San Francisco—(May 14, 2018) Berkeley’s Historic Civic Center District Zoning Overlay was upheld today in United States District Court.

In August of 2016, the United States Department of Justice, acting on behalf of the United States Postal Service, sought injunctive relief against Berkeley’s District Overlay “insofar as it regulates the Berkeley Main Post Office parcel, located at 2000 Allston Way, Berkeley.”

On Monday, Judge William Alsup issued an “Order Setting Forth Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.” Judge Alsup entered judgment in favor of the City of Berkeley, finding that USPS “had established no entitlement to relief on its claims.”

Back in February of 2014, the USPS received among other offers a bid from Hudson McDonald, a developer who intended to convert most of 2000 Allston Way to commercial use as, for example, a Target store. In September 2014, USPS agreed to sell the property for $9 million to Hudson McDonald.

And also in September 2014, the council passed the Civic Center District Overlay. The Overlay restricted the entire Civic Center Historic District — including the post office — to civic, nonprofit, cultural, and other similar uses, for the professed purpose of preserving the integrity of the area and protecting its cultural and historical heritage

The ruling in federal court upholding the District Overlay is cause for celebration. It is an important victory in the fight to preserve Berkeley’s historic Civic Center District and in the effort to preserve historic downtown post offices.

The Department of Justice argued the USPS case with DOJ attorneys who were flown in from Washington DC. We are grateful to the attorneys who successfully represented Berkeley: Andrew W. Schwartz of Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger LLP and Berkeley City Attorney Farimah F. Brown and her deputy attorneys.

The successful legal defense of the Zoning Overlay was only possible because of the steadfast leadership of the Mayor and City Council. Special recognition is owed to Jesse Arreguin, Linda Maio, Susan Wengraf and Kriss Worthington who have been working on this since 2012 when USPS first proposed selling the Berkeley Main Post Office.

And thanks are owed to each of you as part of the Berkeley community that attended numerous hearings and made clear to everyone that preserving the character of Berkeley’s Historic Civic Center is an issue that matters to us.

What happens now? USPS may decide to appeal the ruling. Or USPS could reconsider its decision to dispose of the building, recognize the value of the facility and location and bring back some services. Or USPS could go forward with its plan to dispose of the building, lease back a portion for retail sales, and find a purchaser consistent with the Zoning Overlay. In 2014, USPS walked away from ongoing talks to craft an historic preservation covenant for 2000 Allston Way. That action by USPS led to a suit by the City of Berkeley and the National Trust for Historic Preservation alleging violations of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). That suit was declared moot when USPS asserted they no longer intended to sell 2000 Allston Way. A sale of 2000 Allston Way that conformed with the Zoning Overlay but did not include an adequate historic preservation covenant could result in a refiling of the 2014 suit.
   
Read the U.S. District Court's Decision in USPS v City of Berkeley
Read Maria Dinzeo's article in Courthouse News: "Judge Find No Issue in Bid to Block Sale of Historic Post Office

The USPS/ DOJ argued that the Zoning Overlay results in a “total frustration” of the ability of the USPS to manage its assets.  At the Motion for Summary Judgment hearing on January 11, 2018, Judge William Alsup told the DOJ attorney that “…if it just comes down to we could get more (money for the Berkeley Main Post Office) without the overlay, you're going to lose because that's not total frustration.”

The trial on Monday, April 2nd, will be a bench trial before Judge Alsup. Both USPS/DOJ and the City of Berkeley are relying on the court filings as of the January 11, 2018 Motion for Summary Judgment. Both sides will have one hour each to present oral arguments to Judge Alsup.

The trial is at 12 noon, Monday, April 2, 2018 in Courtroom 12, 19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco.

If you decide to attend the trial, be advised that 450 Golden Gate has airport style security. A government-issued photo I.D. is required. Judge Alsup starts proceedings promptly and the security process is sometimes slow.

These three documents provide a good summary of the arguments to date:
1) USPS/ DOJ argument for summary judgment (November 30, 2017)
2) City of Berkeley argument for summary judgment (December 1, 2017)
3) Transcript of the January 11, 2018 hearing on the competing motions for summary judgment

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – A federal judge seemed disinclined to order a trial in the U.S. Postal Service’s now four-year legal fight with the city of Berkeley over the planned sale of its historic downtown post office, wary of claims the city is intentionally trying to diminish the building’s value and discourage buyers.

