National Park Service Erroneously Claimed in Federal Court Filings that National Park Service Officials Have Never Served on the Board of Directors of the Independence Visitor Center Corporation, a Private Corporation

The Paper Trail and Money Trail Show That Senior National Park Service Managers Have Served in Their Official Capacities on the Board of Directors of the Independence Visitor Center Corporation

On November 23, 2009, Michael Levy, Margaret Hutchinson, and Viveca Parker, the United States Attorneys representing the National Park Service ("NPS") defendants in the lawsuit brought by The Constitutional Walking Tour of Philadelphia ("The Constitutional"), erroneously argued in the NPS's Motion to Dismiss filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that NPS officials do not serve, and moreover have never served, on the Independence Visitor Center Corporation's ("IVCC") Board of Directors,

"Mr. [Dennis] Reidenbach and Ms. [Cynthia] MacLeod are not IVCC board members, and never have been, but they attend board meetings as representatives of the [Independence National Historical] Park and NPS. See current IVCC Board of Directors, and page 1 of June 18, 2009 minutes of Board meeting, attached hereto." (Defs. Reply, p. 9) (emphasis added)

10th Anniversary of the National Park Service's Independence Visitor Center - Spotlight on Fact that Concessions Award Process is Followed in All Other National Parks Across the U.S., Except in Philadelphia

The Independence Visitor Center Corporation's (IVCC) Expenses Have Grown Substantially Over Time, The IVCC's Expenses Have Vastly Exceeded Congressional Budget Office Estimates, and The IVCC Has Failed Over a Prolonged Period of Time to Be Economically Self-Sufficient from Revenue Generating Activities

At the nearly 400 national parks across the country where commercial visitor services occur (i.e., Yellowstone, Yosemite), the concessions award process is followed - however, that is not the case in Philadelphia. As the National Park Service (“NPS”) and Independence Visitor Center Corporation mark the 10th anniversary of the Independence Visitor Center on November 10th, it is time for Congress and the Courts to ensure that all commercial contracts at Independence National Historical Park (“INHP”), including at the Federally owned and funded Independence Visitor Center, are issued fairly, subject to existing laws governing the NPS.

Media Alert - Summary of the Matter Pending in Front of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit: Oral Argument Scheduled for December 6, 2011

Media Alert

Who
The Constitutional Guided Walking Tours, LLC, Jonathan Bari and Leslie Bari (Plaintiffs-Appellants) vs. Independence Visitor Center Corporation, William W. Moore, National Park Service, Dennis Reidenbach, Cynthia MacLeod and Darla Sidles (Defendants-Appellees)

What
Lawsuit pending with the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (Case Documents can be found here)

When
December 6, 2011 - Oral Argument scheduled (time to be determined)

Where

Federal Court in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with the literal and figurative backdrop of Independence National Historical Park (a unit of the NPS) featuring Independence Hall and the Liberty Bell – America’s Birthplace 

Why
This is a David v. Goliath fight between a small business - The Constitutional Walking Tour vs. the National Park Service and its agent, the Independence Visitor Center Corp. This story focuses on backroom deals, pay to play politics, crony capitalism, heavy hand of government, random and arbitrary government regulations, etc. At the nearly 400 national parks across the country where commercial visitor services occur (i.e., Yellowstone, Yosemite), the concessions award process is followed - however, that is not the case in Philadelphia.

Case Documents - In the Matter of The Constitutional Guided Walking Tours, LLC, Jonathan Bari and Leslie Bari (Plaintiffs) vs. Independence Visitor Center Corporation, William W. Moore, National Park Service, Dennis Reidenbach, Cynthia MacLeod and Darla Sidles (Defendants)

Following are the Case Documents in the Matter of The Constitutional Guided Walking Tours, LLC, Jonathan Bari and Leslie Bari (Plaintiffs) vs. Independence Visitor Center Corporation, William W. Moore, National Park Service, Dennis Reidenbach, Cynthia MacLeod and Darla Sidles (Defendants).

