Concerned with USPS mailbox regulations

Today I got a notice in the mailbox informing me my mailbox was out of compliance because it was 33 inches from the ground to the bottom of the mailbox (it is supposed to be at least 45 inches).

To my neighbors with mailboxes on a shared platform,

Today I got a notice in the mailbox informing me my mailbox was out of compliance because it was 33 inches from the ground to the bottom of the mailbox (it is supposed to be at least 45 inches).

Where did this rule come from? Has this regulation been buried for years somewhere in some postal manual, to now come to our attention, or was it recently created to help the post office to better deliver the mail?

My first thought was, oh no, this is not good, and my mind was racing, trying to consider any and all options to raise the horizontal beam our (3) mailboxes are fastened to, at least one vertical foot, i.e. 12 inches further off the ground. And I could not come up with any quick, or cheap, or simple solution. Any modification would require the basic hand tools and specific power tools as well. Someone would have to buy new posts, connector plates, wood screws, etc. Who knows how many hours of labor would be needed… what would be the total cost?

And I started wondering how many other mailboxes are there that could be likewise out of compliance. Are there hundreds? Could be. Thousands? Who knows. What would be the total cost to homeowners to modify all the mailbox platforms? I bet it would cost a lot. Would it cost so much that someone would ask how much it would cost to modify some postal delivery vans, so the vehicles would ride lower to the ground? Not likely…

The infraction notice said I had about a month to comply. I started getting nervous again. But I was able to pause, step back, and think this issue through again, one more time.

You know what I really want? I want the Enumclaw U.S. Postal Service to rent out the high school commons on a Sunday afternoon a few weeks from now, and send all mailbox owners affected by this rule an invitation to the meeting.

This is not a trivial matter. All interested parties should be able to participate, to come and lay their cards out on the table, and voice their concerns.

John Schmidt

Enumclaw

More in Letters to the Editor

Urge Enumclaw Council to support arts funding

There will be public budget workshops to make your comments at on Oct. 22 and 29.

Democrats’ political power play hurt us all

From day one and without waiting to hear any evidence, the Democrats stated that Christine Blasey Ford was telling the truth and her accusations against Judge Kavanaugh were credible.

It’s a jungle out there

Justice Kavanaugh’s hearing before his confirmation was suited more for the zoo than Congress.

Support for arts should not be eliminated from Enumclaw’s budget

Art is my life - both visual arts and other genres.

Democrat PAC spreading false statements on Rossi

It’s simply not true that Dino Rossi was responsible for denying health care coverage for tens of thousands of kids.

Double standard? Maybe, but Democrats started it.

The political double standard is being played out today with the Judge Kavanaugh hearings.

I was assaulted by a ‘good man,’ and my community didn’t believe me

How do I process and file away the goodness I saw and experienced before the incident? Do we throw out the baby with the bathwater?

Wally, don’t contribute to gun misinformation

You should have seen a gun expert before writing your column.

Thank you for, Mount Peak Historical Fire Lookout Association supporters

Keep a lookout for future information during this fundraising phase.

Freedom of religions doesn’t mean imposing your beliefs on the public

To then allow any person or group to inflict its particular religious beliefs upon others would clearly deny our right to freely worship and follow our own beliefs

Businesses should serve the public equally

Many a war has started over “deeply held beliefs’ and religious convictions.

Editor failed to be a fair moderator

Instead of framing the issues and allowing the readers to “form their own opinions on the matters at hand,” the editor chose to apply superfluous labels.