November 15, 2014
November 15, 2014
The Postal Service has closed the post office in Lindsborg, Kansas, because of concerns about the air quality. Apparently some black mold was discovered in the basement. That’s not too surprising considering that it’s an old building that dates back to 1936.
The news reports don’t mention the phrase, but presumably the office was closed for an “emergency suspension.” Under the legal provisions for such suspensions, the Postal Service can close an office on very short notice, without consulting the community.
And that’s just what happened in Lindsborg. Customers arrived at the post office one day last week and found the place closed. There was just a cryptic message posted on the door explaining that due to "safety concerns" postal operations had been transferred to Salina, over 20 miles away. At least one customer complained about the lack of advance notice and asked why the Postal Service "didn't know about this way before."
There are three other post offices less than ten miles from Lindsborg where customers can do their postal business. The more immediate concern was the hundred or so box holders in Lindsborg. In order to provide boxes to these customers, the Postal Service is going to install a cluster box unit in front of the post office.
There’s nothing very unusual about the Postal Service closing a post office over mold issues. It’s happened several times in the past, and usually the office reopens after the landlord takes care of the problem.
And that’s pretty much what one would expect in this case. The notice taped the door of the Lindsborg post office says just that:
“The Postal Service is having the air inside the Lindsborg Post Office tested. If the air quality is determined to be unsafe, the landlord of the Lindsborg Post Office will be notified so remediation can be made. Once it is safe, the Postal Service plans to reopen the Post Office.”
What’s curious about this notice is that the landlord is the Postal Service itself.
According to the most recent Owned Facilities Report, which was just updated a couple of months ago, the Postal Service owns the post office at 125 E. Lincoln Street in Lindsborg, Kansas. In fact, it has owned the building since it was constructed back in 1936.
It’s not as if this is just any post office. It's a historic New Deal post office, it contains a 1938 mural entitled "Smoky River" by Birger Sandzen, and it’s on the National Register of Historic Places. (The 1989 nomination form is here, with the photos here.)
Now, it’s possible that the notice taped to the door of the post office was just boilerplate, and someone in postal management mistakenly used some text that was intended for when a leased property is suspended. But that wouldn’t explain why the Postal Service did not inform the news media that it would be taking care of the mold problem itself as soon as possible.
The fact that the Postal Service is going to spend money installing a cluster box unit in front of the post office suggests that the closure will be more than temporary. It's entirely possible that the Lindsborg Post Office will never reopen and that the Postal Service will eventually put the building on the market. Perhaps that's the plan behind the mold issue.
In the meantime, the Postal Service will be notifying the Postal Service that the mold problem must be corrected before the Postal Service can reopen the Lindsborg Post Office.
November 12, 2014
It's business as usual at the Washington Post. Just as it has done many times over the past few years, the Post's editorial staff is calling for more cuts to postal services and more downsizing of the infrastructure, all in the name of "reform."
Today's Post has an editorial entitled "Delivering a solvent Postal Service, the bipartisan way." The Post endorses the Carper-Coburn bill and its mandate to close facilities and cut services, and then blames “interest-group politics” for opposing these much-needed reforms. According to the Post, it's postal unions, rural states, and large-scale commercial mailers who are “furiously” trying to protect “the dysfunctional status quo.”
Not surprisingly, the Post expresses support for the Postal Service’s plan to close 82 more mail processing plants over the coming months. To make its case, the Post describes these plants as “inefficient mail-processing facilities.” But the Post provides no evidence for why these plants are “inefficient.”
There’s actually a considerable amount of evidence showing that it would be more efficient for the Postal Service to maintain these plants rather than close them.
When the Postal Regulatory Commission did an Advisory Opinion in 2012 analyzing the Postal Service’s Network Rationalization plan to close about 260 plants, the Commission concluded that it would be more efficient if only some of the plants were closed. After an exhaustive analysis conducted by the PRC staff and outside experts, the Commission found that closing some plants would be beneficial. Closing all of the plants on the list, however, would be counter-productive because it would necessitate ending overnight delivery for almost all First-Class mail, which in turn could cause a considerable amount of damage in terms of lost revenue.
How deep the losses would be was hard to say, however, because the market research done on the question was so problematic. The Postal Service commissioned a market research survey that showed that mail volumes would decline precipitously if the mail were slowed down as proposed. The losses would be so significant, in fact, that the closures could end up losing money in the end. The Postal Service buried the survey and commissioned a second survey, which produced more palatable results.
In reviewing the two surveys, the PRC could not come up with a reasonable estimate for how much the plan would save. If everything went perfectly, the consolidations could save over $2 billion a year, as the Postal Service was claiming, but the plan could also end up breaking even or even losing a half billion dollars a year. In the worst-case scenario, it might even end up losing almost $1.5 billion a year. (For more on the numbers, see this previous post.)
In the end, the PRC recommended that the Postal Service proceed with phase one of the closures (which the Postal Service had already begun to do before the Advisory Opinion was issued), but hold off on phase two. The Postal Service is ignoring the advice, and it's going to begin closing the plants early next year. Postal workers across the country will be protesting the closures on Thursday of this week.
Nov. 10, 2014
In a previous post, "It takes a Village Post Office, but for what?" we questioned the financial rationale for VPOs and asked why many of them were now being placed in densely populated areas. Now there’s more reason to pose such questions.
A couple of days ago, an article in The Press Democrat touted the "debut" of some new Village Post Offices in Sonoma County, north of San Francisco. A couple of them are right in the heart of Santa Rosa, where there are seven or eight post offices, all of them operating at regular hours, some with Saturday hours as well. This map of Santa Rosa shows VPOs in red and the nearby post offices in blue.
The Postal Service has been putting VPOs in other urban areas, and California seems to be a popular location. Nearly a third of the 74 VPOs created in August and September 2014 were in California. In San Diego, where there about 25 or 30 post offices, the Postal Service has set up a half dozen VPOs. In Sacramento, there are now five VPOs, surrounded by 16 real post offices, as you can see on this map.