Feedback Opportunity for Aramark and NPS

B. Stanton said:
I never realized there are two different contracts in play. Thank you @ashtonc77 for your efforts to bring this to light.

As has been mentioned on several other strings on WW, part of the problem is that a new concessionaire will need to buy out all of the assets and improvements (ahem) Aramark has acquired/accomplished over the years. There would need to be a significant long term payout to make the initial investment worthwhile.

On the south end, the competition with AP is forcing Aramark to do a better job than they are at BF and HC, but that competition will only increase the up-front cost for a potential newcomer.

IMO, Aramark has a vested interest in keeping the BF and HC facilities in a condition most of us consider sub-standard, at best, and making a buy-out of the Uplake concession cost prohibitive. They can continue to overcharge for under performing without consequence - unless.

Unless NPS starts to write and enforce contracts that demand a minimum level of products and services the situation is unlikely to change. Let's not kid ourselves. We can complain about Aramark all we want, and I don't know many people who've had to deal with Aramark at LP who don't have complaints, but they (corporately) simply do not care what we think. At the end of the day, Aramark is not in business to have top-notch facilities which appeal to their customers. They are in business to make money. And the best way to make money when you have a monopoly on services at LP is to incur the least amount of overhead while charging the most you can.

But this rabbit hole seems to have no bottom. NPS is a government bureau. And that is another conversation altogether.

So, what if instead of bureaucrats who only care about holding on to their titles and positions running this show, we look at the Antelope Point model? What if NPS invited local tribes to bid on Ownership (not a concession contract) of the land at Wahweap, BF and HC? A separate owner for each facility. They would own the land, buildings, slips, buoys, and all infrastructure.
Of course, contracts would have to be ironed out regarding the cooperation required between the resorts and NPS, but I would think that could be a reasonable possibility. The competition between the resorts would keep equipment and services at a much higher standard, and the employment opportunities and profits would benefit the tribes.

Just spit-balling a possible solution...
Click to expand...
In response to your suggestion stating NPS needs to write and enforce contracts that demand a minimum level of products and services... That was already written up with the contract in 1988. There are lots of things written in the contract that are simply not being 'enforced'. Not sure who is essentially responsible for 'enforcing' but maybe getting to the bottom of that would solve a short term issue...

I do like your idea of having separate concessionaire's at all facilities. To have a different concessionaire at Bullfrog and Halls Crossing could really promote better on lake services. My biggest concern is that where things stand now, Bullfrog is a bigger marina with better access. Halls Crossing has less infrastructure and doesn't provide as much visitation so I don't know if any investor or company would buy off on only owning Halls? But with that being said, we always come in at Bullfrog but the Houseboat is on a Buoy at Halls. When services are open, we do prefer to use the Halls Pump Out and Fuel Dock where it's closer and more accessible. The marina store has always been better as well. We however have never used any off lake services there but maybe on lake services is enough... Or maybe someone could make the off lake services better at Halls to make it worth dry docking there. Rental services may be a little harder to come by as well unless the agreement could provide a dock for Halls Crossing to use at Bullfrog to pickup and transport customers...
 
lakepowellnut said:
I should have the original NPS/Aramark contract shortly and I'll share it when I have it.
Click to expand...
I should have thought this through earlier when I couldn't upload the contracts to the forum. Here's the link for the contracts- scroll to the bottom and any document that starts with GLCA is contracts Aramark has been apart of. GLCA002-88-CC is the one I've been referencing for the Uplake contract. It's 156 pages so pretty meaty and historically works backwards from the top. The initial contract starts on page 84, but there are amendments and supplemental contracts on pages 33-78. The Operating Plan starting at page 147 does a pretty good job at outlining some responsibilities Aramark has- many which are not being followed. I learned that their facilities are required to be open from 7:30am to 8:00pm during peak summer months. This one specifically hasn't been followed in years.

NPS Aramark Corporation

Jimmy Tobias made this request to National Park Service of the United States of America.
www.muckrock.com www.muckrock.com
 
After going back and forth via email with James Hickman, he gave me a call this afternoon. He's a great guy and I appreciated the conversation I had with him and the time he's taken to address many of my concerns. Here's a few take-aways from our conversation:

- He works out of Wahwheap marina. Currently there is no Concession Specialist on the ground at Bullfrog/Halls. They have however hired a new specialist that is expected to start in September.

-His gut feel is that the prospectus for a new contract is not even on the radar. He sees it being at least 5 years before there is any change but sounds like it could likely be longer. He mentioned this being due to several other contracts going on. Antelope Point is on the 1998 contract and their contract is up. They are able to extend up to 3 years and have already extended 1 so their contract will be up entirely in 2 years. This contract is taking priority and there is much work to do here to put antelope point out for bid. He also mentioned they are working on the River Contract (Hite Area) and have lots to do there. He mentioned that there are plans to extend/relocate the ramp again at Hite and put a marina there. This would be so cool! Keeping my fingers crossed here. But again that contract has a higher priority than the Aramark contracts because they are 1965 contracts with less rules and criteria so they can continue to be renewed (and likely why they have been renewed every year for the last 16 years).

-He mentioned that the NPS has spent millions of dollars in infrastructure over the last several years. They have been trying to build Bullfrog back to a place that people and staff will want to live (updating buildings, roofs, etc). This is something we don't see but I believe it's relevant. He also mentioned that the changing water levels have put a big damper in their budget and what they have wanted to do (had to extend ramps, move docks, and do everything else related to moving water levels).

