California
Where do you live? That's a complicated question for a California town with no street addresses
CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, Calif. — No one in this wealthy California community known for its white-sand beaches and storybook charm has a street address. But unlike the houses in Carmel-By-The-Sea, those days may soon be numbered.
After more than a century of address-free living, this seaside tourist destination where Clint Eastwood once presided as mayor is moving ahead with a plan to assign street numbers to homes and businesses.
Many long-time residents aren’t happy about it.
The city’s residents and visitors must navigate a woodsy, 1-square-mile (2.5-square-kilometer) landscape where houses, stores, restaurants and other buildings don’t have numbers. It’s even more difficult at night because the town has few street lights.
When asked for their address, residents describe their homes’ color or style, nearby landmarks like cypress trees and fire hydrants or their location relative to the nearest cross street. Many houses have signs with whimsical names like Neverland, Dreamcatcher and Pinch Me or descriptors such as “San Antonio 3 SE of 9th.”
There is no mail delivery service, so residents must pick up up their mail at the U.S. post office, the only building with an official address.
But street addresses may finally be coming to this coastal city of 3,300 residents, about 120 miles (193 kilometers) south of San Francisco. In July, the city council voted 3-2 to move forward with a plan to issue street numbers.
“When emergency crews are responding, particularly at night, it’s very difficult to count houses in order to find the right house,” Councilmember Karen Ferlito said, noting the city has an aging population. “Sometimes they go to the wrong house and that wastes precious time.”
Residents complain that many government agencies and businesses require physical address for service. They say delivery and taxi drivers can’t find their homes and often drop off packages and food orders at the wrong house.
“We’ve had flowers delivered that were useless. We’ve had fruit baskets delivered when my dad died that were six weeks old,” said Betty Kullas, who moved to Carmel 15 years ago. “Sometimes if you know it’s been delivered somewhere, you have to go out with a flashlight at night, going house to house to see if you can find it.”
Kullas said her husband’s $13,000 medication never arrived, and having it delivered to the post office won’t work because it requires refrigeration. It was a struggle to get water, electricity and cable service without a physical address.
But many don’t see the need for street addresses, even in modern times when people increasingly use their addresses to shop online and get important legal documents.
“I was born in Carmel 67 years ago. I grew up with no street addresses, and it’s just something you’re used to,” life-long resident Grant Johnson said outside the post office. “That’s one of the charms of Carmel. It’s one of the stories we get to tell.”
Those opposed include the mayor, who voted against the measure.
“If it’s not broke, don’t fix it,” Mayor Dave Potter said during an interview at his home. “I just don’t think it’s necessary. I mean, honestly, we’ve lived this way for 100 years. We don’t need them.”
The issue of street addresses has generated controversy in Carmel since its founding in 1916, often pitting business owners against residents intent on preserving the character, culture and village charm.
City officials passed an ordinance requiring house numbering in 1926, but preservation-minded residents fought back. Three years later, the city passed an ordinance to keep Carmel’s residential streets free of sidewalks, street lights, neon signs, high-rise buildings, mailboxes. It also prohibited street addresses.
In 1953, Carmel threatened to secede from California over proposed state legislation requiring house numbers. The bill didn’t pass.
The issue reemerged as a hot-button issue during the pandemic, when in-person interactions were curtailed and more residents wanted to have packages and meals delivered to their homes.
Local law enforcement and fire officials spoke out in support of addresses at the July 9 council meeting, noting the lack of street numbers violates fire and building codes.
Potter dismissed the safety concerns, pointing out that local emergency service providers have detailed knowledge of the town and can respond within a few minutes.
Some longtime residents worry street numbers will take away from Carmel’s quaintness.
“I’ve lived here so long, I’ve kind of forgotten what it’s like to have mail delivered, so it doesn’t bother me,” resident Virginia Crapo said. “I think it’s more communal when you have to come down to the post office to get your mail because you can see your neighbors.”
Even after homes receive street addresses, the post office will remain open and there will be no delivery mail service to residences, Ferlito said.
After the council vote, the city staff was directed to develop a numbering plan that must be approved by the U.S. Postal Service.
But the story isn’t over. In November, residents will vote for city councilmembers and a mayor who will determine the fate of whether to issue addresses to residents.
“This is a very political issue, and I don’t know what will happen after the election, but I hope that the new council will continue to stay the course,” said Councilmember Jeff Baron, who is running for mayor and voted for street addresses.
Others agree it’s time to join the modern world.
“I don’t think street numbers will ruin the charm,” said part-time resident Bruce Edwards, who was picking up mail from his post office box. “I’m in favor of it because of delivery issues. Uber will work better. The ambulances will be able to find us when I have a heart attack. And my UPS driver will be able to deliver my books.”
California
California bill to bar police from taking second job with ICE advances in state Assembly
Wednesday, March 4, 2026 4:43AM
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KABC) — A bill that would prevent police officers from moonlighting with federal immigration enforcement agencies, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is advancing through the California State Assembly.
AB 1537 passed the State Assembly’s committee on public safety on Tuesday.
The bill also requires that officers report any offers for secondary employment related to immigration enforcement to their place of work.
Those failing to comply could face decertification as a peace officer in California.
The bill was introduced by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, whose district includes Mar Vista, Ladera Heights, Mid-Wilshire and parts of South Los Angeles.
Copyright © 2026 KABC Television, LLC. All rights reserved.
California
Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say
Newsom slams Trump amid U.S. military action in Iran
Newsom criticized Trump for spending little time acknowledging four U.S. service members killed in the conflict with Iran during recent remarks.
