Home > Humboldt County > Humboldt post offices on list of possible closures

Humboldt post offices on list of possible closures

While the United States Postal Service struggles with a bad economy and changing consumer habits, it is looking to downgrade or close 3,653 branches across the country.  Possible closures in Humboldt County:

  • Kneeland
  • Honeydew
  • Blockburg
  • Korbel
  • Phillipsville
  • Redcrest
  • Samoa
  • Weott

Here’s the California list.

  1. July 27, 2011 at 9:19 am

    They raised the cost of stamps, wages, and still unable to make it with the old fashion way of delivering mail – It is a bummer for there are some kind postal workers that go out of their wat to assist you.

    Problem is, like other changes in our society, business can be conducted more efficiently electrontically cheaper and faster. If the postal service wanted to make money, they would create an avenue to transmitting legal document electronically that did not need an original signature from point A to B.

    Would it not be nice to go on-line, sign in to a local postal site and forward a legal document with an electronic signature of some sort?

    Smaller communities get less services, this is the lifestyle chosen.

  2. July 27, 2011 at 9:24 am

    Let’s make the Post Office into a national savings bank, where the little people can put thier money, earn a decent interest return, and not get gouged by the banksters.

    The postal workers already handle money, all it will require is a few changes.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  3. July 27, 2011 at 1:15 pm

    Why should the Post Office “want to make money”. Next our public schools will be required to turn a profit.
    It use to be no matter where you lived in America, you got postal service. Just like public transportation, this is something we should be willing to let the government subsidize.
    This is what cutting taxes gets you. But I doubt it will change anyone’s position on that issue, just as the conservative farmers in East Texas still don’t believe in climate change (they’re apparently convinced it’s God’s doing, since they are relying on prayer to get rain).

  4. July 27, 2011 at 1:16 pm

    Testing. Testing 1,2,3… Am I the only one online?

    DSL seems to be down but for some reason I seem to have pretty good access using dial- up. Let’s see if this comment shows up.

  5. Walt
    July 27, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    In places like Kneeland there’s no place else to go to get neighborhood information, not to mention picking up packages that won’t fit in the mailbox. As it is, folks who live out in Iaqua and down toward Maple Creek will have to drive an hour or more each way to get their Christmas packages in Arcata (and stand in the line that winds out the door NOW.) Many don’t have electricity, and if they want internet connections, they’ll pay $60/mo. And Richard, in a few years the money now “wasted” on post offices, schools, welfare and government employees will be funneled to prisons and mercenary armies. And the rich, of course.

  6. Plain Jane
    July 27, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    Jeez, Walt. How do you expect them to keep loaning us money if we don’t keep their military stocks high and their taxes low?

  7. July 27, 2011 at 8:30 pm

    I am bummed out. These rural communities depend on small post offices as social hubs of communication of what is going on in their small worlds. Samoa would shrink even more. Sad.

  8. Anonymous
    July 27, 2011 at 8:32 pm

    I love the community feel of these small post offices. Perhaps the pay scale should be lower for them for the workers. Would that be okay? The stress is probably lower.

  9. Anonymous
    July 27, 2011 at 8:35 pm

    Some of these places have the PO boxes for the community and that community doesn’t have delivery. What will happy if they don’t have a PO box? They will have to drive 50 miles?

  10. July 27, 2011 at 9:17 pm

    As I said over at Erik’s: Nothing burns the New-American-Centurions more than common people getting any sort of benefit from the government.
    Richard S. is right; whatever exists to benefit common working people will be taken away. While at the same time the wealthy have the government at their beck-n-call.

  11. Walt
    July 28, 2011 at 7:00 am

    “Perhaps the pay scale should be lower for them for the workers. Would that be okay? The stress is probably lower.” Oh, they have a cushy job, 8:32, especially in Kneeland. They’ve been using an outhouse, walking through the snow to get to it, since the new property owner took over several years ago.

  12. Plain Jane
    July 28, 2011 at 7:19 am

    It’s odd that Cutten post office isn’t on the list of possible closures since the inconvenience of having to drive 2 miles to Henderson Center is not nearly as great a burden as some of these closures would impose.

  13. July 28, 2011 at 9:21 am

    It’s odd that Cutten post office isn’t on the list of possible closures….

    It serves a LOT more people than any of the ones on the list.