“We’re not just talking about the Postal Service’s ability to sell one piece of property, but their obligation to serve the whole country and be self-sustaining,” said Julie Berman, a Justice Department attorney arguing on behalf of the Postal Service. “The financial situation of the Postal Service is such that it’s putting the mission at risk.”

Her argument did not convince U.S. District Judge William Alsup.

“You could still do a pretty good deal,” he said, even with the possible 39 percent decrease in value.

The Postal Service announced plans to sell the 104-year old neoclassical style building, designed by Oscar Wenderoth and listed as a National Historic Landmark in 1981.

In September 2014, the Postal Service struck an agreement to sell the building to urban developer Hudson McDonald. That same month, Berkeley passed an overlay restricting nine parcels of downtown land, including the post office, to civic and nonprofit uses.

The Postal Service argued the developer backed out of the deal because the overlay had so devalued the property that the developer said it was “destroyed and worth very little.”

At a hearing on cross-motions for summary judgment Thursday, Alsup said the Postal Service had all but conceded it would have to prove that the city’s overlay did more than simply interfere with the sale. He said the agency must show “total frustration” of its ability to dispose of its property and manage its resources to the point it violates the 1970 Postal Reorganization Act, which mandates disposal of unused property.

“If it devalues the property in a way that obstructs the Postal Service’s ability to manage its finances and the potential for sale at only 61 percent of market value, the court should examine that potential,” Berman said, adding the Postal Service fears a ruling in favor of the city would encourage others to enact similar zoning laws. “If this overlay ordinance is upheld, other municipalities would follow suit.”

Berman said the overlay reduces the number of potential buyers by about 80 percent of the market.

“That still leaves 20 percent,” Alsup said. “Where does it say they’ve got to sell it for full value? They paid almost nothing for this property. They could still sell it for a profit. If it just comes down to ‘We could get more without the overlay,’ you’re going to lose. Because it’s not a total frustration.

“I just think you need something stronger to be able to show it’s total frustration. They could sell it for 30 percent. That’s good money. The Postal Service goes and buys a lot of stamps for that,” he joked, appearing weary of Berman’s constant dodging of his direct questions.
​
“I’m not going to rule on this now,” he said, ending the hearing with an admonition to Berman that the Postal Service is going to need a stronger argument to proceed to trial other than the law says it should be able to make maximum profit off of the sale.

Read the entire article in Courthouse News

America has 30,000 post offices — mostly in lower-income zip codes where bank branches are vanishing and payday lenders spread like toadstools after rain — making a public option for basic financial services a no-brainer. In this article Ira Dember talks about how the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposed crackdown on predatory pay day lenders is only half a solution. Without an alternative, "desperation borrowers" are left with nowhere to turn. Reform — without an alternative — will harm millions of hardworking families who urgently need ready access to affordable small loans between meager paychecks. Dember tells us that no one — repeat no one — has proposed any solution that even comes close to addressing this need, except the Inspector General of the United States Postal Service, David Williams.

In March, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau proposed rules to crack down on predatory payday lenders. These rules would prevent many payday lending abuses and give consumers a way out of lenders' debt trap.

Under the CFPB's new rules, borrowers would first have to show they could cover their basic living expenses while repaying loans. Lenders could skip "means testing" and instead limit each person's total borrowing to $500 — with a single finance charge and no repeated charges. Gone would be auto title loans: if you can't repay, lenders can't grab your car. (Workers often lose their jobs when they lose their wheels, a "death spiral" that spreads personal and financial chaos.)

A couple of months after the CFPB published its proposed rules, TheHill.com reported financial industry blowback. According to The Hill, a credit reporting agency warns these rules would cut the number of payday loans by 70%. A global consulting firm catering to the financial industry predicts the new rules would reduce "payday loan revenues of small lenders" by 82%.

In a related piece, The Hill parroted bankers' ridicule that the US Postal Service could provide basic financial services. It spewed lies by omission: "the fiscally unsteady US Postal Service... a federal agency in financial trouble... trying to salvage a floundering operation... [in] a federal agency, which has lost billions of taxpayer dollars over the years." The report never mentioned the Postal Service's $1.4 billion operating profit last year alone, or that the USPS's "financial trouble" was fabricated by Congress. "Trouble" refers to a ludicrous 75-year pension and healthcare pre-funding requirement to cover workers who haven't yet been born — a fact The Hill conveniently omitted.

