The Biden-Trump transition just delivered a seismic shift in federal property policy, ditching two legacy executive orders that forced agencies into costly urban centers and historic buildings.
At a Glance
- Trump revokes Carter and Clinton-era location mandates
- New order frees agencies to prioritize cost and efficiency
- GSA empowered to revise federal office placement rules
- Urban development and preservation concerns raised
Historic Rules Get the Axe
On April 15, 2025, the Trump White House announced the revocation of two longstanding executive orders—Executive Order 12072 from the Carter era and Executive Order 13006 issued under President Clinton. The new directive, titled “Restoring Common Sense to Federal Office Space Management”, allows agencies to choose office locations based on cost and mission needs rather than urban development or preservation goals.
Executive Order 12072, signed in 1978, required federal agencies to prioritize locating offices in central business districts of major cities. The policy was meant to revitalize urban cores and boost city economies. Clinton’s 1996 order, Executive Order 13006, built on that foundation, instructing agencies to favor historic properties within those districts, aiming to preserve architectural heritage and contribute to downtown development.
Watch Washington Times’ report on the incident at Trump seeks to relocate federal offices to rural areas.
Focus Shifts to Efficiency
The new order marks a pivot away from place-based mandates, focusing instead on strategic placement aligned with federal missions and cost efficiency. According to the White House directive, this shift “empowers agencies to make sensible decisions without being bound by outdated constraints.” The General Services Administration has been directed to revise current regulations to support the new policy framework.
Supporters argue the change could save taxpayers millions and provide agencies with flexibility to locate closer to the populations they serve or consolidate in lower-cost regions. Critics, however, fear it could gut investment in urban areas and jeopardize the preservation of historical buildings.
Reform Echoes Broader Strategy
The revocation is just one piece of a broader realignment by the Trump administration aimed at shrinking bureaucracy and enhancing agency performance. As outlined by Akin Gump’s Executive Order Tracker, this order is part of a larger suite of reforms targeting renewable energy, administrative processes, and federal procurement practices.
The administration’s argument is rooted in efficiency and fiscal responsibility. With the growing prevalence of remote work and changing federal priorities, Trump’s advisers say it makes little sense to cling to spatial restrictions from the 1970s and 1990s. According to reporting by the Washington Times, some agency leaders have long complained that being forced into urban districts and aging buildings complicated service delivery and ballooned leasing costs.
Public Debate Intensifies
Reaction to the move has been swift and mixed. Supporters from rural constituencies welcomed the potential decentralization of federal jobs, while preservation advocates and some urban planners sounded alarms about disinvestment and neglect of historically significant buildings.
On social media, public discourse has ranged from enthusiastic support to strong skepticism. Some commentators, including policy analyst Zvi Mowshowitz, framed the change as a “win for flexibility,” while others cautioned against abandoning historic infrastructure without a clear plan for reuse or maintenance.
