[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 67 (Wednesday, May 16, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5010-S5012]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Allard, Mr. Leahy, 
        and Mr. Levin):
  S. 897. A bill to amend title 39, United States Code, to provide that 
the procedures relating to the closing or consolidation of a post 
office be extended to the relocation or construction of a post office, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Government Affairs.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today I am pleased to re-introduce an 
important, common sense, community-based bill with my friend, Mr. 
Jeffords. That bill is the Post Office Community Partnership Act of 
2001.
  It is not by mistake that we offer this bill during National Historic 
Preservation Week. This week, sponsored by the National Trust for 
Historic Preservation, highlights the need to support the diversity and 
history of our communities and work to revitalize them.
  A few years ago, we discovered that post offices throughout the 
country were not paying attention to local ideas and local needs before 
closing, relocating, consolidating, or constructing new facilities. I 
know of several examples in my home state of Montana. Post offices in 
Livingston and Red Lodge, for example, proposed changes that would have 
severely altered the downtown fabric of those communities. These small, 
rural towns have a Main Street by name and by function. It's on Main 
Street that people stop by the post office on the way to the bank or 
the grocery store. It's where they enjoy the chance to not only get all 
their ``in town'' chores done, but also interact with each other.
  It's small town ``Main Streets'' all over the country that are 
threatened when post offices close or relocate. At a time when many 
rural communities are struggling, the closure or relocation of a Main 
Street post office is the sounding of a death knell.
  Communities like Livingston and Red Lodge define our rural 
landscapes. They have been built around a cluster of essential services 
that ensure their vitality. Communities are unnecessarily hurt when 
cornerstone institutions, like post offices, close or relocate. People 
not only lose a gathering place, they lose an important element of 
their community.
  There are certainly instances where closures, relocations, 
consolidations, and new construction are good choices for a community. 
This bill doesn't change that. What it does, is address those instances 
where people and communities have suffered because the Postal Service 
has made a decision without consulting with community members.

[[Page S5011]]

  While the Postal Service has made some internal changes in the past 
couple of years to include more public involvement, I fear that new 
pressures on delivery service will tempt the Postal Service to focus on 
ways to meet their business needs, while belying the role they play in 
communities.
  Today, Senator Jeffords and I are re-introducing legislation to 
ensure public participation in local post office decisions relating to 
closing, consolidation, relocation, or new construction. This bill 
isn't about imposing new mandates on the Postal Service. It's about 
honoring the role that the Postal Service plays in our towns and 
communities. It's about protecting a partnership that communities and 
the Postal Service have nurtured throughout the history of this 
country.
  Indeed, partnership is what this bill is all about. Specifically, our 
bill outlines a process for community notification and involvement. It 
makes sure that a community's voice is heard. It requires the Postal 
Service to post notification of proposed facility changes. It specifies 
that local government officials be notified of the proposed changes at 
the same time as persons serviced by the local post office. And it 
requires the Postal Service to follow local public participation 
processes if they are more stringent than their own.
  These common-sense provisions will ensure that communities continue 
to partner with the Postal Service and that both the Postal Service and 
our communities will continue to enjoy a mutually beneficial 
relationship.
  I urge my colleagues to support Senator Jeffords and me in passing 
this important legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 897

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Post Office Community 
     Partnership Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE PROPOSED CLOSING, 
                   CONSOLIDATION, RELOCATION, OR CONSTRUCTION OF A 
                   POST OFFICE.