-James feels that Aramark does a good job at responding to complaints and feels like he has a good relationship with them. He encouraged me to continue to send him complaints for Bullfrog and Halls until the new specialist at Bullfrog arrives. He feels like when he lets Aramark know about the issues, they are willing to correct them. He wants the experience for us lake users to be the best that it can. He also mentioned that he does watch Waynes Words and Facebook Groups as well so I'm hoping he is having open conversations with Aramark about these issues as well.

-I discussed repercussions of Aramark not fulfilling their contract and he commented about how there is very little that they can do where the contracts are so vague. I get the feel that he wishes there was but due to it being a 1965 contract it makes things very difficult. It sounds like there are also lots of other amendments and agreements made (including different operating hours) that Aramark and the NPS have agreed on. I would be interested to get more details on this.

-He mentioned that NPS does inspections I believe he said a couple times each year. This includes inspections related to public health, verifying financial records, cleanliness, and customer service. Based on these evaluations the concessionaire is given a score. I wish I would have asked him what score Aramark is receiving and how they are in comparison to other vendors. I did learn that Aramark does have a large presence being a concessionaire for many other National Parks which is too bad.

-He does feel like there is a discrepancy with fuel prices and that Aramark is charging to much. He put in several requests to verify and acknowledged that mistakes happen but was grateful that was brought to his awareness.

-I did ask James if there was a way that congress could do anything to buy down the PI from Aramark. He didn't feel like there is anything that could be done as they are on a very limited budget with not very much wiggle room.


Sorry for all my posts today but hopefully some of this is insightful. If anything it helps me to remember and gives me a place to come back to when I forget ;)
 
The problem with anyone taking over the concession isn't even the initial cost, it's the maintenance/employee nightmare! I can't even imagine running a marina after being in hospitality! Makes my job look easy.
The only way it would succeed would be to bring in tour boats and to raise the bar beyond what Antelope offers, do we want that?
Better question: can we stop it?
 
Joy said:
The problem with anyone taking over the concession isn't even the initial cost, it's the maintenance/employee nightmare! I can't even imagine running a marina after being in hospitality! Makes my job look easy.
The only way it would succeed would be to bring in tour boats and to raise the bar beyond what Antelope offers, do we want that?
Better question: can we stop it?
Click to expand...
Due to the remoteness of Bullfrog/HC (no city or major airport nearby), I don't see this area of the Lake ever looking like Antelope Point. I believe that the major source of income for the concessionaire doesn't/wouldn't come from tour boats but would come from Boat Rentals, Fuel Sales, Maintenance, etc. I don't think this area needs to 'look' like Antelope Point, just needs to operate the existing facilities like Antelope Point (answer their phones, maintain the facilities and equipment, clean the docks, not run out of gas, keep stores open and stocked, have mechanics on staff and ready to help, and maintain sufficient employees for the workload).
 
ashtonc77 said:
Due to the remoteness of Bullfrog/HC (no city or major airport nearby), I don't see this area of the Lake ever looking like Antelope Point. I believe that the major source of income for the concessionaire doesn't/wouldn't come from tour boats but would come from Boat Rentals, Fuel Sales, Maintenance, etc. I don't think this area needs to 'look' like Antelope Point, just needs to operate the existing facilities like Antelope Point (answer their phones, maintain the facilities and equipment, clean the docks, not run out of gas, keep stores open and stocked, have mechanics on staff and ready to help, and maintain sufficient employees for the workload).
Click to expand...
I live in Mexican Hat, I get it! I DO know a few who would love to see Halls become a 'high end' destination along with Bullfrog Resort...it could happen and we won't know about it until it's a done deal. I think there would be a lot of push back...just wondering what people here think about it. As you know, many read this forum even if they don't participate.
 
It sounds like the NPS bureaucracy is pretty comfortable with the status quo so why would they want to rock the boat and have do some work.

Maybe call or email your congressional (Congressmen/Senators) representatives and ask them to look into why the NPS had let this particular vendor run a monopoly for the past 30+ years? It seems they actually do take a bit of interest when their constituents contact them directly, so I've heard.

Nothing like a little pressure from above to get a little attention on those who are comfortable where they are sitting. Squeaky wheel get the grease, as they say.
 
Just a little update to bring the thread back alive ;) I followed up with James Hickman on the fuel prices (previously $6.89 this season and above what Aramark is able to charge). As of September 2, Aramark dropped prices to $6.319 (a 57 cent drop) to be in line with what they are legally able to charge. I'm guessing this brought in several hundred thousand more dollars in revenue for Aramark so I'm hoping NPS forces this extra revenue to get spilled back into the park where I'm sure none of us will ever get reimbursed for this error and the excess fuel prices we paid unless there is a lawsuit filed against Aramark...
 
ashtonc77 said:
Just a little update to bring the thread back alive ;) I followed up with James Hickman on the fuel prices (previously $6.89 this season and above what Aramark is able to charge). As of September 2, Aramark dropped prices to $6.319 (a 57 cent drop) to be in line with what they are legally able to charge. I'm guessing this brought in several hundred thousand more dollars in revenue for Aramark so I'm hoping NPS forces this extra revenue to get spilled back into the park where I'm sure none of us will ever get reimbursed for this error and the excess fuel prices we paid unless there is a lawsuit filed against Aramark...
Click to expand...
Well done, sir!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top