Over the course of the next two weeks, we will be publishing primers about the important items on the ballot in California as part of our GOOD Voter Guide.

The Attorney General is housed in the Department of Justice and works to lead and educate on law enforcement, justice, safety, equal opportunity, and economic prosperity.


Peter Allen

Political Party: Green

Candidate Platform: Post-partisan and in it for the long haul, Peter argues that most politicians favor “short term spin and protecting their own power” instead of prioritizing the welfare of the state and its inhabitants. His top priorities align with the Greens: crime, the environment, the economy, political reform, and education.

Background and History: Allen received his bachelor’s from UC Santa Cruz and his law degree from the University of San Diego. After a stint as a prosecutor at the San Diego City Attorney’s Office, Allen started working for TURN, a San Francisco-based consumer group. He then joined with the California Public Utilities Commission, advising them on environmental issues.

Death Penalty: Allen supports an end to the death penalty, saying that its astronomical costs are crippling the state, monopolizing its most capable and experienced prosecutors, and backlogging the courts.

Prop. 8: Allen has not said whether or not he would take the Prop. 8 case to the Supreme Court, but his campaign website says “government should not be in the business of telling us who to marry.”

Three Strikes Law: Allen has said, vaguely, that he supports creating a society where “violent criminals are punished not just by the state and the criminal justice system, but by everyone.”

Drugs: Allen supports the decriminalization of all drugs.

Economic Responsibility / Justice: Allen is adamant about fair competition and being real about true cost of businesses, the war on drugs, and education. He has said he wants to lower income tax and sales tax, and instead tax things like drugs, oil, cars, gasoline, and toxic chemicals.

Environmental Responsibility: This has long been Allen’s cardinal issue, and he has long demonstrated his support for renewable energy. He opposes the creation of more nuclear power planets and off shore drilling in California, and supports making cars and trucks “bear a fair share of the true costs” in order to support public transportation.

Education: Allen talks about education as an economic issue, arguing that the state is ruining an investment that was previously made, and that the long-term costs of not investing in education are dire.

Reproductive Freedom: He supports existing California law and the federal precedent set by Roe v. Wade.

Fun Facts: Allen is an artist and photographer, an amateur musician, a volunteer junior sailing instructor, and an adoptive parent.

Sources: Peter Allen for Attorney General; California Voter Guide

Steve Cooley

Political Party: Republican

Candidate Platform: Steve Cooley wants to fight crime both in the streets of Los Angeles and in the world of politics. His key issues for the election are public corruption, foreign extradition, fraud, and gang prosecution.

Background and History: Cooley was raised by an F.B.I.-employed father and a homemaker mom. He graduated from California State in 1970 and went on to USC Gould School of Law, where he received his law degree in 1973. Cooley then joined the L.A. County District Attorney’s Office, where he served as a prosecutor for 27 years and as a reserve LAPD officer for seven. In 2000, Cooley was elected as L.A. County’s D.A., he got a second term in 2004, and yet another in 2008. Cooley’s office prosecutes 60,000 felonies and 130,000 misdemeanors annually. He oversees an annual operating budget of more than $330 million.

Death Penalty: Cooley supports the death penalty. As D.A., his office obtained 13 death-penalty verdicts in 2009, according to the San Francisco Chronicle—four more than the entire state of Texas during that same time.

Prop. 8: Cooley would defend Prop. 8, and would use the state’s resources to do so.

Three Strikes Law: Cooley coauthored the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2006. Cooley supported the ballot measure that would have changed the Three Strikes Law (it didn’t pass), and he left the Calilfornia District Attorneys’ Association in 2006 due to political differences over this law.

Drugs: Cooley is against the decriminalization of marijuana and opposes Proposition 19. As D.A., he worked to shut down medical marijuana dispensaries in L.A. County.