Meanwhile, The Hill's selective reporting on the proposed CFPB rules left readers wondering whether these rules exemplify government overreach, unduly burdening lenders.

Truth is, payday predators take billions a year from paycheck-to-paycheck families. Retired folks struggling to survive on a pittance of Social Security also get snared. Lenders have been running their debt traps for years. Interest rates (effective APR) on payday loans average about 400%. Some loans end up costing borrowers 1,000% a year — 10 times the amount they borrowed. Even the Bible speaks out against such excesses.

NAPA, CA – U.S. Rep. Mike Thompson (CA-5) today announced that the United States Postal Service (USPS) has agreed at this time to stop pursuing the demolition of the Historic Franklin Station Post Office in downtown Napa and will instead pursue the sale of the building and property. The USPS will initiate the process to sell the post office in mid-August. The USPS will hold a public meeting where community members can provide feedback on the location of the new Napa post office.

Many thanks are due to Congressman Thompson and to everyone who pressured the USPS to back away from the proposed demolition.

Read Congressman Thompson’s press release.

The US Postal Service wants to tear down the historic Downtown Post Office in Napa, California. The Postal Service has not held a public meeting and openly discussed the reasons why this Art Deco masterpiece and important part of Napa's history must be destroyed.

The Postal Service announced that it will cost $8 million to restore the building and make it earthquake proof. The Postal Service compares that with $500,000 to raze the structure. But the Postal Service did not provide any basis for these numbers.  Julianne Polanco, California's State Historic Preservation Officer,  wrote the Postal Service that the "correspondence received contained no explanatory information, such as structural reports, economic analyses, existing condition assessment, in order to derive such a determination."

But even while the Postal Service is refusing to hold a public meeting, the citizens of Napa are organizing and fighting back to save their Downtown Post Office!

Napa County Landmarks will host a public meeting to generate support for saving the Franklin Station post office. Please come and speak out to save this important Napa landmark.

6:30 to 8:30 p.m.
Monday August 10, 2015
Napa County Library, 580 Coombs St., Napa, CA 94559

For details, call 255-1836.

The Downtown Napa Post Office at 1352 Second Street was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1985. An outstanding example of Art Deco design, the post office was constructed during the New Deal in 1933.

 

By law, Federal Agencies are responsible for preserving historic properties under their jurisdiction. The Postal Service has failed to do that with historic properties across our earthquake prone state. The Napa Post Office was damaged in the August 24, 2014 quake. Now the Postal Service proposes to demolish the building.

1. Demolition of the Franklin Station Post Office will have a significant impact on Napa and will result in a permanent loss of a part of Bay Area history. The Postal Service has not attempted to mitigate the loss.
2. The Franklin Station Post Office has high artistic and architectural value. It was designed by Napa architect William Corlett and is a rare example of the Art Deco style in Napa.
3. The United States Postal Service holds the Franklin Station Post Office in trust for the people of our country. It remains a public building built with taxpayer funds and belongs to all of us.
4. The Postal Service is responsible for maintaining the building in good condition. That responsibility includes seismic analysis and structural improvement. The Postal Service failed to protect the public, their employees and this building.
5. The Franklin Station Post Office has suffered from deferred maintenance.
6. The Postal Service has not analyzed alternatives. The Postal Service unilaterally decided on demolition and has not released information to the public supporting their decision to demolish the building.
7. There has been no public process, no public notice.
   

• City of Napa Downtown Post Office webpage
  
• USPS letter to California SHPO proposing demolition, June 26, 2015 (with attachments)
  
• Save Our Historic Napa Post Office on Facebook
• Napa Valley Register: "Napans Rally to Protest Demolition"
  
• April 2014 Report to Congress on "Preserving Historic Post Offices" by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
• Section 110 and the Spirit of Stewardship
• USPS Inspector General "Preservation and and Disposal of Historic Properties", April 2014
• USPS Inspector General "Postal Service Management of CBRE Real Estate Transactions", April 2015