National park concessionaires are gearing for a major battle with Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan Jr. - and their point man is former Rep. Allan Howe, D-Utah.
At Lujan's prodding, the National Park Service is proposing rule changes to get more money from concessionaires, who now return an average of only 2.5 percent of their $500 million-plus in annual revenue to the treasury.But concessionaires say many of the proposed changes are unfair - if not illegal - and overlook many improvements they fund for park facilities, which they say parks likely could not have afforded themselves.
Howe, who was in Congress from 1975-77, is the Washington representative of the Conference of National Park Concessionaires and is leading its fight.
He was a part-time lawyer/lobbyist for the group for 11 years before he dropped his other clients last year and began working for it full-time.
Howe's immediate concern is the proposed rule changes the Park Service published in the Federal Register this month, which it said are designed to increase competition in bidding for concessions.
Two of three proposed formulas for bidding for concessions would weaken incumbent concessionaires' current right to keep their concessions simply by matching any best offer from a competitor. Howe said a 1965 law gave that "right of preference" to concessionaires.
"The changes the secretary proposes we fear are attempts to really circumvent the law," Howe said, adding that Congress designed the law to give concessionaires incentive to perform well.
"By law, only concessionaires who the Park Service itself rates as satisfactory are entitled to that. The Park Service only gives two ratings: satisfactory or unsatisfactory," he said.
He fears doing away with the present system - which he said might bring legal fights - would discourage concessionaires from paying for major improvements to facilities they operate.
"I have an A-1 example," he said. "Back in 1974, the National Park Service proposed to close the in-park concessions at Bryce Canyon and Zion in Utah. When I was in Congress, I fought them."
He said after much opposition and hearings, the Park Service agreed to extend the concessionaires' contracts at lodges in those parks and allowed them to make major investments in them.
"The first-class lodges you see now are a result," he said. "The private sector invested money to do what the Park Service wanted done. . . . Over the years, Congress has not been too generous to the Park Service for money - and parks in Utah might still be waiting for those improvements.
"Just look at Canyonlands. The promises when it was made a park about adequate roads and visitors' services still have not been realized," he said. Howe was administrative assistant to Sen. Frank E. Moss, D-Utah, when Moss pushed to create that park.
Howe is worried about another proposal that would take away the right of a concessionaire to sell his business - with Park Service approval - for the remaining years on his park contract if he had no possessory interest in park facilities. It would instead essentially force the concession to be re-bid.
Howe said that would especially hurt concessionaires such as river-running companies. They could sell their boats, but not the contract that allows them to run park rivers with them. "The business isn't worth anything without it," he said.
The Park Service will accept comments on such proposed rule changes until Oct. 22 and does not expect to have final rules ready before the end of the year.
Howe said his group is also concerned with continuing efforts by the Park Service to charge higher fees when concession contracts come up for adjustment or renegotiation.
"They argue they are too low. But the Park Service knew what it was doing when it set them. At the time the emphasis was on providing improvements to facilities. They forget about that now," he said.