A Local
Official’s Guide to Developing
Better Community Post Offices
A project of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns,
the Preservation Trust of Vermont,
and the Vermont Division for Historic Preservation
PREFACE
| TABLE OF CONTENTS | PART
I: INTRODUCTION | PART II: THE RULES
& HOW TO USE THEM US | PART
III: THE VERMONT MODEL & CASE STUDIES | SUMMARY
| APPENDIX
PART TWO:
THE RULES AND HOW TO USE THEM
“We have example after example across the country where
citizens have more input into which version of the Elvis stamp
we’re going to pick than the location of a post office…Relocation
can actually give you the worst of both worlds if it’s not
done sensitively. You can end up tearing the heart out of a
historic downtown and then put it in an inappropriate location.”
----US Representative Earl Blumenauer, D- Oregon, Sponsor
of the Post Office Relocation Act.
“To continue to provide effective retail, processing and
delivery services to the businesses and residents of Vermont…balancing
manageable costs is critical. Our emphasis has to be on
maintaining a functioning and effective postal system.
Regrettably, we cannot be all things to all people. Our role
in the revitalization of the nation’s cities and towns must be
limited to incidental participant. While we eagerly seek and
weigh input from the community regarding facility projects, we
must keep our mandate in focus.”
----Deborah Willhite, Senior Vice President, Government
Relations and Public Policy, USPS, November 2000.
THE USPS POST OFFICE RELOCATION REGULATIONS
Responding to growing political pressure and public concern
about the impact of post office relocations on downtowns and
local communities, in October 1998 the Postal Service
voluntarily adopted regulations that require broader public
notice and participation in any post office relocation project.
39 CFR Part 241. In addition, the regulations require postal
officials to consider community input, including alternative
recommendations, and provide for limited appeal opportunities
While these regulations do formalize a role for the public in
the post office planning process, the regulations are also very
clear that all final decisions will be made by the USPS and that
decisions will ultimately be based on the needs of the USPS and
not on the needs of the community. In many respects these
regulations simply codify existing USPS policies that many
citizens, state and local officials have criticized as not
working and not in the best interest of local communities.
Although these regulations do not provide the same security
as statutory mandates, local officials and communities should
know and understand them. The local community should expect the
USPS to comply with the letter and the intent of these
regulations at every point in the relocation process.
What follows is a step-by-step review of the rules the USPS
must follow in any relocation process. Also included are ideas
and advice for local officials intended to maximize the
community’s role in the USPS decision-making process. And,
regardless of any future changes to these regulations, many of
the action ideas included here are timeless and can be utilized
by local officials to guide many positive community changes.
The new regulations are triggered when the USPS “contemplates”
a relocation or expansion of a customer service facility. The
USPS claims that most local post offices are relocated because
market growth makes it impossible for the existing facility to
efficiently handle increased mail volume. Other often cited
reasons offered by the USPS when it decides to relocate a
community post office are:
· Current space is too small. Modern day mail sorting
machines are large and require significant open floor space
for processing mail. The mail sorting generally needs to be
done on one floor and cannot be spread over several floors.
There may also be a need for more space for post office boxes
and service windows. In addition, the USPS is ever expanding
their retail services and products and may require more
display and sales space.
· Parking and turn around space for
tractor-trailers is inadequate. The loading docks may need
to be updated to accommodate larger (48 to 53 ft) trucks.
Although most postal facilities in Vermont rarely if ever
receive 53 foot tractor-trailers, the USPS is planning
facilities to accommodate the use of these larger trucks in
the future, if necessary.
· The existing building is in poor condition
and creates an unsafe work environment.
· Fiscal pressures. A decision to relocate may be
based primarily on an efficiency and cost analysis. The USPS,
as a self-sustaining federal agency, constantly reviews and
scrutinizes operational expenditures in an effort to meet its
statutory mandate to provide prompt, reliable and efficient
services at reasonable rates. 39 USC §101.
When the need for expansion or relocation is first identified
or contemplated, the USPS is required to take a number of
steps intended to notify and involve the community.