The Case Documents include those filed in the following Federal Courts:

• United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania - Case Number: 2-09-cv-03083 Note: Oral Argument in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Court in Philadelphia is scheduled for December 6, 2011.
• United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Court- Case Number: 11-2146

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
 
I. COMPLAINT
Original Complaint - The Constitutional Walking Tour
July 10, 2009
The Constitutional Guided Walking Tours, LLC, Jonathan Bari and Leslie Bari (Plaintiffs) vs. Independence Visitor Center Corporation, William W. Moore, National Park Service, Dennis Reidenbach, Cynthia MacLeod and Darla Sidles (Defendants); United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania at No. 09-cv-03083; July 10, 2009.

Private Benefit and Inurement - Public Dollars Serving Private Interests: Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC") Appears to be Non-Compliant with Federal Regulations and Standards Governing a Non-Profit Corporation

National Park Service Senior Officials Have Overseen Non-Profit's Operations with Administrative, Operational and Financial Controls

On June 8, 2011, the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") announced that approximately 275,000 organizations lost their tax-exempt status because they did not file legally required annual reports for three consecutive years. While the Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC") was not one of these 275,000 organizations, the IVCC's non-profit status should nonetheless be carefully scrutinized, investigated and audited because it appears that the IVCC has used charitable funds to make undisclosed lobbying expenditures, the IVCC has attempted to influence legislation without reporting it, and the IVCC has provided substantial private benefit to organizational insiders and other private companies doing business with the IVCC.

The IVCC has acted over a prolonged period in a manner that may call into question the legitimacy of its tax-exempt status. The IVCC appears to have submitted misleading information to the IRS that conceals the lobbying activities in which the IVCC has engaged. Furthermore, transactions and business relationships between the IVCC and other related parties suggest conflicts of interest and substantial private benefit and inurement. The IVCC’s lack of transparency also raises suspicion as to its tendency to work towards the public good. Not only does the IVCC seem to have engaged in a history of behavior to benefit private, for-profit parties over the public, but it appears that the IVCC has also used millions of dollars in public money to serve these private interests and to fight transparency.

It appears that the IVCC has been regularly engaging in activities that do not appear to meet the IRS standards set for tax-exempt educational organizations whereby there appear to be serious inconsistencies with its tax exempt purpose. From a Board of Directors which appears rife with conflicts of interest, perceived and/or real, to a business model that appears to substantially benefit private, for-profit enterprises, the IVCC appears to have betrayed its educational mission in the name of greater revenue and private gain over the public good. It also appears that there are numerous errors, omissions and/or misrepresentations by the IVCC with regard to its operations, disclosures and filings with the IRS and other government authorities. The IRS should investigate the IVCC and perform a critical assessment regarding the IVCC's compliance, or lack thereof, with the regulations governing non-profit organizations. To the extent that the IVCC is found to not be in compliance with IRS regulations governing non-profit companies, then the IRS should assess whether the IVCC can continue as a 501(c)(3) non-profit and determine what penalties, financial and/or otherwise, would be appropriate.

Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC") Appears to Have Engaged in Eight-Year Effort to Marginalize The Constitutional Walking Tour and Keep the Evidence Secret

The IVCC Has Spent at Least $515,626.00 on Legal Fees to Ballard Spahr over the Period from July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2010

Overview
On July 21, 2003, Bill Moore, President and CEO of the Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC"), sent a critical evaluation of The Constitutional Walking Tour of Philadelphia ("The Constitutional") to Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell allegedly in response to a request from the Office of the Governor ("2003 Memorandum"). The 2003 Memorandum was finally revealed by the Office of the Governor on July 26, 2011 after a lengthy legal battle spearheaded at least in part by the IVCC. In the 2003 Memorandum, Mr. Moore revealed his apparent dislike for The Constitutional since Mr. Moore appears to have perceived The Constitutional as a threat:

"My conclusions on this tour are as follows: ... Copycat idea - not unique to Philadelphia - difficult to separate the product from the Boston [Freedom Trail] experience ... would be confusing to customers ... Philadelphia is almost over-burdened with disjointed products that consumers find hard to understand and use." (emphasis added)

In stark contrast to Mr. Moore's conclusions, The New York Times published a supportive Travel Advisory article about The Constitutional Walking Tour on October 26, 2003 in which it stated:

"A new walking tour of Philadelphia [The Constitutional] helps visitors find their way to sites relating to the city's history and its key role in the creation of the United States.The self-guided, three-mile tour, the Constitutional, features more than 30 historical sites, including churches, museums, former taverns and old hospitals."