       (a) Applicability.--Section 404(b) of title 39, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (5) as 
     paragraphs (3) through (6), respectively;
       (2) by striking ``(b)(1)'' and inserting ``(2)''; and
       (3) by inserting before paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) 
     the following:
       ``(b)(1) This subsection shall apply in the case of any 
     proposed closing, consolidation, relocation, or construction 
     of a post office.''.
       (b) Advance Notice.--Paragraph (2) of such section 404(b) 
     (as so redesignated) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2)(A) The Postal Service, before making a determination 
     under subsection (a)(3) as to the necessity for a proposed 
     action described in paragraph (1), shall, in order to ensure 
     that the persons, including local government officials, who 
     are (or would be) served by the post office involved will 
     have an opportunity to present their views, provide adequate 
     notice of its intention to take such action with respect to 
     such post office at least 60 days before--
       ``(i) in the case of the proposed construction of a post 
     office, the date of the determination under subsection 
     (a)(3); or
       ``(ii) in the case of an action other than the proposed 
     construction of a post office, the proposed date of such 
     action.
       ``(B) The requirements of this paragraph shall not be 
     considered met unless the notice--
       ``(i) has, by the deadline specified in subparagraph (A)--
       ``(I) been hand delivered or delivered by mail to the 
     persons required under subparagraph (A); and
       ``(II) been published once a week for at least 4 weeks in 1 
     or more newspapers regularly issued and of general 
     circulation within the zip code areas which are (or would be) 
     served by the post office involved; and
       ``(ii) includes a description of the action proposed to be 
     taken with respect to the post office involved, a summary of 
     the reasons for the proposed action, and the date on which 
     such action is proposed to be taken (or, if the construction 
     of a post office is involved, the proposed timetable 
     therefor).''.
       (c) Considerations.--Paragraph (3) of such section 404(b) 
     (as so redesignated) is amended--
       (1) in the matter before subparagraph (A), by striking ``to 
     close or consolidate'' and inserting ``to take a proposed 
     action with respect to'';
       (2) by striking ``such closing or consolidation'' each 
     place it appears and inserting ``such action'';
       (3) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking the semicolon and 
     inserting ``, taking into account (I) the extent to which the 
     post office is part of a core downtown business area (if at 
     all), and (II) the nature and the extent of any opposition 
     within the community to the proposed action;'';
       (4) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking ``Service employed 
     at such office;'' and inserting ``Service;'';
       (5) in subparagraph (A)(iv), by inserting ``quantified 
     long-term'' before ``economic''; and
       (6) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end of 
     clause (iv), by redesignating clause (v) as clause (viii), 
     and by inserting after clause (iv) the following:
       ``(v) any views or concerns expressed by any officials or 
     other representatives of local government, including whether 
     the proposed action is reasonable in light of local 
     population projections;
       ``(vi) consistency with the size, scale, design, and 
     general character of the surrounding community;
       ``(vii) whether all reasonable alternatives to such action 
     have been explored; and''.
       (d) Notice of Determination.--Paragraph (4) of such section 
     404(b) (as so redesignated) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``to close or consolidate'' and inserting 
     ``to take a proposed action (described in paragraph (1)) with 
     respect to'';
       (2) by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraph 
     (3)''; and
       (3) by striking ``office.'' and inserting ``office 
     (including by posting a copy of such determination in the 
     post office or each post office serving the persons who will 
     be affected by such action) and shall be transmitted to 
     appropriate local officials.''.
       (e) Additional Requirements.--Such section 404(b) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) In any case in which a community has promulgated any 
     procedures to address the relocation, closing, consolidation, 
     or construction of buildings in the community, and the public 
     participation requirements of those procedures are more 
     stringent than those provided in this subsection, the Postal 
     Service shall apply those procedures to the relocation, 
     closing, consolidation, or construction of a post office in 
     that community in lieu of applying the procedures established 
     in this subsection.
       ``(8) In making a determination to relocate, close, 
     consolidate, or construct any post office, the Postal Service 
     shall comply with any applicable zoning, planning, or land 
     use laws (including design guidelines, building codes, and 
     all other provisions of law) to the same extent and in the 
     same manner as if the Postal Service were not an 
     establishment of the Government of the United States.
       ``(9) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to 
     apply to a temporary customer service facility to be used by 
     the Postal Service for a period of less than 60 days.
       ``(10)(A) In this paragraph the term `emergency' means any 
     occurrence that forces an immediate relocation from an 
     existing facility, including natural disasters, fire, health 
     and safety factors, and lease terminations.
       ``(B) If the Postmaster General determines that there 
     exists an emergency affecting a particular post office, the 
     Postmaster General may suspend the application of this 
     subsection, with respect to such post office, for a period of 
     not to exceed 180 days.
       ``(C) The Postmaster General may exercise the suspension 
     authority under this paragraph with respect to a post office 
     once for each discrete emergency affecting such post office.
       ``(11) The relocation, closing, consolidation, or 
     construction of any post office shall be conducted in 
     accordance with applicable provisions of the National 
     Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.).''.
       (f) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Such section 
     404(b) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated) by striking 
     ``take no action to close or consolidate'' and inserting 
     ``take no action described in paragraph (1) with respect 
     to''; and
       (2) in paragraph (6) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) by striking ``to close or consolidate'' and inserting 
     ``to take any action described in paragraph (1) with respect 
     to''; and
       (B) by striking ``paragraph (3)'' and inserting ``paragraph 
     (4)''.