  14. Plain Jane
    July 28, 2011 at 10:00 am

    My point is that it isn’t needed, Fred. There is another post office just a couple of miles away that these people could use AND they have home delivery available as well. That isn’t true of most of the PO’s on the list. If I were making the decision, the first on the list would be in towns with multiple post offices, next those with home delivery available. The last PO’s I would close would be those in rural areas long distances from another PO and without home delivery available.

  15. Anonymous
    July 28, 2011 at 10:12 am

    I agree with PJ and applaud her as that office is in her neighborhood. How often do those of us that have home delivery have a need to go to the post office? If we do we can combine it with other errands and come out ahead of the game on expenses.

  16. tra
    July 28, 2011 at 10:18 am

    P.J.,

    I think the issue is that those rural post offices lose a lot more money because the volume of mail is so low.

    So there’s potentially the same argument here as there is with regard to other services provided to rural areas — that they’re bing subsidized by people in less-rural areas.

    That being said, I do think that basic postal service (sending and receiving basic mail) is so improtant that it should be provided, one way or the other, to as many communities a possible, including rural ones. But if there was a way to charge a little more for the service in those rural areas (charging more for P.O. boxes, or a small parcel tax or something like that) I’d be O.K. with that.

    If keeping a post office open at some of these very-low-population locations is just too expensive, and there isn’t home delivery there either, then at least, they should have delivery (if not daily, perhaps at least every other day) to one of those cluster-mailbox thingies. Folks would still have to go to am actual post office in town for some of their postal business, but at least they could still recieve mail at a location that was somewhere reasonably close to their home, and post letters and small packages that way, etc.

    Presumably even the most rural folks are still going to town for other purposes at least once a week or once every couple of weeks or something like that, so they could do their other postal business (money orders, posting or recieving larger parcels, etc.) at those times. So the cluster-mailbox thingy wouldn’t be ideal, but it would be better than no service at all in those areas.

  17. Anonymous
    July 28, 2011 at 10:25 am

    Walt, some of them do have a rather cushy job. Low expectations and low flow of mail. Lower stress. If they could man those stations with lower paid people they might be able to swing it, but instead they are paid like any postal worker most likely and I think they would take a pay cut rather than lose their job.

  18. Plain Jane
    July 28, 2011 at 10:33 am

    Sure, Tra. But if the bottom line is the only concern, why not cut back to every other day delivery everywhere and stop Saturday deliveries entirely? For the record, I’m not suggesting this is a good idea because the last thing we need is higher unemployment. I would support an increase in the price of stamps, which are an incredible bargain currently, to keep our PO’s open and our neighbors employed over ending all mail service to remote areas.

  19. July 28, 2011 at 11:23 am

    The biggest problem facing the post office is technological obsolescence in an age where email is instantaneous and virtually free.

    Phsical delivery of snail mail is not a profitable business plan with reduced volume. The only profitable sector in delivery is package delivery and the USPS has plenty of competition in that area.

    Its a problem with no easy answers.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  20. Plain Jane
    July 28, 2011 at 11:35 am

    I have an easy answer! Quadruple the postage on mass junk mail, flyers, etc. that no one wants and which are a waste of resources to produce and get rid of.

  21. High Finance
    July 28, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    Do you realize the Post Office gives a discount on bulk mail as it increases their income ? That they do it as an incentive to attract more of that kind of business ?

    It may waste 1-2 seconds of your time but it is the lifeblood of a lot of businesses.

  22. Another 2 cents
    July 28, 2011 at 1:37 pm

    Charles Bean – are you Mr. Bean from the movies? Read Salzman’s response for your answer. People did not move into rural areas to escape postal service – and it wasn’t apparent that they would be sacrificing it, when they moved in was it?
    Plain Jane’s comments are always on top – absolutely more than quadruple junk mail rates! Can you imagine the ‘free speech’ arguments that would engender?
    Sheesh,
    What a mess.

  23. July 28, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    Quadruple the postage on mass junk mail,….

    As much as I sympathize with you, you’d likely be putting the final nail in the post office’s coffin if you did that. They get a significant portion of their revenues from junk mail. You quadruple their rates and they might go the same way as so many others and just go with the internet. Either that, or pay private people to deliver their advertisements (more and more are doing that already).

