Historical Society member Karen Dustman talks about longtime archivist Nancy Thornburg on July 14 as Becky Thornburg listens. Richard Dustman is standing behind Karen.
More than 100 people attended the July 14 dedication of a monument in Markleeville to charter Alpine County Historical Society member Nancy Thornburg.
Thornburg died New Year’s Eve 2017, and the monument was approved by Alpine County supervisors on Oct. 16, 2018.
But even as residents were remembering Nancy and her husband, Alpine native Fritz, the historical society and county were facing an impasse that resulted in a lawsuit and termination of a 34-year-old agreement.
The Historical Society sued Alpine County in June, claiming breach of the agreement.
Founded in 1963, the Alpine County Historical Society spent its first decade with Thornburg working on the archives.
“When Nancy got involved, the archive materials were stored in the basement of the courthouse, which was lovingly called the dungeon,” said author and Historical Society member Karen Dustman at the dedication. “(This plaque) is here to honor Nancy Thornburg, who spent 50 years of her life, to preserve the archives of Alpine County.”
Nine years later, in 1971-72, volunteers with the historical society put the finishing touches on the Alpine County Museum located on the hill above where Thornburg’s plaque was dedicated.
The Historical Society deeded the museum complex to Alpine County, so volunteers wouldn’t have to raise money to pay property taxes. Under an agreement formalized in 1990, the county would operate the museum, and the society would care for the artifacts.
The contract states that Alpine County is responsible for hiring and managing the museum’s staff while the society would be responsible for the volunteers.
“Society will assist the Alpine County Personnel Department with procedures related to hiring and will be granted representation on all hiring panels for museum employees,” according to the designation of responsibilities in the contract.
According to the lawsuit filed in California Superior Court, when the museum closed in the last weekend of October 2019 it was anticipated that it would reopen Memorial Day 2020.
In March 2020, Alpine County locked down for the coronavirus outbreak and stayed that way for more than a year until July 2021.
Also occurring July 6, 2021, was the expansion of Librarian Rita Lovell’s duties to include museum and archives director, something that happened without consulting the society, according to the lawsuit.
Two weeks after the museum reopened, the Tamarack Fire raged through Markleeville, which tamped down whatever conflict was simmering at the time. The following summer, an August flood resulted in the closure of Highway 89, essentially shutting Markleeville down for two months.
Before the museum reopened in May 2023, society members were told that directors and officers were attempting to direct the county staff and was making them uncomfortable. In the lawsuit the society claims that “despite repeated requests … details of the purported allegations made by staff have still not been provided to the society.”
Lovell sought all correspondence between the society and the county to go through her on June 14, 2023, which the society claims exacerbated the conflict.
It was around then that the society said the county copied the society’s data from it’s computer and merged it with the county’s data under its license. It’s alleged that the county changed the password on the computer, leaving the society locked out until March 22, 2024.
Meanwhile, the society was working behind the scenes to bring the job titles in line with the 1990 agreement. In August 2023, they submitted revisions, but the county rejected them.
Two weeks before the museum closed for the winter in October 2023, the society was told county staff was “uncomfortable with interactions,” and told the museum staff could only access the museum when it was closed.
It would be six months before society officers were notified of the computer work, according to court documents.
Also included in the agreement is a 90-day termination clause, which the county invoked, saying that with the filing of a March 25, 2024, claim and the lawsuit there wasn’t any alternative, according to County Administrative Officer Nicole Williamson.
In a statement to The Record-Courier, Williamson argued that the society has been intransigent in attempting to come to a solution.
“We have continuously sought a mutually agreeable solution and have provided numerous proposals at maintaining a collaborative relationship,” Williamson said. “Unfortunately, these solutions were not even considered by the Historical Society, leading to a stalemate in our negotiations.”
According to the society, those options were for the Historical Society to run the entire museum, hiring its own employees, or the county would run the museum including curation and management of the artifacts.
Neither of those options were acceptable to the Historical Society, according to a letter written by President Tom Sweeney appearing in today’s Record-Courier.
“The county’s proposed ‘independence’ plan simply isn’t practical, especially for a small society in the tiniest county in California by population,” Sweeney said. “It doesn’t work in larger counties. Take Mono County’s historical society, for example. They’re reduced to raffling quilts to keep their museum open.”
As it stands, the Historical Society has until Oct. 1 to remove their artifacts from the museum property. Dustman said she hoped that the judge in the lawsuit issues a stay of the contract termination while the parties work things out.