Battling Crime: Cooley created the Public Integrity Division to monitor and prosecute politicians, as well as the Justice System Integrity Division. (There is some controversy around this, in the form of a federal lawsuit filed by the Association of Deputy District Attorneys alleging that Cooley made it a policy to punish its members with punitive transfers, demotions, reduced benefits, and other disciplinary measures.) Cooley has placed an emphasis on using DNA and other new technologies to solve cold-cases. His office co-authored Proposition 69, passed in 2004, to allow for the collection of DNA samples from all people arrested for or charged with a felony. Cooley’s office also prioritizes combating intellectual-property theft and other cybercrimes.

Environmental Responsibility: In 2003, citing budget restraints, Cooley closed the District Attorney’s Environmental Crimes unit, leaving one attorney to cover all environmental crimes in L.A. County. He has declined to take a public stance on Prop. 23, which would halt California’s Global Warming Solutions Act.

Health Care: He also opposed the health care reform bill passed by Congress in March, and has vowed to sue for its repeal.

Reproductive Freedom: Spokespeople for Cooley say that he is “pro-choice.” The pro-choice organization NARAL has criticized Cooley for not clarifying his stance, however.

Key Donors and Endorsements: The L.A. Police Union, the Association of California School Administrators, the Farm Bureau,? California Women’s Leadership Association, Metropolitan-News Enterprise,? Los Angeles Times, ?San Francisco Chronicle, ?Sacramento Bee,? Modesto Bee,? Fresno Bee,? Contra Costa Times,? Oakland Tribune.

Fun Facts: He is a history buff who enjoys collecting memorabilia, including a suitcase that had belonged to Michael Jackson and the clothes that U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy was wearing when he was shot to death at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles on June 5, 1968.

Sources: Steve Cooley Website; L.A. County Web Site; L.A. Weekly (2), Los Angeles Times (2); SF Gate (2); L.A. Sentinel; Christian Science Monitor; CA Majority Report

Robert J. Evans

Political Party: Peace and Freedom

Background and History: Evans received his bachelor’s and law degrees from UC Berkeley. He has been in private practice for the last 40 years doing civil and real estate law and has served on Berkeley’s Rent Stabilization Board.

Death Penalty: Evans is against the death penalty.

Prop. 8: He supports gay marriage.

Three Strikes Law: Wants to repeal Three Strikes.

Drugs: Evans is in favor of legalizing marijuana and decriminalizing other drugs.

Reproductive Freedom: Evans pro-choice, and the Peace and Freedom Party also supports a platform of free abortion on demand.

Fun Facts: Robert Evans is in no way related to the legendary producer of the same name. His party has adopted “The Internationale”—which until 1944 served as the anthem of the Soviet Union—as its official party music.

Battling Crime: He wants to create a special unit of the Attorney General’s Office to investigate police violence and, where appropriate, “prosecute badge-wearing criminals.”

Sources: Justice for California; Peace and Freedom Party Website

Timothy J. Hannan

Political Party: Libertarian Party

Background and History: Hannan received his BA from the University of San Francisco and his law degree from Georgetown University. Hannan was a Lt. Commander in the Coast Guard Reserve, where he served for 11 years. He now practices real estate law in Santa Rosa.

Death Penalty: Hannan is against the death penalty, writing: “None please. Seriously no death penalty.”

Prop. 8: In an email he wrote, “If elected Attorney General, I would defend Prop. 8 in possible higher court challenges. I would do so because the California Constitution charges the Attorney General with responsibility for enforcing California’s laws ‘uniformly and adequately.’ I personally voted against Prop. 8 because, as a Libertarian, I believe in maximum individual freedom (“live and let live”). But since Prop. 8 was legitimately voted into law by a majority of the voters, I have to respect their decision. If the courts ultimately decide that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause, then I will honor and enforce that decision as well.”

Three Strikes Law: He is opposed to the Three Strikes Law, especially as it is applied to non-violent offenders. “Every case is unique,” he says. “Judges need far more flexibility in sentencing offenders that Three Strikes allows. I understand the angry popular sentiment that gave rise to Three Strikes. But I think it is a clumsy, heavy-handed, unintelligent reaction to the crime problem. I recommend abolishing the Three Strikes Law.”