Wasted Pennsylvania Taxpayer Dollars: The Independence Visitor Center Corp. ("IVCC") is not a "Tourism Promotion Agency" ("TPA")

Millions of Taxpayer Dollars Spent by The IVCC May Have Violated Permitted Uses of TPA Funds Including For Patronage Pay To Politically Connected "Key Employee" Who Now Works for The IVCC

In an effort to reduce budget shortfalls, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett released a proposed 2011-2012 budget that "includes a 70% reduction in state funding for tourism marketing and promotion." On May 27, 2011, the Philadelphia Business Journal reported,

"Facing a $1 billion budget shortfall, Corbett hopes to save $5.5 million by eliminating the so-called Tourism Promotion Assistance distributed through 49 regional tourism-promotion agencies statewide. The money is used for television-and-print advertising, digital communication and other marketing."

As sacrifices are being made across the board to adapt to reduced funds, hopefully the Commonwealth's limited tourism promotion resources are not being used to continue supporting the unjust actions undertaken by the Independence Visitor Center Corporation ("IVCC"), a taxpayer supported public charity which operates the Independence Visitor Center, a Federal facility.

Tourism Promotion Agency Funding to the IVCC
From 2002 to 2009, the IVCC has received approximately $2.9 million of state taxpayer dollars from Tourism Promotion Agency ("TPA") funds allocated under the Tourism Promotion Assistance Grant Program to the Philadelphia Convention and Visitors Bureau ("PCVB"). Disconcertingly, such redistribution of tax dollars to the IVCC may have violated the permitted uses of those TPA funds and could therefore have potentially constituted the illegitimate and wasteful appropriation of public money.

Guidelines from the Pennsylvania Department of Community & Economic Development
The Pennsylvania Department of Community & Economic Development (“DCED”) published detailed guidelines entitled "Pennsylvania Tourism Office Grant Programs for Destination Marketing Organizations" ("Grant Program Guidelines"). According to the March 2010 release of these Grant Program Guidelines, the Tourism Promotion Act “establishes two grant programs that focus on local and regional marketing – the Tourism Promotion Assistance Grant Program and the Regional Marketing Partnership Grant Program.”

As a Tourism Promotion Agency, PCVB likely receives funds from the Tourism Promotion Assistance Grant Program, while the Greater Philadelphia Tourism Marketing Corporation (“GPTMC”) appears to be the Philadelphia recipient of the Regional Marketing Partnership Grant Program.

Appendix F of the Grant Program Guidelines lists Eligible and Non-Eligible Expenses for the grant funds (pages 39-40). While the reallocation of grant funds is not expressly covered, the delineation of Eligible Expenses emphasizes marketing-related expenditures. The Grant Program Guidelines repeatedly stress this marketing focus for the Grant Program funds.

In the “Introduction,” the Grant Program Guidelines state, “While we face significant economic challenges in 2010 the grant programs for Destination Marketing Organizations [i.e., PCVB] will continue to invest in tourism marketing and product development.” In Section I, Point A: Purpose of the Tourism Promotion Act, the Grant Program Guidelines explicitly state, “The purpose of the Tourism Promotion Act (Appendix A) is to support local and regional Destination Marketing Organizations in their efforts to market and promote tourism.”

As per the Grant Program Guidelines, eligibility to receive TPA funds is limited such that “only designated TPA’s may receive grants under the Tourism Promotion Assistance Grant Program.” “Pennsylvania has 49 designated destination marketing organizations that are eligible to participate in the Tourism Promotion Assistance grant program.” PCVB is a designated TPA. However, the IVCC is not, and has never been, designated as a Tourism Promotion Agency!