Several Tour Operators Have Reported Operational Challenges at the Independence Visitor Center Due to Unfair, Random and Arbitrary Treatment

While this blog includes commentary regarding The Constitutional Walking Tour's operational challenges in Independence National Historical Park, a unit of the National Park Service, including at the Independence Visitor Center, The Constitutional is certainly not alone in its complaints of the unfair random and arbitrary treatment that it receives from the Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC") and National Park Service.

Other tour operators have remarked on the inequitable playing field that has been enabled by the actions of the Independence Visitor Center Corporation and National Park Service at Independence National Historical Park; these complaints have persisted at the Independence Visitor Center ("IVC") and date back to at least 2005.

On January 26, 2005, Scott Lewis, then General Manager of Ride the Ducks Philadelphia, wrote to Brian Abernathy, then Legislative Assistant to Philadelphia City Councilman Frank DiCicco, and to Fran Dougherty, then Assistant Managing Director of Philadelphia. Mr. Lewis emphasized problems that would arise by moving Ride the Ducks' operations to the Independence Visitor Center:

"We [Ride the Ducks] require a high pedestrian traffic area in order to run a successful operation [...] Placing all operators side by side would cause confusion and would be a disservice to Philadelphia visitors [...] We would have no ability to sell our own products or distribute our information at the [Independence] Visitor Center location [...] If the Visitor Center sells our tickets, we lose a substantial amount of revenue to commissions [...] The Visitor Center staff would not fairly represent our products."

By mentioning the importance of high-traffic areas and the ability to distinguish between tour operators, Mr. Lewis appeared to acknowledge the need for a tour company to have accessibility to customers and visibility for prospective customers to identify the tour attraction. Mr. Lewis expressed concerns about the possibility of the IVCC staff unfairly representing a tour and lost revenue resulting from a "partnership" with the IVC.

On June 28, 2010, Stephen Earnest, Vice President and General Counsel for Herschend Family Entertainment (which owns Ride the Ducks International (RTDI)), wrote to Dennis Reidenbach, Northeast Regional Director of the National Park Service (NPS). Mr. Earnest described as "arbitrary and capricious" (emphasis added) the NPS's decision not to extend three of the four Commercial Use Authorizations issued to Ride the Ducks by Independence Historical Park. Mr. Earnest also said, "NPS is discriminating against RTDI without any reasonable basis for doing so" (emphasis added).

Third Party Master Plan Acknowledges Challenges at the Independence Visitor Center

"IVC & NPS Relationship: The IVC and National Park Service share the Visitors [sic] Center, but they often seem to be in competition with each other. There is a clear divide in the building and the information desk and visitors can feel the apparent tension between the two entities. This can be confusing and awkward for a first time user." -- ex;it (consulting and design firm)

Overview
The Philadelphia Inquirer recently reported that the "DRPA [Delaware River Port Authority] funneled more than $13 million to groups, some with ties to board." As previously discussed on this blog, these funds were outrageously going to the Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC"), a taxpayer supported public charity, which is chaired by John Estey (who also chairs the DRPA), even though the IVCC has nothing to do with the bridges that the DRPA operates.

Part of the $1.0 Million dollars allocated from the DRPA to the Independence Visitor Center ("IVC") is intended for a "New Wayfinding System." In the IVCC's proposal for the grant funding, the Independence Visitor Center Corporation stated:

"Due to the Visitor Center's long and narrow configuration, the use of the south end of the building for NPS exhibits, and the location of the concierge desk about half way back, the current system of directional signage and pedestrian circulation is ineffective. IVCC has retained exit, a local firm specializing in wayfinding and improving the pedestrian experience in challenging environments. The results of their research will lead to a program of improvements in and around the building which will enhance the visitor experience, improve pedestrian flow and circulation, and make the building more user-friendly and easier to navigate. We will look to implement these improvements in late 2010" (emphasis added).

The "local firm specializing in wayfinding" is "ex;it", and the firm created a "draft preliminary" plan dated September 3, 2010, and titled, "Independence Visitor Center: Visitor Experience Assessment & Touchpointing Master Plan." Ex;it identified five main priorities for the IVC: increase revenue, increase number of visitors, improve visitor experience, increase utilization of services, and increase staff efficiencies. Through its analysis, ex;it also identified some of the challenges facing tour operators at the IVC. Elements of ex;it's analysis are presented below and in the Exhibits. Details about the specific problems facing The Constitutional Walking Tour in terms of visibility and accessibility are presented in this post and in this video.