WHAT THE USPS MUST DO WHEN IT
"CONTEMPLATES" A RELOCATION OR EXPANSION OF THE LOCAL
POST OFFICE:
1. POSTAL REPRESENTATIVES ARE
REQUIRED TO MEET WITH LOCAL OFFICIALS
The regulations require that postal representatives
responsible for the project personally visit one or more of the
highest-ranking local officials. In Vermont, that should include
the chair of the local selectboard or city council, city manager
or mayor. At this visit the postal representatives are supposed
to identify the needs of the post office, describe the project,
explain the process by which the public’s input will be
solicited and considered, request time on the agenda of next
meeting of the local legislative body and provide the local
government officials a letter describing the project. The
regulations identify the USPS priority of expansion over
relocation whenever possible. The postal representatives are
required to explain to the local officials that, in meeting a
need for increased space, the first priority of the USPS is to
expand the existing facility; the second priority is to find an
existing building in the same area as the current facility; and
the third option is to build on a new site; all within the
downtown area, if possible. 39 CFR §241.4 (c)(1)(ii).
“I feel this battle is very winnable if we organize and
act now.”
---St. Albans Mayor Peter DesLauriers on trying to keep
the post office in downtown St. Albans.
What local officials should do:
Before the meeting:
Act quickly. Identify state, regional and local leaders that
are committed to the preservation or revitalization of your
community’s downtown and let them know that the post office
is considering a relocation. Those contacted should include:
selectboard or city council members, local/state or regional
planners, local/state historic preservation officials, local
Chamber of Commerce and/or other business groups, neighbors,
local development, revitalization or “beautification”
committees, congressional offices, the Vermont League of
Cities and Towns and business leaders. See Appendix for
contact information.
At the meeting:
· Make sure you understand the reasons the USPS has
identified that require a relocation, e.g. more space for
sorting, distribution and circulation, more space for retail
services, more space for parking and truck traffic, unsafe and
deteriorating work space. If you are going to promote a viable
alternative, you will need to directly respond to the needs
and problems identified by the post office.
· Ask the postal officials for details that quantify the
problems. Request that all information be in writing, it will
make your analysis and response to the information easier.
When requesting information, do not settle for vague or
off-point answers. Keep asking. If the postal service is
relying on demographic data, review it closely. Their data may
have no resemblance to the town you live in or your town’s
future growth plans.
· If the initial meeting is with the selectboard, make
sure all public meeting requirements are followed.
· Suggest a process that includes more cooperation and
collaboration and longer timelines than the regulations
require.
· And finally, impress upon the postal representatives
your town’s commitment to a vital town center and the
essential role that the post office plays in that vitality.
Immediately after the meeting:
· Send a follow-up letter to the USPS officials, recapping
what was proposed, presented and discussed at the meeting.
Copy that letter to the state and local leaders identified
above.
· Call a meeting of the local and state leaders identified
above to identify strategies for keeping the post office
downtown.
· Spend some time analyzing the data and information
provided by the USPS officials. Compare it with your own data.
Check to see if it is internally consistent (i.e. are they
proposing 3 employees but asking for 9 employee parking
spaces). Examine the information critically and present
follow-up questions in writing as necessary.
· Establish a team to begin to explore alternatives and to
be able to respond to problems and proposals presented by the
post office. Consider all alternatives, including separating
postal functions - keeping retail services downtown if
circulation and distribution services cannot be accommodated.
· Be creative when considering how to get necessary
information. The USPS officials may not always be the most
efficient source.
· Visit other post offices in your region, especially ones
built in the last five years and consider talking to carriers
and postal clerks to get a better understanding of the
operations and needs of the post office.
a. The owner of the current post office
must be notified in writing of the potential relocation or
expansion.
The majority of local post offices are located in leased
buildings. In Vermont, as of December 2000, 259 of 298 (87%)
postal facilities are leased. Historically, these leases have
been long-term leases, in the range of 20 years or more.
What local officials should do:
Contact the owner to discuss the proposed relocation. Seek to
understand owner’s flexibility and desires regarding the
post office. Are renovations and/or expansion an option? Are
there any issues with the lease?
b. The USPS must notify the media and
the general public.
