Thoughts on changing off-site storage rules

DMS General
#1

Before I start on this - I currently don’t have the time or the muscles to get this plan into order so please consider this chicken feed to consider and I wouldn’t be the muscle to implement this. I would think this concept would be a larger decisions outside of just Team Logistics and it would also take additional organization to get the plan rolling but I believe the change in culture would be worth it.

I would like to hear feedback on changing the concept of off-site storage and ownership of left materials for DMS.

My proposal is that items, tools, “stuff” is marked with a specifically colored sticker (March-yellow April-pink etc) denoting the month the items were placed in storage. After three (or place a number of months in here) months of storage the ownership of the unclaimed item becomes DMS property to be dealt with as DMS feels in the best interest of DMS (insert leagleeze here). 3X a year we hold a sale of left items to benefit two things - the fund to pay for the storage unit(s) and extra money to go to the maker scholarship fund.

This would be a huge shift I think and something to discuss before implementing.

Questions:

  1. How much is our monthly storage fee?
  2. What problems does this plan create?
  3. What problems does this plan solve?
  4. Is it feasible?
  5. Is the reward worth the work?
  • You’ve found the golden goose with is idea!
  • The idea needs some revision, but is worth considering
  • Not something that could work at makerspace - but keep on typing ideas out on your computer for other people you lush
  • Throw this crap out

0 voters

2 Likes
#2

During my term as Logistics Chair (and Allen’s) the policy was abandoned materials are dumpster’ed. The logic was that DMS didn’t own them, we had no clear consent/communication from the owner on re- assignment of ownership, thus we disposed of them. What happened after that is none of our business, but some materials surely ended up in volunteers’ hands.

It’s possible there’s some clever boilerplate we could employ that transforms abandoned property in project storage into DMS property without risking litigation, but I’ve never bird-dogged the legality of such a strategy. It was markedly less effort to contribute to the ever-imposing bulk of Mount Carrollton than it was to sort out the valuable recoverable tools, supplies, materials and shlep those back to DMS.

2 Likes
#3

I think there would have to be some change to the legalese agreed to when getting a project storage space. If it said that ownership of items passed to DMS after they had been abandoned for X months, then I think this could be good. Think of it as the DMS equivalent of an unpaid tax sale, of police auction of seized goods. If something sits in off-site storage for X months it can be claimed by a committee chair, and if not wanted then it goes to auction. Anything not claimed or sold goes into the dumpster.

3 Likes
#4

That’s how you spell it? I was so wrong.

Creative arts sale was a massive success
#5

Thank you Google Chrome spellcheck.

2 Likes
#6

I support any idea that reduces our trash output as long as it is vetted from a legal standpoint. It seems outrageous to send perfectly good materials to a landfill.

2 Likes
#7

Dumpstering is the same as removing ownership rights from the original owner. DMS has the right to do this per the agreement entered into when printing/signing a storage ticket. I assume this language is still printed out or documented somehwere public/visible/knowable. As long as DMS can legally consider the items abandoned, and there may be more to that than just printing/signing a storage ticket that says “blah blah blah 2 months”, we should be able to do whatever we want with it. Including auctioning off. Including dumpstering.

But any/all of this takes volunteers that are ready, willing, and able though, and that is our basic problem. That and people that make this effort necessary in the first place.

3 Likes
#8

One hurdle that we had early on in a “save the good stuff” thought-line was that David Kessinger swears up one side and down the other that we cannot keep other people’s stuff legally. It might be better if we had somebody look into the law about such things. I know if you fail to pay your storage building rent, the storage company certainly seizes and sells your things. If you leave your car parked somewhere, the person or company can submit a claim for “storage costs” and receive ownership. For the car, they have to submit a form to the tax office, but there’s a title involved there. I don’t know if the storage building company has to submit official paperwork to claim your stuff, or if the lease you signed is considered sufficient.

And, not volunteering to check.

2 Likes
#9

We have a lawyer now.

1 Like
#10

From the perspective of the person whose materials we just landfilled, sure. They’re out property and DMS took the action that deprived them of it.

Indeed. That marvelous 4 point print on the back of storage tickets when I was chair was the key for disposal.

But it doesn’t give us the right to claim ownership. It just means that after the end of the off-site period we don’t have to store it anymore. Doing otherwise could be considered conversion without a far more elaborate agreement that could be administratively burdensome.

1 Like
#11

The bonded title process is arduous and wrought with peril for those that naviagte it. I suspect that placing a lien on it - especially if there have been actual costs and/or losses as a result - is the route taken instead … not sure if that process can ultimately result in involuntary transfer of title however.

1 Like
#12

You are correct – they’re placing a storage lien on it. I do believe that they end up with full title at the end of the process, however long that may take.

#13

You are 100 percent correct. The reason why it goes in the trash is because taking over abandoned property is a legal minefield, and the process to legally take ownership of some materials wouldn’t be worth the process. Unless we have the lawyers draw up the process, and we strictly adhere to the process, the best course of action is going to the trash bin.

#14

And speaking from experience, quality of service is … difficult … to ensure with volunteers.

1 Like
#15

Ya that’s the kicker - always right