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise today to join my colleague 
Senator Baucus in reintroducing the ``Post Office Community Partnership 
Act of 2001.''
  This bill is similar to the one we introduced in the 105th and 106th 
Congress that so many of our colleagues supported in the past. It is my 
hope that this year the bill will become law. We are also coordinating 
our efforts with Representative Blumenauer of Oregon who will introduce 
a companion bill in the House of Representatives this week.
  This bill will allow local communities to have a voice in determining 
the future of their local Post Office. In many towns across Vermont, 
the post office functions as the social and economic cornerstone of the 
local downtown area. Not only does the post office provide a daily 
service to residents, it is an enduring neighborhood institution. The 
post office is an enduring neighborhood institution where

[[Page S5012]]

residents catch up with their neighbors, or get the latest news. As a 
consequence many small towns across America are hurt by decisions to 
close, relocate or consolidate postal facilities. Our bill will 
increase local community input when the Postal Service determines that 
a facility will be constructed, consolidated, relocated, or closed.
  This bill also addresses larger smart growth concerns. Right now, the 
U.S. Postal Service is exempt from local zoning and building laws. This 
creates situations where the new facilities do not fit in with the size 
or scale of the local community. Many new facilities are relocated to 
the outer fringes of downtowns which encourages sprawl. Transplanting 
local facilities out of downtown locations has a potentially 
devastating impact on the character of many towns. This bill will help 
preserve the small town way of life by preventing sprawl and 
encouraging the re-use of historic structures. The Post Office 
Community Partnership Act will help communities have a say in the 
future of their local post offices.
  There have been a number of incidents in Vermont where a post office 
has moved out of the traditional town center and local officials have 
had little or no say in the decision. In Perkinsville, VT the post 
office moved from the general store to a site miles from the downtown. 
The same thing happened in Fairfax, when the post office moved from a 
historic building downtown to a strip mall.
  A prime example is Westminster, one of the oldest towns in Vermont. 
This town of 3,200 people was shocked to learn that the Postal Service 
was replacing their old facility with a building more than four times 
as large with 33 parking spaces. There were several reasons the 
community and local government officials were outraged at the decision. 
First, the Postal Services's standard ``design number 30'' does not fit 
in with Westminster's size, scale, zoning, or historic character. The 
Postal Service has been unwilling to modify their standard designs to 
meet community needs. Moreover the neighboring town recently built a 
new post office with more than 1200 PO boxes that are still vacant. The 
Post Office Community Partnership Act will allow the Postal Service and 
the local community to work together from the beginning of the planning 
process toward common sense solutions that benefit everyone.
  This legislation is necessary to ensure that local communities will 
always have a voice in the Postal Service's decision making process. As 
towns struggle to grow and plan for their development, the Postal 
Service has all too often been an unwilling partner. In Vermont and 
across the U.S., many communities are attempting to carefully plan 
their future development, to protect and preserve their open space, 
prevent unregulated sprawl, and conserve natural resources. Yet they 
are not getting any assistance, and are often hindered by Postal 
Service decisions. This bill will close some of the loopholes that 
allow the Postal Service to operate outside the regulations that 
localities place on other businesses and government agencies.
  This legislation will strengthen the ties between the Postal Service 
and local governments, help preserve our downtowns, prevent sprawl, and 
promote sensible, managed growth. I urge my colleagues to join Senator 
Baucus and me in support of this legislation.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to be an original co-sponsor 
of the Post Office Community Partnership Act. Too often the Postal 
Service's designs for new offices fail to conform with local land use 
laws and these new cookie-cutter structures are replacing what were 
once the heart and soul of our towns. This legislation will ensure that 
the Postal Service does a better job of listening to local communities, 
respecting zoning regulations, and preserving Vermont's distinctive 
character.
  In Vermont and across the country, Post Offices are community 
linchpins, serving more than just generic mailing stations. It is the 
Post Office where people go to meet their neighbors and talk about the 
latest news. The Postmaster is sometimes the only national 
representative in a community, and they often provide advice and 
guidance about important issues. The Post Office is inextricably linked 
with daily life. Remove it, and the special character of the place is 
lost.
  As the Post Office has experienced financial difficulties in recent 
years, the prospect of Post Office closures has loomed larger. 
Unfortunately, inadequate processes are in place to ensure that the 
U.S. Postal Service will consult with local communities in the event of 
a closure, relocation, or consolidation. This legislation will ensure 
that the service notifies communities far in advance of any action, and 
ensure that concerned citizens have a role in decisions.
  With such provisions in place and other much-need reforms, the U.S. 
Postal Service will work through its difficulties. The service will 
continue to grow, expanding access and making much-needed 
modernizations to its older facilities.
  Too often, though, new post offices look like they do not belong in 
the heart of a traditional town center. Local zoning ordinances are 
ignored, and the Post Office contributes to unsightly sprawl. While 
there are many success stories, there are few detailed guidelines to 
avoid repetitions of the failures. That is why this legislation also 
includes provisions to ensure the U.S. Postal Service will follow local 
land use laws.
  Successful mail service is a subtle balance between efficiency and 
contributing to the community. I think this important legislation will 
help the U.S. Postal Service find that balance well into the future. I 
commend Senator Jeffords for introducing this legislation, and I urge 
its swift consideration and passage, as it will help preserve the 
important role of our Post Offices in our way of life.
                                 ______