    If they lost their junk mail clientele, the post office won’t have anything to deliver.

  24. Plain Jane
    July 28, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    Sure, HiFi. I was trying out Republican tactics this morning. You know – where I claim whatever I want done is the solution to a big problem – even if it will only worsen it. But you know there are a lot of businesses I’d like to see bleed to death. Those which send unsolicited mail that requires shredding so no one can get an already approved credit card in my name, of course, top the list; but those which send crap to every occupant, waste resources and fill up my recycle bin aren’t far below.

  25. July 28, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    Those which send unsolicited mail that requires shredding so no one can get an already approved credit card in my name, of course, top the list;.

    For you and me both.

    Libertarian though I may be, I think they should make that illegal. I’m not saying banks can’t send out credit card info and applications, but they shouldn’t be allowed to have your personal info already filled out on it.

  26. Anonymous
    July 28, 2011 at 10:01 pm

    Anonymous says:

    July 28, 2011 at 10:12 am

    I agree with PJ and applaud her as that office is in her neighborhood. How often do those of us that have home delivery have a need to go to the post office? If we do we can combine it with other errands and come out ahead of the game on expenses.

    This was my earlier post, do not want to be known as “Anonymous”

  27. Anonymous
    July 28, 2011 at 10:10 pm

    Anonymous says:

    July 28, 2011 at 10:01 pm

    Anonymous says:

    July 28, 2011 at 10:12 am

    I agree with PJ and applaud her as that office is in her neighborhood. How often do those of us that have home delivery have a need to go to the post office? If we do we can combine it with other errands and come out ahead of the game on expenses.

    This was my earlier post, do not want to be known as “Anonymous”

  28. Anonymous
    July 28, 2011 at 10:13 pm

    Anonymous says:

    July 28, 2011 at 10:01 pm

    Anonymous says:

    July 28, 2011 at 10:12 am

    I have ni idea what is happening here????

  29. July 29, 2011 at 6:44 am

    You have to fill out the name field, 69er.

  30. July 29, 2011 at 8:35 am

    “But if there was a way to charge a little more for the service in those rural areas (charging more for P.O. boxes, or a small parcel tax or something like that) I’d be O.K. with that.”

    tra,

    I’m really surprised you feel it would be OK to charge people differently based on whether or not they live in a rural area.

    The government exists to provide certain services to everyone, equally. Yes, the post office has been privatized, but it is providing one of the basic services required of all societies — basic communications to everyone in the society. If ever a cost should be socialized and a charge should be level for all, it’s the postal service. In most societies, there’s a recognition that the same process is required for things like health care. Ours is, alas, going in the opposite direction.

    As income inequality increases, we’re increasingly seeing a transition from “taxes for the common good” to “fee for service, for those who can afford to pay.” That way, the wealthy can have one social environment, and the rest can have another. Now you see it with special priority traveler lines and first class lines at airport security — the rich get to step ahead in line at larger airports’ security screening, and we’re told it’s the airline policy even though the screening is a federal process. The founders would roll over in their graves, and it’s yet another sign that democracy is not coping with the increase in income inequality.

    I’d hate to see a surcharge for mail to or from Hawaii and Alaska.

  31. Mitch
    July 29, 2011 at 8:58 am

    Actually, the establishment of the post office and our current treatment of communications serve as excellent examples of how far we’ve strayed from the revolutionary democracy of the 18th century. (Of course we’ve become more inclusive since then, but that is a separate issue.)

    For the founders, the high tech communication system of the time was mail. It was a cabinet level department. Yet for us, we don’t expect the phone service or the internet to be run from a government cabinet office, or provided as an equally-priced service to all Americans.

    In short, at least on the subject of communications, the founders were leftists, believing there was an important role for government in binding the nation together. You didn’t see them farming the work out to private enterprise.

  32. Plain Jane
    July 29, 2011 at 9:26 am

    Their experiences with British corporations made them leery of such corrupting entanglements, Mitch. Allowing for-profit organizations to take control of vital public services is never good for the public. Allowing these for-profit organizations to buy the politicians who make such important decisions is catastrophic. Ignoring the needs of the majority while claiming they are the same as the demands of their corporate masters is to be expected. The Tea Party was funded precisely to put a faux populist mask on these corporate whores, but the mask is slipping.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s