DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER GOLDWAY

Ruth Y. Goldway

I dissent from this opinion because I believe a reasonable interpretation of the law gives the Commission jurisdiction to consider the well-being of the communities and the general public who submit complaints of discrimination or poor service, or appeals of post office closings.

The Commission’s decision is unduly myopic. The Commission should do all it can in such cases to support communities’ interests in their historic central post offices, and to ensure that the public art and architecture, paid for by taxpayers, which the Postal Service inherited from the Postal Service Department in 1970, should be preserved and accessible to all for the foreseeable future. The Postal Service and the Commission must recognize the public’s stake as an essential third party beneficiary in all such proceedings. In general, in recent years, the Commission has chosen to narrowly interpret our authority to review complaints.

The Postal Service’s current policy of disposing of historical central post offices, many in key downtown locations, without fully exploring the potential for dual- or multi-use or cooperative development, is economically short-sighted. This failure of vision is bad business for both the Postal Service and for the American communities it serves.

Further, the Postal Service’s recent record of selling off its historic buildings is blemished by its inability to protect the public’s right of access to great works of civic art and architecture. Post Offices that have been transferred to private ownership are locked. Public artwork that is part of the fabric of our nation has been removed or is now inaccessible to the public. My home town of Venice, California is only one example of how access to iconic civic assets is being lost.

Ruth Y. Goldway

Click Here for more info on closure of Atlantic Street Station post office in Stamford, Connecticut