Problems for Walking Tour Operators
The observations and conclusions in the Master Plan highlight some of the major obstacles challenging walking tour operators at the IVC:

• The assessment includes an image of the North End of the IVC labeled "EMPTY" with the caption, "The North Entrance is usually empty and disorienting. Occasionally a tour meets here and clogs the entrance, but there is often only empty tables to welcome visitors."

• "Observations show the location of the café is a visual block in the space."

• "The Playmotion screen currently resides in the North end and lacks clear identification. It takes away possible seating and generally visitors did not find the screen enjoyable. It is not centered around Philadelphia history nor does it have a clear focus."

• "These [concierge] interactions are not typically tailored to the individual, nor do they promote the smaller, lesser known attractions."

• "Vendors: There are multiple vendors that serve visitors out of the Visitor Center. Visitors may choose to bypass the Concierge Desk and approach the tour vendor directly. These experiences are often more focused and 'retail oriented.'" These vendors include Ride the Ducks, Philadelphia Trolley Works, Franklin's Footsteps, City of Philadelphia Mural Arts Tours, Max and Me Catering, etc.

• "Currently the IVC directs many visitors to use the tourist-centered transportation such as the Phlash bus, taxis or the Big Bus tour. Public transit, like Septa, is difficult to give instructions for, so most visitors are directed to use other transportation." (emphasis added)

Walking tours such as The Constitutional Walking Tour are relegated to a remote, "empty" area of the IVC where they are overshadowed by a large media system (playmotion) that is unfocused and not enjoyable. The cafe further obstructs the visual space that may encourage visitors to head towards the walking tour staging location. According to ex;it's findings, the IVCC's concierge staff does not ameliorate this problem as they appear to promote large companies such as Big Bus tours instead of smaller businesses with less accessibility and visibility to visitors. Furthermore, the lack of a designated space or sales kiosk (which The Constitutional has tried to attain from the NPS and IVCC through a license for comparable space on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms) precludes The Constitutional Walking Tour, for example, from delivering the more direct and focused retail experiences that other vendors can.

$1.0 Million in Public Funding from the Delaware River Port Authority ("DRPA") to the Independence Visitor Center Corporation (IVCC)

Private Benefit and Inurement - Public Dollars Serving Private Interests: Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC") Is Not A "Small, Emerging and New Business" as per DRPA's Grant Requirements; DRPA's and IVCC's Corporate Governance - Conflicts of Interest with Funding when John Estey Chairs Both DRPA and IVCC

On November 19, 2010, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported that the "DRPA funneled more than $13 million to groups, some with ties to board,"

"DRPA [Delaware River Port Authority] officials repeatedly have said in the last two years that they were out of the economic-development business... That followed the DRPA's pledge in July 2008, during public hearings for bridge toll increases, to end its spending on such projects."

On November 15, 2010, the Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial Board published the following,

"The Delaware River Port Authority has finally proven the existence of an alternate universe in which it must be located. In an era of dire government budgets and municipal bankruptcies, it's somehow sitting on a gigantic pile of spending money.

Despite the temptation to keep found cash, many people actually try to return it to whomever it belongs. One might even be so starry-eyed as to hope the DRPA would give its extra money back to the public - a notion likely to make one of its officials laugh so hard as to choke on his toll-funded wasabi-and-panko-crusted ahi tuna steak at the Palm."

On August 9, 2010, the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation ("PIDC") reached an agreement ("Funding Agreement") with the Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC") whereby PIDC would funnel $1.0 Million in economic development funds from the Delaware River Port Authority ("DRPA") to the IVCC.

The details of this Funding Agreement reveal the inherent conflict of interest that has emerged through the entangled web of allegiance and responsibility between two agencies designed to serve the public--DRPA and IVCC.

John Estey is the Chairman of the Board of of Directors of both the DRPA and the IVCC. His law firm, Ballard Spahr, has represented both of these organizations for years. The PIDC Funding Agreement appears to show the ways in which public funds may have been used for the personal gain of those involved in these organizations.