The USPS is required to send out “an initial news release”
to local media, however, the regulations do not specify the
content of this initial news release. The assumption is that the
news release will describe the project and the process for
public input. In addition, the USPS must post the news release
and/or the letter given to local officials in the lobby of the
affected post office. The regulations also require that, at
least 7 days prior to the public meeting, the date, time and
location of the public meeting or hearing be included or added
to the lobby posting. There is no requirement that the meeting
notice be provided to the local media. 39 CFR §241.4 (c)(3) and
(4)(i).
What local officials should do:
· Hold a press conference or send out a press release to let
the public know your concerns about losing the downtown post
office and/or other concerns with the post office’s
proposal.
· Encourage people to submit comments to the USPS and attend
any public hearing.
· Create a stir - inform the residents and get the
community talking. The USPS is a governmental agency and is ultimately
accountable to the people. Remember: the expressed goal of the
USPS is to work with the community and to keep the post office
downtown whenever possible.
c. The USPS must hold or attend a
public meeting and seek public comment on the proposed project.
This step requires that the USPS either hold a public hearing
or attend a regularly scheduled public meeting of the local
legislative body to “describe the project to the community,
invite questions, solicit written comment, and describe the
process by which community input will be considered.” 39 CFR
§241.4 (c)(4)(ii). If the USPS believes that it will not be
able to expand at its existing facility it is supposed to “disclose”
and discuss that fact with the public. The regulations also seem
to require the USPS to make a good faith effort to consider
alternatives to relocation that are offered at the public
meeting. However, this provision in the rule has been criticized
by local officials and citizens as being unclear and misleading.
Finally, at the public meeting the USPS must also notify the
public of their appeal rights and the process by which an appeal
can be made. 39 CFR §241.4 (c)(4)(iii).
“Under exceptional circumstances” the regulations allow
the USPS to forego attendance at the public hearing on the
proposed project and in lieu thereof the Postal Service “may
distribute a notification card to all affected customers,
seeking their comments or other feedback.” 39 CFR
§241.4(c)(4)(ii). “Exceptional circumstances” include a
project “in a sparsely populated area remote from the seat of
local government or any forum where a postal conducted could be
held.” 39 CFR §241.4 (c)(4)(ii). Although such “exceptional
circumstances” are subject to the approval of the Vice
President, USPS Facilities, Vermont local officials should
object to any effort to exercise this exception to a public
meeting for a rural Vermont project.
“What the post office officials heard in unmistakable,
impassioned language is that they want the post office to
remain in the downtown area, and preferably where it is. What
the community heard is that the current building is too small,
creating severe inefficiencies and safety issues. They want a
single-level building and are willing to consider all options.
Give us a choice they say. In response the community said be
open to creative solutions; old, historic towns don’t often
lend themselves to single-story, ultra-modern buildings.” St.
Albans Messenger Editorial, September 30, 1988, reporting on a
public meeting held to discuss a post office relocation
proposal for St. Albans.
What local officials should do:
· Send personal invitations to attend the public hearing to
business leaders, local and state economic, community
development and historic preservation officials, local, state
and federal politicians, local developers and commercial land
owners, leaders in organizations devoted to smart growth and
downtown and historic preservation. For a list of these
state officers and organizations see Appendix.
· If possible, get donations of childcare and refreshments
for the public meeting.
· Make flyers announcing the public meeting (and the
availability of refreshments and childcare) and post them in
community centers, grocery stores and markets and other public
buildings.
· At the hearing, have the working team present proposed
alternatives to keep the post office downtown. Provide the
public and the media with copies of any materials presented.
d. The USPS must review public comments
and notify local officials and the general public of their final
decision on relocation.
The USPS must wait at least 15 days from the date of the
public meeting to make a decision regarding relocation. The USPS
must notify local officials in writing of their decision. The
decision should take into account public comment and should be
consistent with the USPS priorities as outlined in Step One. The
decisions should also be posted in the lobby of the local post
office. No action on the decision may be taken for at least 30
days following the public notice. 39 CFR §241.4(c)(5)
“The U.S. government can be part of the solution or part
of the problem. The right choice could shore up a historic
downtown with many empty shopfronts. The wrong choice could
undermine a budding revitalization. The U.S. Postal Service,
despite its claims of listening to the public, and despite a
presidential directive to stop fostering sprawl, continues to
champion plans for a new building that might not be compatible
with downtown St. Albans.” Burlington Free Press
Editorial, October 6, 1998.
