There’s a quote, supposedly from Mark Twain, “Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.” In Carmel, the story is 109 years of “village character.” The facts that some Carmelites choose to ignore: The state’s fire and building codes that require visible street addresses.
A growing number of residents are lobbying in favor of adopting addresses but the Carmel City Council continues to move slowly. On Monday, May 5, they rejected the option of holding a special advisory election this November, previously agreed to by the last council. Several pro-address residents told the council that the notion of holding an election was offensive.
“The health and safety of our village should not be treated as a public preference,” said Betty Kullas. “It’s a responsibility.” She and others urged the council to stop delaying and implement house numbers as soon as possible.
Only two residents argued in favor of keeping things as they are. “The thing that really bothers me is the lack of respect in people’s opinions about Carmel’s traditions,” said Linda Smith.
Addresses have been under consideration since at least 2021, as more residents began sharing stories of difficulties getting insurance, state identification and package deliveries, as well as worrying about first responders finding locations quickly. Councils have studied and debated the issue since then, culminating last September with the former council deciding to put it to voters to decide.
In April newly elected Councilmember Bob Delves joined a committee of residents to study the issue all over again. On May 5, he presented their progress, with a timeline that took the council to a possible decision in November. The council was tasked to decide between holding a special election in 2025, waiting until the November 2026 general election, or taking some other direction.
The council agreed to no election this year, but declined to decide on a 2026 election, instead waiting to hear the committee’s findings.
(1) comment
Council should not be making a decision on what the vote context would be without knowing more on the potential address approach snd implementation plan. Doing a ballot vote is not a simple yes or no - do you want addresses. And a ballot vote wouldn’t include businesses and employees who are also critical stakeholders on this potential path ahead. There has been and are a ton of questions to ask and be answered first. This approach is not a delay. This is simply doing more of the homework and filling in more of the gaps, their implications and pros/cons.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.