A judge in San Francisco has thrown out a two-and-a-half year legal battle seeking to force the US Postal Service to deliver mail into individual mailboxes within single-room occupancy (SRO) apartment buildings.
SROs are often converted hotels, in which very small apartments are used by individuals or couples, and are often used as social housing. About 4% of the population of San Francisco lives in SROs.
Unlike ordinary apartment buildings in the US, the Postal Service treats SRO buildings the same as hotels, simply dropping off a bulk batch of mail for the whole building at a front desk, rather than sorting mail into a centralised bank of mailboxes for individual apartments.
The City of San Francisco and three social housing groups sued USPS back in early 2009 seeking the same service for the city’s 300 SRO buildings as ordinary apartment buildings.
The lawsuit suggested USPS was violating SRO dwellers’ constitutional rights by treating them differently. Among the claims were the assertion that that SRO managers lose social welfare checks in the mail, and also sometimes withhold mail in disputes with tenants, as a way of intimidating them.
However, on Tuesday Judge Richard Seeborg agreed with USPS arguments that single-point delivery was not violating constitutional rights to free speech, freedom of association or privacy. He said USPS was only responsible for mail until it was properly delivered to an address.
“Reasonable”
The judge also backed the assertion that it was “reasonable” for USPS to restrict delivery to SROs on the grounds of the extra costs for the Postal Service, which is currently facing $10bn-a-year annual losses.
Adding centralised delivery to San Francisco’s 14,000 SRO tenants might add $2m to local operating costs, but the Court documents suggested that for the one million single-point delivery locations in the US, switching to individual mailboxes would take $300m from the USPS bottom line.
This would be a third more than the $200m USPS hopes to save by closing 3,600 post offices over the next 12 months.
“In establishing the USPS, Congress made it clear that it was to run as a self-sufficient business, giving the highest priority to efficiency,” the Judge stated.
“Respecting that mandate, the USPS reasonably determined that it was most efficient to conserve valuable resources in a difficult economic period by continuing single-point delivery to SROs.”
San Francisco’s City Attorney, Dennis J Herrera, who originally brought the case in 2009, said this week’s ruling denied the right of the city’s “most vulnerable” residents to a secure mail delivery service.
He is planning to discuss the outcome of the case at the next San Francisco Tenants Union meeting, including the possibilities of an appeal or a request to the Postal Regulatory Commission to revise US postal policy on SROs.
Source: James Cartledge, Post&Parcel
