at the bridges. He's building them on a flood plain. He talks about all the rainfall in that area. Did you see all the debris crashing thru the area?? What kind of ground is under that?? Probably real soft and wet. Who did the soil study?? How deep are the foundations, under the frost line?? Looks like he poured them right on the ground after mixing unknown concrete in the little 3 cu ft mixer. Is there any re-bar in that? The trestle bents are not shear braced in any way and are spaced rather far apart. The beams look a little skinny to me. Who designed that girder bridge?? Let's see the spec on it. He does all the welding on it. What certifaction does he have to weld a load bearing structure like that?? This list can go on and on. I have looked at some older State Highway and Public Works bridge specs from Tennessee and Iowa as well as old GRS and DRGW pratice.. Every birdge on that property should be condemned.

For those more expert railroad track, are you not supposed to have guard rails on bridges to reduce the chance of a derail??? All the track standards I've seen call for them. Is that a real steam engine?? What's his qualification to operate it, since he's hauling the public?? And what about the boiler cert??

Lownote talked about tax and insruance issues, bet there is a lot under the surface of that too.

I don't believe that our Gov't sits around all day dreaming up new and innovative ways just to mess with people. Part of the reason our society has laws to protect the public from dangerous, reckless and irresposible people. If you draw the ire of the Gov't, there is probably a reason for it. Remember, this guy was hauling the (unaware) public. What ticks me off is that he blew off a lot of regulations and practices and tried to pass himself off as the poor, innocent, helpless little guy being screwed over by the big bag Gov't.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

One thing to note is this is supposedly private property so if he choose to let folks ride and then someone get injured then He is responsible so what has this to do with the county or state. Yes he was wrong with what he did in building the RR and not checking on the rules for the area. 

As far as bridges goes with guard rails, that another subject for debate as a lot of RR removed them and are not required under the FRA bridge rules or any other of there rules to have in place. Later RJD


----------

