A federal judge has sunk the City of Mackinac Island’s antitrust counterattack on the two companies that run most of the island’s ferry service, cutting off the city’s bid to use competition law to wrest control over fares, parking and other fees. U.S. District Judge Robert J. Jonker ruled that the city failed to allege the kind of exclusionary conduct antitrust laws are meant to police, leaving the fight over franchise contracts as the main battle still ahead. The timing is no small thing with the island about to ramp up for its busy visitor season.
What the judge said
In a Feb. 20 opinion, Jonker granted the ferry companies’ motion to toss the city’s antitrust counterclaims and held that the city lacked antitrust standing. He stressed that “market share alone” is not enough to prove a Sherman Act violation and said the supposed barriers the city pointed to — control over docks, franchise rules and parking — were mostly preexisting or regulatory in nature rather than the product of unlawful conduct. As reported by Courthouse News, Jonker also turned down the city’s attempt to rope in the Hoffmann Family Companies as an additional defendant.
How the fight began
The feud traces back to a rapid consolidation on the Straits. The Hoffmann Family of Companies bought Shepler’s Ferry in 2022 and then snapped up the Mackinac Island Ferry Company (rebranded from Arnold Transit) in 2024, putting the two largest operators under one corporate roof. The ferry companies sued the city in early 2025 after officials moved to freeze proposed rate hikes, and the city fired back with counterclaims accusing them of monopolization and related harms. That backstory and the case’s procedural steps are laid out by Crain's Grand Rapids Business.
Ticket and parking numbers
Court filings show Shepler’s charging about $38 for an adult round-trip ticket and Arnold around $36, with basic day parking hovering near $10. Jonker said those figures, by themselves, do not show predatory pricing. He pointed to the relatively modest recent $2 fare increases and noted that comparatively high base fares were already in place before the Hoffmann acquisitions. Those ticket and parking details appear in the court record and are reported by Courthouse News.
Why the ruling matters now
Jonker urged both sides to use the remaining term of the current franchise deals to hammer out “sensible” terms, noting the agreements expire after the 2027 season and that Mackinac Island draws more than a million visitors a year. The opinion also undercuts one of the city’s key theories by pointing out that a third-party parking operator has already entered the market near the Mackinaw City docks, suggesting Hoffmann’s ownership has not completely shut out competition. Those observations, and the judge’s nudge toward a negotiated fix, are highlighted in reporting from Crain's Grand Rapids Business.
Legal implications
With the antitrust counterclaims dismissed, the city cannot use federal competition law, at least for now, to force changes to fares or parking. Still, its breach-of-contract claim tied to the ferry franchise agreements is alive and could yet reshape how the system is run. According to the ferry companies’ counsel, the court rejected the city’s antitrust theories, refused to add the Hoffmann Family Companies to the case, and allowed the contract claims to move forward. That outcome is described in a statement from the ferry operators’ lawyers at Dykema.
What to watch
All eyes now turn to what happens off the water: negotiations between city officials and ferry operators over the next two seasons, any fresh motions or discovery on the remaining contract claims in district court, and moves in Lansing. State lawmakers have already debated bills that would clarify Mackinac Island’s charter and potentially expand local authority over rate setting. If talks break down, the combination of the contract case and possible state action will likely decide whether fares and parking stay mostly in private hands or shift toward tighter local control. For a deeper look at the political and policy backdrop, see Bridge Michigan.