What local officials should do:
The experience in Vermont is that the USPS’s decision
usually takes months, not 15 days. In fact, sometimes the
decision takes so long that certain relocation or expansion
opportunities may have come and gone before the decision is
made. If viable and desirable opportunities are at risk
because of delay, use public pressure to attempt to hasten a
decision. Ask your congressional delegation to contact the
USPS and urge a timely decision.
If you are successful, and the decision of the USPS is to
stay in your community center - congratulations, but the
really challenging work is just beginning - site selection and
building design. It is critical that you pay close attention
to every step of this process and maintain the public pressure
to ensure a site and design that is consistent with your
community’s standards. If you do not participate, chances
are you will get the “one-size-fits-all” design.
e. Any person may appeal the decision
to relocate.
Within 30 days following public notice of the written
decision, any person may request, in writing, that the decision
to relocate be reviewed by the Vice President, Facilities. The
appeal should state the reasons for the objection. 39 CFR
§241.4(c)(6)
What local officials should do:
Although the USPS has wide discretion under the regulations to
make a decision, it is important that local communities hold
this federal agency to consistently high standards. A notice
of appeal should comment on the following criteria: 1) the
extent to which the post office is an essential part of your
core downtown business area; 2) the adequacy of the existing
facility and the cost-effectiveness of the move; 3) the
potential effects of the change on both the community and the
postal workers, 4) whether or not the community served by the
Post Office opposes the proposed action; and 5) whether all
reasonable alternatives, particularly those with a lesser
impact on the community, have been adequately considered.
2. THE USPS MUST COMPLY WITH THE
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT
If it is determined that a relocation project will have an
“effect on cultural resources,” the USPS has stated in its
regulations (39cfr 241.4 (2)) that it will voluntarily comply
with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
and its implementation regulations, 36, CFR 800. The NHPA
requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of
their undertakings on historic properties. The intent of the law
is to identify historic properties potentially affected by a
federal agency’s undertaking, assess the potential effect and
seek ways to avoid, minimize or mitigate any adverse effects on
historic properties. In addition, Executive Order 13006, “Locating
Federal Facilities on Historic Properties in our Nation’s
Central Cities” further requires the USPS to give first
consideration to locating in historic properties within historic
districts.
What local officials should do:
Local officials should make sure that any post office
relocation is conducted in accordance with the National
Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470, et. seq.).
Generally, this means that the USPS should give priority to
consideration of historic resources whenever possible. If you
are not familiar with the NHPA or if your town needs help
identifying historic buildings in your town, you should
contact the Vermont Division for Historic Preservation. See
Appendix for contact information. Downtown is the historic
center of most communities, and a healthy downtown is vital
for a community’s economic well-being. Consequently,
historic preservation is nearly always a central element in
successful local revitalization efforts. Therefore, keeping
the post office downtown or in the town center works
hand-in-hand with historic preservation and community
revitalization.
In addition, public occupancy of downtown historic
buildings makes triple use of scarce public resources.
Reinvestment in historic buildings reinforces the value of
existing real estate assets, provides an impetus for private
investment and, maximizes the public investment in downtown
infrastructure.
3. THE USPS MUST PROVIDE LOCAL
OFFICIALS AND THE PUBLIC NOTICE OF ALL SITES BEING CONSIDERED
FOR RELOCATION.
When potential sites (building lots or existing buildings) are
identified, the USPS must provide written notice to local
officials of all contending sites and post a copy of that notice
in the lobby of the local post office. The notice should
encourage the public to comment on all of the potential sites.
The notice should also advise the public that no site decision
will be made for at least 30 days from the date of the notice.
39 CFR §241.4(e)(i).
When the final site selection is made, the USPS must again
provide written notice of the decision to local officials. No
final action to acquire or lease the selected site should be
taken for 30 days following notice to public officials. 39 CFR
§241.4(e)(ii)(iii).
