New 7-Year Pilot Allows Local Governments to Pay USPS to Redraw ZIP Code Maps

The Community Involvement in Zone Improvement Plans Act of 2025, or the CIPZIP Act, is setting up a seven-year pilot program that fundamentally changes how ZIP Code boundaries can be altered. Currently, the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) manages these boundaries primarily based on postal efficiency. This bill, however, hands a significant amount of influence to state, local, and Tribal governments, allowing them to enter into agreements with the USPS to pay for boundary changes or realignments.

The ZIP Code for Sale: How the Cost-Sharing Works

This pilot program is essentially a workaround for cost-based denials. If a local government asks the USPS to change a ZIP Code boundary—maybe to make a school district and a ZIP Code match up—and the USPS says no only because it would cost them money, the game changes. Under Section 2, the USPS must notify the requesting government of the program and provide a written estimate of the net cost to implement the change. If the government proposes an agreement to cover that cost, the USPS must accept it and grant the request. This means that if you have the cash, you can force the USPS’s hand on administrative geography, overriding what might otherwise be a cost-prohibitive decision for the Postal Service.

Why Local Governments Want This Power

For local governments, ZIP Codes are often about more than just mail delivery. They frequently serve as proxies for community identity, school zones, service areas for utilities, and even political boundaries. When a city annexes a new area, or a community grows and shifts, having the wrong ZIP Code can cause headaches for everything from emergency services routing to how local taxes are collected. For example, a homeowner might find their insurance rates are higher because their mailing address falls into a neighboring, higher-risk ZIP Code, even if their physical location is in a safer area. This bill allows local leaders to fix those administrative mismatches by paying the USPS’s implementation costs.

Potential for Administrative Headaches and Equity Concerns

While the ability to align administrative boundaries is a clear benefit, this mechanism raises two major questions. First, what exactly are the “net costs” the USPS will charge? That definition is vague (Section 2), and the cost estimate could become a point of contention. Second, and more concerning, this program introduces a stark financial barrier to administrative change. If a wealthy municipality wants a boundary change, they can easily afford the cost and compel the change. A smaller, less affluent Tribal government or rural county, however, might be locked out of influencing their own postal geography simply because they can’t afford the USPS’s fee. This creates an equity issue where only governments with deep pockets can buy control over their administrative boundaries. For residents, this could mean that ZIP Code changes are driven more by local political or financial agendas than by postal efficiency or community need, potentially leading to confusion during the transition.

Oversight and Accountability

To keep tabs on this seven-year experiment, the bill mandates strict reporting. The Postal Regulatory Commission must submit annual reports to Congress detailing how many requests were received, granted, and denied, and the total value of the cost-sharing agreements made. Furthermore, if a ZIP Code change request is denied, the USPS must provide a detailed report explaining the reasons to any Member of Congress who asks. This level of transparency (Section 2, Reporting Requirements) is crucial, ensuring that the process is documented and that Congress can evaluate the success and fairness of the program before its expiration date.