I think it's wonderful that people are restoring public objects of historical value, but nowhere does the article explain why this has to be clandestine.<p>The article says that Monum's leadership didn't want to publicise the repair, but why would they? It would be a tacit admission that illegal entry into protected historical sites is justifiable for the purpose of 'guerilla restoration' - wherever such a position is valid or not, endorsing it would indeed compromise Monum and similar organisations. Monsieur Jeannot was surely right in this regard.<p>That leaves me wondering why simply asking wasn't an option. Are Monum really so resistant to offers of restoration that a few phone calls and a press release couldn't have done the job, saving both sides a lawsuit?