“What I think the Postal Service has learned in Vermont
is that a one-size-fits-all approach to community needs doesn’t
work. While Vermonters recognize that the Postal Service has
to provide convenience to its customers, efficiency in mail
delivery, safety and a good working environment for its staff,
it has become apparent in Vermont that the building and site
standards established by the Postal Service for upgrading
postal facilities are very specific and sometimes at odds with
the goal of strengthening downtowns.” Senator James
Jeffords, October 1999.
What local officials should do:
Stay involved! This is one of the most critical
stages in the relocation process. If the project is contracted
out to a private developer, the USPS is still required to
follow the public notice requirements. Make sure that the USPS
is fairly and completely examining all potential sites. During
this process the USPS will give the owners of potential sites
the specifications for the future building. By following the
process closely and communicating with all owners of potential
sites, local officials can get a good idea as to what type of
building the USPS is considering for your community. Work with
the USPS officials to understand and challenge their
assumptions and to explore all alternatives. Continue to push
for the sites that local leaders feel are most appropriate for
your community.
Parking and Post Office Relocations
In Vermont, the USPS parking “requirements” are often the
reason for not locating in a town center. The methods used by
the USPS to calculate parking needs generally result in a
requirement for a huge parking lot, probably the biggest lot in
most towns. Local officals can learn a lot from the experiences
of South Burlington and Westminster when it comes to challenging
USPS parking requirements:
South Burlington.
The USPS calculates that a new South Burlington post office
would require 93 parking spaces. To arrive at that number, the
USPS formula breaks the parking needs into two categories -
customer parking and employee parking.
· Customer parking: Based on a computer program
that considers the number of counter transactions and post
office boxes, the USPS calculated a customer parking need of
39 spaces (includes 2 handicapped spaces). The calculation
assumes every customer arrives in his or her own car.
· Employee parking: The South Burlington facility
is projected to have 19 route drivers and 5 office clerks, for
a total of 24 employees working out of the facility. However,
the formula requires 54 employee parking spaces (including 2
handicapped). The formula breaks out as follows: 19 city route
vehicle parking spaces (those are the trucks that are driving
around the neighborhoods all day), 19 employee vehicle spaces
(assuming all employees drive their own car to work), 3 rural
route vehicle spaces, 2 “official” spaces, 3 custodial
spaces, and 1 highway contract route vehicle space.
To their credit, the USPS representatives working with
South Burlington officials acknowledged that the parking
requirements are probably too high and they can allow for some
flexibility.
Westminster
The USPS originally proposed replacing the 800 square foot
post office with a new 3,630 square foot facility with 35
parking spaces - 23 for customers and 12 for employees. The
existing post office was staffed by one full time
postmistress, one part-time counter person and one part-time
delivery driver. After significant research and negotiation,
local officials were able to work with postal officials to
decrease the size and scope of the proposed facility. The USPS
agreed to a 2100 square foot post office with 12 parking
spaces. For a longer discussion of the Westminster project
see the Case Studies section.
Ideas for challenging parking needs:
1) survey the number of post office customers that walk, car
pool, or park while running various errands in the downtown
area (i.e. shared parking) and encourage the USPS to decrease
the customer parking needs accordingly;
2) encourage USPS to consider sharing the city route vehicle
parking spaces that remain empty for most of the day with the
customer spaces;
3) if the parking requirements include community growth
projections, encourage the USPS to set land aside but postpone
paving it until the need arises;
4) encourage the USPS to consider on-street parking and any
other nearby public parking facilities.
4. THE USPS IS NOT REQUIRED
TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL ZONING OR BUILDING CODES WHEN THE USPS
OWNS THE BUILDING.
The Post Office Relocation regulations encourage but do
not require compliance with local zoning and building codes.
The regulations state that it is the “policy” of the USPS to
comply with local planning and building codes if they are “consistent
with prudent business practices and unique postal requirements.”
