Six Firms Bid for Yosemite Park Concession : Tourism: Officials say competition is likely to ensure that government will earn more revenues from new contract. Accord may set standard for future deals.

At least six companies have submitted formal bids to run the hotels and tourist concession at Yosemite National Park, ending months of speculation over whether a newly structured concession contract would be lucrative enough to attract interest.

Park Service officials said Tuesday that they were delighted with the number of bidders so far, all of whom had been screened to ensure that they were qualified.

“Think of it this way,” National Park Service Director James Ridenour said. “For 30 years, we didn’t have any competition. Now we’ve got six or seven bidders.”

The bidders include a corporation formed in part by environmental activists and two companies that run concessions at other national parks. The winner, which would take over the Ahwahnee Hotel and other park operations next fall, will be chosen in January.

The contest for the concession, the Yosemite Park & Curry Co., is being closely watched as a test case of the Park Service’s ability to squeeze more money from companies that traditionally have paid relatively little and made hefty profits from park visitors.

“This contract will set the standard for all future concession contracts,” said Joan Reiss, regional director of the Wilderness Society.

Seven companies had been expected to bid. Representatives of six of the seven, reached by telephone, said they had submitted their bids. The applications had to be postmarked by Monday, leaving the possibility that one more will arrive by mail before the end of the week.

The bidders so far include AMFAC Resorts Inc., which runs the concessions at three other national parks, including the south rim of the Grand Canyon and Joshua Tree National Monument, and TW Recreational Services Inc., which runs concessions at Yellowstone, Everglades, Bryce Canyon and Zion national parks.

Others include the National Resource Management Inc., a Santa Ana-based company, Yosemite Park Services, a Beverly Hills-based partnership that includes as investors Minnesota Twins owner Carl Pohlad and entertainer Paul Anka, and Delaware North Companies Inc., a food service corporation based in Buffalo, N.Y.

Also bidding was the Yosemite Restoration Trust Services Corp., founded by a nonprofit board whose members include environmental activists. The firm pledged it would reduce the commercial tone of concession operations and become a model of environmental conservation.

Reiss, an environmentalist who sits on the Restoration Trust’s nonprofit board, said the awarding of the contract should be postponed until President-elect Bill Clinton takes office because his appointees would be “more likely to look at some of the environmental concerns.”

“What is the big rush?” she asked. “The rapidity of this whole process is being pushed.”

Ridenour, however, said that the contract decision will not be deferred, though Congress will have 60 days to review the Bush Administration’s recommendation.

“I don’t see this as having any political implications whatsoever,” Ridenour said. “We have been on this schedule all the way along and there is no reason to throw it off schedule.”

Other park officials say they believe Interior Secretary Manuel Lujan Jr. in particular would like to participate in the process. Lujan has made concession reform a priority and environmental groups have praised his actions.

How much the Park Service ultimately receives from the next concession will be partly a reflection of how well the government negotiated the sale last year of the Curry Co. to a nonprofit park foundation. The purchase price will actually be borne by the new concessionaire.

Some critics have contended that the next concessionaire will have to pay so much for the Curry Co. that there won’t be much left over for the Park Service.

The Interior Department arranged the sale to the park foundation, which acted as a middleman for the government, to keep the Curry Co. in American hands after its parent corporation, MCA Inc., was bought by a Japanese firm.

Lujan pledged at the time that the deal would produce more revenue for park improvements and give the Park Service greater clout in dealing with the next concessionaire.

But some have argued that the $61.5-million purchase price, including interest, was too high and complained that MCA was being allowed to escape responsibility from several future, unknown liabilities, including the cost of cleaning up leaking underground storage tanks in the park.

Indeed, some of the companies that decided not to bid for the Yosemite contract--including McDonald’s Corp., Marriott Corp., the Boston Concessions Group Inc. and Ogden Entertainment Services--cited these factors in their decision to withdraw.

Ridenour, however, called the criticism of the terms of the sale “complete hogwash.”

“We made one of the greatest purchases for the American public that has ever been made,” he said.

The next Yosemite concessionaire will be able to earn a reasonable profit, though it will not be as lucrative a deal as MCA’s, he said.

After paying the $61.5-million purchase price, the next concessionaire will be required to turn over all hotels, stores and other buildings in the park to the Park Service. Currently the buildings are owned by the Curry Co.

Park officials also have said they expect to charge the new concessionaire about $75 million in 1990 dollars over the life of the 15-year contract to pay for removal of some rustic accommodations, the construction of motel-style lodging and the relocation of housing and offices outside scenic Yosemite Valley.

At the same time, the next concessionaire will be required to reduce overall park lodgings 15.2% to reduce development in Yosemite.

The contents of the bids are being kept secret. Several bidders, however, said they believe they will be able to meet many if not all of the requirements and still make a profit.

The seventh expected bidder was Highmark Corp. Officials from the firm could not be reached for comment, and Park Service officials said they had not been told whether the firm had dropped out.