California Democrats running for governor, your party has a message for you. Think carefully about your candidacy and campaign ahead of the swiftly approaching filing deadline.
California Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks urged candidates looking to assume the state’s highest office to “honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign” as March 6, the final day to declare candidacy, nears. Hicks said that concerns about the crowded field of Democrat candidates “persist” in an open letter on Tuesday, March 3.
It comes as five leading candidates, several of which are Democrats — Katie Porter, Eric Swalwell, and Tom Steyer — are in a “virtual tie” per a recent poll, the Desert Sun reported, which is part of the USA TODAY Network.
Two Republican candidates pushing out California democrats in the gubernatorial bid may be “implausible,” but “it is not impossible,” Hicks said of the reasoning behind his latest message. Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, both Republicans, lead in RealClear Polling’s average of various polls.
The party chair spotlighted the need for California Democrats’ leadership, particularly over Proposition 50, the voter-approved measure that will temporarily implement new congressional district maps, paving the way for Democrats to secure more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“If in the unlikely event a Democrat failed to proceed to the general election for governor, there could be the potential for depressed Democratic turnout in California in November,” Hicks said. “The result would present a real risk to winning the congressional seats required and imperil Democrats’ chances to retake the House, cut Donald Trump’s term in half, and spare our nation from the pain many have endured since January 2025.”
During a press conference on March 2, Gov. Gavin Newsom said that when he is out in communities, people aren’t talking about the governor’s race. It’s an observation he called “interesting,” considering voting in the primary election starts in May.
“It’s been hard, I think, to focus on that race,” Newsom said, pointing to the attention on President Donald Trump, redistricting, and other matters.
What exactly is California Democratic Party asking of candidates?
In his open letter, Hicks gave directions to candidates.
First, assess your candidacy and campaign. If you don’t have a viable path to the general election, don’t file to get your name on the ballot for the primary election in June. Also, be prepared to suspend your campaign and endorse another candidate by April 15 if you decide to file but can’t show “meaningful progress towards winning the primary election.”
When is the next California election? Primary election in 2026
California voters will trim the field of candidates for governor on June 2. Only the two candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party preference, will move on to the November election.
Paris Barraza is a reporter covering Los Angeles and Southern California for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at pbarraza@usatodayco.com.
California
Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students
BAKERSFIELD, Calif.(KBAK/KBFX) — The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a California law that limited when schools could require staff to disclose a student’s gender identity, clearing the way for schools to tell parents if their children identify as transgender without getting the students’ approval.
Rear view of multiracial students with hands raised in classroom at high school
The decision came after religious parents and educators, represented by the Thomas More Society, challenged California school policies aimed at preventing staff from disclosing a student’s gender identity.
Erwin Chemerinsky, dean and professor of law at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, said the ruling favors parents’ ability to be informed. “The Supreme Court today rules in favor of the claim of parents to be able to know the gender identity and gender pronoun of the children,” Chemerinsky said.
FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)
The decision temporarily blocks a state law that bans automatic parental notification requirements if students change their pronouns or gender expression at school. The Thomas More Society called the decision a major victory for parents, saying the court found California’s policy likely violates constitutional rights.
Chemerinsky said the Supreme Court’s action is an emergency ruling. “This law is now put on hold. So what this means is that schools can require that teachers and other staff inform parents of the gender identity or gender pronouns of children,” he said.
Kathie Moehlig, founder and executive director of Trans Family Support Services, said she is concerned about how the ruling could affect students who do not have supportive families.
“I am really concerned about our kids that do come from these non affirming homes, that they know that they’re going to get in trouble, that they’re going to possibly have violence brought against them possibly kicked out of their homes,” Moehlig said.
Moehlig said parents should eventually know, but that the conversation should happen when a student feels safe. “Our students are going to be less inclined to confide in any adults that might be able to help to get them access to mental healthcare, to a support system. They may still tell their peers but they’re certainly not going to tell any other adult,” she said.
Equality California, a LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, shared a statement:
Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, released the following statement from Executive Director Tony Hoang in response to today’s U.S. Supreme Court shadow docket ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta regarding California’s student privacy protections for transgender youth. Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in this case is deeply disturbing. By stepping in on an emergency basis, the Court has effectively upended California’s student privacy protections without hearing full arguments and before the judicial process has run its course. While not surprising, this move reflects a dangerous willingness to short-circuit the established judicial process to dismantle protections for transgender youth. While this case continues to be litigated, the ruling revives Judge Benitez’s prior decision, which broadly targets numerous California laws protecting transgender and gender-nonconforming students — threatening critical safeguards that prevent forced outing and allow educators to respect a student’s affirmed name and pronouns at school. These protections exist for one reason: to keep students safe and ensure schools remain places where young people can learn and thrive without fear. To be clear: today’s decision does not impact California’s SAFETY Act, which prohibits school districts from adopting policies that forcibly out transgender students. The SAFETY Act remains in full effect, and we will continue defending it. Transgender youth deserve dignity, safety, and the freedom to learn without fear. We will never stop fighting for transgender youth and their families. Equality California will continue working with parents, educators, and advocates to ensure schools remain safe, welcoming, and focused on the success and well-being of every student.
The case now returns to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which will decide whether the California law is constitutional.
-
World6 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts7 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO7 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Oregon5 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
-
Florida3 days agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days
-
Maryland3 days agoAM showers Sunday in Maryland
-
Culture1 week agoTry This Quiz on Thrilling Books That Became Popular Movies