As a courtesy, the postal service is supposed to send any plans
and drawings to local building and zoning administrators for
review. The Postal Service is required only to provide local
officials with “written notice of any timely, written
objections or recommendations [from local zoning or building
code administrators] that it does not plan to adopt or
implement. 39 CFR §241.4(f).
What local officials should do: From the local official’s
perspective, this “exemption” from local zoning is
probably the most significant weakness in the regulations.
Remember however, this exemption only applies when the USPS owns
the facility. In Vermont, the vast majority of post
offices are leased from private landlords. If a property is
privately owned it is subject to local zoning regulations
and state land use laws (Act 250) regardless of who is the
tenant.
If the facility is owned by the USPS and therefore exempt
from zoning regulations and building codes, local officials
should persistently insist on voluntary compliance by the USPS.
Reiterate as often as possible the fact that many Vermont
communities are attempting to carefully plan their future
development, so as to protect and preserve their open spaces
and maintain a high quality of life for themselves and their
children. Zoning laws were created to reflect local values and
planning priorities. Therefore, noncompliance by the USPS
undermines the economic and social well-being of communities
by permitting the construction of new facilities without
regard to local plans for growth or traffic management,
environmental protection, and public safety. Urge the USPS to
be a governmental partner in shaping communities.
5. THE USPS MUST REGULARLY
COMMUNICATE WITH THE PUBLIC AND LOCAL OFFICIALS DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PROCESS
The local postmaster should keep local officials and the
community informed, via letters and news releases, of the
progress of construction. In addition, the postmaster should
invite the community and local officials to any grand opening,
“as appropriate.” 39 CFR §241.4(g).
The Post Office Community Partnership Act of 2001
“…Our bill would codify the process that communities
should go through [as plans are developed to expand or
relocate their local post offices] and would avoid a one-size
fits all approach…The bill sets up a process that makes sure
community voices and concerns are heard and taken into account
by the Postal Service. Additionally, this bill will require
the Postal Service to abide by local zoning laws and the
historic preservation rules regarding federal buildings…I
believe this legislation will strengthen the federal-local
ties of the Postal Service, help preserve our downtowns, and
combat the problem of sprawl.”
---Senator James Jeffords, sponsor of the Post Office
Community Partnership Act of 1999
“Local governments should know that there are
protections in place that recognize the importance of Post
Offices to the community. Codifying these protections thorough
[the Post Office Community Partnership Act] will ensure fewer
arbitrary post office closings, consolidations, relocations or
moves to newly constructed facilities. It will also ensure
that as future Postal Administrations come and go there is an
established process for making these decisions that can only
be altered be Congress.”
---Richard Moe, President, National Trust for Historic
Preservation.
U.S. House and Senate versions of the Post Office Community
Partnership Act were first introduced in the 106th
Congress in 1999 by Representative Blumenauer (Representative
Sanders was a co-sponsor) and Senators Baucus and Jeffords
(Senator Leahy was a co-sponsor). The bills (H.R. 670 and S.
556) passed both the House and the Senate but were not enacted
into law. As this handbook is being written, Senator Jeffords
and Senator Baucus are drafting the Post Office Community
Partnership Act of 2001 to be introduced in the 107th
Congress.
In short the new legislation will require the post office to
fully consider the impact of a relocation on the local community
and all reasonable alternatives to relocation. The legislation
also includes a more significant appeal opportunity than the
regulations currently provide. In addition the legislation makes
compliance with local zoning, building and design regulations
and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
mandatory not voluntary.
The Post Office Community Partnership Act of 1999 enjoyed
wide bi-partisan support in both the House and the Senate led by
Vermont’s Congressional Delegation - Senators Jeffords and
Leahy and Congressman Sanders. The legislation was also endorsed
by a variety of national organizations including: National
Association of Postmasters of the United States, National League
of Cities, National Association of Home Builders, National Trust
for Historic Preservation, National Conference of State Historic
Preservation officers, National Association of Counties, U.S.
Conference of Mayors, National Governor’s Association,
American Planning Association, Preservation Action,
International Downtown Association, National Alliance of
Preservation Commissions, Preservation Action, and the Sierra
Club.
