You are here

National Park Service, In Court Filing, Claims Xanterra Trying To Block Competition In Grand Canyon Concessions Business

Share

In a strongly worded response to Xanterra Parks & Resort's request for an injunction to remain in business past year's end on the South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park, lawyers for the National Park Service argue that the concessionaire is trying to thwart competition and feels its history on the rim entitles it to remain there.

Less than three weeks remain until Xanterra's current contract to operate lodging and dining facilities on the South Rim expires, and there is no temporary contract in place to ensure continued operation of the El Tovar Hotel, Bright Angel Lodge, Maswick Lodge, and other lodgings and restaurants beyond New Year's Eve. 

On December 16 a U.S. District Court judge in Denver is scheduled to hear arguments over Xanterra's request that the Park Service be barred from closing the South Rim lodging and dining operations on December 31 and allow the concessionaire to remain in business there until a new 15-year contract is awarded.

Doing so, the federal government counters in its 48-page response, would not maintain the "status quo," but rather upset it, cause competitive harm, and prevent the Park Service from making concessions contracts more competitive as Congress directed it to through the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998.

"In its Complaint and Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, Xanterra stresses that it has operated at the South Rim of the Grand Canyon for over a century, as though this history constituted an entitlement to continued operations," the government's response reads. "Xanterra has resisted the Park Service'™s efforts to enhance competition for the South Rim concessions, complaining, for example, that the Park Service'™s $100 million buy-down of its LSI was 'not requested nor welcomed by Xanterra.'

"In an effort to maintain its advantageous position, Xanterra now seeks a preliminary injunction that would allow it to continue operating nearly all of the South Rim concessions, deprive Delaware North of the benefit of its successful bid for a new contract that includes some concessions that Xanterra now operates, prevent the Park Service from entertaining bids from any competitors, and limiting the terms of a temporary contract to essentially the terms of Xanterra'™s expiring contract '” all for the duration of this litigation."

Alternate Text
The clock is winding down on efforts to keep the El Tovar Hotel open past year's end/Xanterra Parks & Resorts

The standoff between the Park Service and Xanterra has been brewing for more than a year, and has laid open the problem of possessory interest, or "leaseholder surrender interest," in the National Park System. That interest essentially is built up as a concessionaire invests in properties it operates for the Park Service. If a new concessionaire is awarded a contract, it must pay the outgoing concessionaire the amount of LSI it has accumulated.

At the Grand Canyon, Xanterra's LSI was determined in 2013 to stand at $198 million -- "the highest amount associated with a single contract in Park Service history," according to the government's response to Xantera's request for an injunction. Park Service officials viewed that amount as a barrier to other companies that might be interested in operating the South Rim concessions, and a decision was made to 1) break the single concessions contract for the South Rim in two, and 2) buy down Xanterra's LSI by $100 million, a sum 88 park units contributed to earlier this year. 

It was in 2013 that the Park Service announced that it would split the single South Rim contract into two, and both Xanterra and Delaware North bid on the smaller of the two. This past August the Park Service announced that it was awarding the contract to Delaware North. That left the larger contract, known as the "001 Contract," up in the air. That contract had been extended three times to Xanterra after the initial contract expired. The third extension, which runs out this Dec. 31, is the last one allowed by law.

It's the contractual expiration of the 001 contract that is the "status quo," the government argues, not Xanterra's right to continue to run the concessions. If the court grants the injunction, it would go against the status quo, the government contends. Granting of an injunction also would deny Delaware North the contract it rightfully won for the other concessions on the South Rim, the motion argues.

"...Xanterra fails to show that it will suffer irreparable harm because of any actions by the Park Service. Instead, the alleged harms are the result of the expiration of Xanterra'™s existing contract (which has already been extended for the maximum period allowed by law) and its failure to be the successful bidder on one of the new contracts," the motion reads. " In addition, the balance of equities favors the Park Service. In contrast to Xanterra, whose alleged injuries are not traceable to any NPS action and are therefore illusory, an injunction would prevent the Park Service from exercising its lawful authority to execute a contract with Delaware North.