It is critical that the Post Office Community Partnership Act
of 2001 be enacted into law during this 107th session
of Congress. As was mentioned previuosly, in early 2001, the
USPS announced a moratorium on all construction projects. Now is
the time for Congress to act. If the new law is in place before
the construction moratorium is lifted, it will give USPS and
local communities time to adjust to the new requirements and to
prepare for the next round of relocation projects. While the
current USPS regulations provide some guidelines for
relocations, they are not mandated by law and therefore are
voluntary and can be amended to suit the needs of the USPS.
Vermonters are lucky that their congressional delegation is
firmly committed to passage of the Act and to preserving
downtowns and town centers by limiting the potentially
devastating impact of post office relocations.
For the most up-to-date information on proposed federal
legislation in the 107th Congress, contact your
congressional delegation. See contact information in the
Appendix.
Significant elements of the Post Office Community
Partnership Act of 2001, to be introduced in the 107th
Congress:
1. Findings. The most significant provision in
the proposed legislation requires the USPS to make written
findings with respect to the following considerations when
making a decision to relocate or expand a post office:
a. the extent to which the post office is part of a core
downtown business area;
b. the extent of any opposition within the community to the
proposed action;
c. any potential effect of the relocation on the community
served by the post office;
d. any potential effect of the relocation on employees of the
local post office;
e. the quantified long-term economic saving to the USPS
resulting from the relocation;
f. the adequacy of the existing post office;
g. whether all reasonable alternatives to relocation have been
explored;
h. whether the proposed plan is consistent with the size,
scale, design and general character of the surrounding
community; and
i. any views expressed by local officials, including whether
the proposed action is reasonable in light of local population
projections.
By requiring written findings in each of these areas, local
officials can focus on these considerations throughout the
relocation debate and can base any appeal on the USPS findings.
2. Notice period. The proposed legislation requires
the USPS to notify communities at least 60 days prior to making
a decision to relocate, close, consolidate or construct a post
office. The USPS regulations in place today provide only a
seven-day period after public officials and the community are
notified of a proposed relocation before holding a public
hearing. This is an insufficient amount of time for the
community to come together, understand the problem presented and
develop alternatives to the proposed relocation.
3. Public Meetings. The regulations in place today do
not require the USPS to hold a public hearing in
"exceptional circumstances." Instead the USPS is
allowed to simply send notification cards to the public about
the closing. The legislation requires public hearings under all
circumstances except true emergencies.
4. Compliance with National Historic Preservation Act.
The proposed legislation requires compliance with the NHPA for
closings, consolidations and relocations. The regulations in
place today do not require compliance with the NHPA unless the
USPS determines it is not burdened by compliance.
5. Local zoning, building and design codes. The
proposed legislation requires compliance with local zoning,
building and design codes. The regulations in place today
make compliance voluntary. Compliance with zoning and building
codes is critical to ensure that post offices like all new
buildings are developed in a way that is consistent with
community values.
7. Appeal rights. The proposed legislation provides a
right to appeal by any person served by that post office to the
Postal Rate Commission. The Postal Rate Commission must set
aside any decision of the Postal Service if the Commission finds
it to be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or
otherwise not in accordance with law or procedure, or
unsupported by the record. Under current regulations, any appeal
now stops at the Vice President for Facilities of the USPS.
A Local
Official’s Guide to Developing Better Community Post
Offices
A project of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, the
Preservation Trust of Vermont, and the Vermont
Division for Historic Preservation, June 2001
Prepared by: Jessica Oski,
Esq. with Editorial Assistance from (in alphabetical order):
Paul Bruhn and Ann Cousins, Preservation Trust of VT; Jim
Condos, state senator and South Burlington city councilor; Karen
Horn, Vermont League of Cities and Towns; Don Keelan, The Keelan
Company; Fred Kenney, Senator Leahy’s Office; Jeff Munger,
Senator Jefford’s Office; Jenny Nelson, Representative Sanders’
Office; John Rehlen, private developer; Glenn Smith, Westminster
Town Manager; John Taylor, Governor Dean’s Office; Emily
Wadhams, State Historic Preservation Officer; and David
Weinstein, Vermont Housing and Conservation Board.