"In the larger scheme, it would also thwart the goal of fostering competition among prospective concessioners, and would introduce uncertainty into the concession contracting process going forward. Moreover, an injunction would be adverse to the public interest, because it would stymie the competitive process that helps ensure satisfactory service to Park visitors and a fair return to taxpayers."

Park officials did not respond Thursday to an inquiry into whether they have a plan for managing South Rim concessions if the injunction is denied and if a temporary 1-year contract is not awarded. However, in the government's response park officials said they were working hard to negotiate a temporary agreement. Too, they denied that visitors to the park would be greatly impacted if there's a lapse in hotel and restaurant operations.

"Even in the unlikely event that the Park Service is unable to enter into a temporary contract to address the services covered by the 001 Prospectus before the existing contract expires on December 31, 2014, the Park itself will remain open to day visitors and tent campers, and the concessions under the new 003 (Delaware North) Contract would be available, including an RV campground," the motion notes.

"Visitors may be inconvenienced by restaurant and other closures, but only a small minority will have planned to stay in concessioner lodging, and given the time of year, they will doubtless be able to find accommodations nearby. Nonetheless, even a short interruption of some services in the Park is not a desirable outcome, and NPS is working hard to prevent this. However, it is not in the public interest to keep all of the South Rim concessions open at any cost." 

 

Comments

Trail - I don't know that the NPS has had a "growing dissatisfaction" with Xanterra.  I think they are following the appropriate mandate to have competition for the concession business.  The problem seems to lie in the structure of the LSI.  It would seem to me that those that conceived and approved that structure are most culpable for the current fiasco.

I beleive the public is best served by competition and would be best served if the LSI formulation were reworked.   The public would not be served by having Xantarra or anyother operator make a bad business deal solely to employ folks.


In fact, I submit that it is at its greatest near the top of the economic stratosphere.

So you have repeatedly claimed without substantiation.   Could you provide some examples of where those "near the top of the economic stratosphere" have indicated they are "entitled" to anything beyond the liberties and protections guaranteed by the Constitution.


"The purpose of a business or the NPS is not to provide jobs. Providing jobs is necessary to obtain their purpose." There's certainly truth to that, although it would be interesting to hear ec's ideas about the "purpose of a business."

One key contributor to the nation's recent economic woes was business decisions based soley on improving profits for stockholders and top executives - even if that meant undue risks in financial decisions. The "bailout" of some banks and Wall Street and the housing market crash was the result, and lots of employees and average citizens took their lumps, while some of those top execs got bonuses or "golden parachutes..." There's an example of  an "entitlement attitude." 

Another comment above touched on the fact that businesses (and sometimes politicians) use the "number of jobs they will create" as a justification for tax breaks, etc., so those companies at least want the public to believe the "purpose of business is to create jobs."

In the long run, one would hope that companies that treat employees well will see improved customer service, and therefore an improved bottom line. I certainly tend to give repeat business to places where I am helped by employees who are both pleasant and efficient.


Excellent points, JThomas, and spot on.


Thank you also JThomas. A previous comment stating that "employees are an expendable resource" is truly troubling. Shades of "Let them eat cake". The comment deserves no further discussion at least in my view.  It is a tragic situation that the vast majority of dedicated and competent employees for the concessionaire at Grand Canyon are the pawns of this litigation. Shame on both sides. 


It is bad enough that natural resources - like entire mountain tops, in mining - are considered disposable, expendable, consumable, pick your term. The soulless Randian inclusion of human resources in this are not what I want my nation to stand for.


JThomas - your representation of the economic collapse is so eroneous it is laughable.  The collapse was caused by government intervention in the markets and the Wall Street and bank "bailout"  is pure fiction.  Wall Street and the banks in the aggregate have paid back more than 100% of what was loaned and or invested in them. 

And while all you my lament that businesses are in business for the business and not for their employees, I don't see any of you giving jobs to people solely for the purpose of creating a job.  Your socialist mindthink doesn't work in the real world. 


I agree, Rick.  There's a nice national narrative of the parks and their relation to the human framed along those lines.  A nice piece of American exceptionalism.


Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.