Drugs: Hannan is in favor of legalizing marijuana. His stance on other drugs is unclear.

Reproductive Freedom: Hannan believes the government does not have any right to tell an adult woman she cannot terminate her pregnancy. He does however favor parental notification for abortions performed on minors.

Fun Fact: His campaign site features a zoomable picture of the candidate’s face.

Sources: Email correspondence with the candidate; Tim Hannan Campaign Website; Smolen Camapaign Website

Kamala D. Harris

Political Party: Democrat

Candidate Platform: Harris believes that we have to be tough on crime but also smart on crime. Her top priority would be to battle the state’s 70 percent recidivism rate. Other priorities include battling hate crimes and protecting civil rights and marriage equality, environmental preservation, financial fraud, and more.

Background and History: Harris was born in the East Bay to a Tamil Indian breast cancer specialist and a Jamaican American economics professor. She got her BA from Howard University and her law degree from the University of California’s Hastings College of Law in San Francisco. Once graduated, she started her career as a Deputy D.A. in Alameda County, where she specialized in prosecuting child sexual assault cases. She later worked in the San Francisco D.A.’s Office, and in 2003 became the first woman elected D.A. of San Francisco. Under Kamala, the San Francisco D.A. has had the highest felony conviction rate in almost 15 years. She has received various awards, and has been recognized by Oprah and Newsweek for being one of “America’s 20 Most Powerful Women.”

Death Penalty: Harris personally opposes the death penalty, but said she’d uphold it if elected Attorney General. As the DA in San Francisco, she refused to seek the death penalty against a gang member who killed a San Francisco Police Officer in 2004, sparking a fair amount of controversy, and much criticism from her Republican opponent.

Prop. 8: Kamala is “committed to doing everything within the power of the Attorney General’s office and the law to join in the effort to repeal Prop 8.” In 2006, she organized and led a national conference to confront the “gay-transgender panic defense” that has been used to try and justify brutal hate killings

Three Strikes Law: Harris said her policy has only been to seek 25 to life for a third strike if the conviction is for a serious offense.

Drugs: In March, Harris opposed a bill to legalize the recreational use of marijuana and opposes Prop. 19.

Immigration: Harris has overseen the implementation of free legal clinics in immigrant communities in San Francisco. She “recognize[s] that there are 12 million undocumented immigrants who are already here [in the U.S.], and [she wants to] help them transition toward compliance with the law, without jumping ahead in the line.”

Battling Crime: In 2005 her office created the program “Back on Track” —an employment and reentry initiative focusing on reducing recidivism among young adults and nonviolent drug offenders. The National District Attorney’s Association and U.S. Department of Justice have selected Back on Track as a model re-entry program for prosecutors’ offices across the country.

Economic Responsibility / Justice: As DA, Harris has prioritized the prosecution of financial predators, processing over 450 consumer complaints in 2009 and forming the state’s first stand-alone mortgage and investment fraud unit.

Environmental Responsibility: As AG she would “vigorously” uphold the enforcement of California’s Global Warming Solution Act and focus on the use of state criminal laws in order to protect the environment.

Health Care: She supports federal health care legislation.

Reproductive Freedom: Harris is pro-choice and has a NARAL endorsement to prove it. She has worked to reduce unplanned pregnancies as well as to protect a woman’s right to choose.

Fun Fact: If elected, Harris would be a series of firsts for the state of California: First woman elected AG, first Asian-American, and first African-American.

Key Donors and Endorsements: Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Dolores Huerta, Diane Feinstein, former LA Police Chief William Bratton, California Professional Firefighters, California Labor Federation, San Francisco Chronicle, the L.A. Sentinel, and many nonprofits.

Sources: Kamala Harris campaign Website; Los Angeles Times (2); SFist; SFGate; ABC News; San Francisco D.A. Office Website; Huffington Post

Diane Beall Templin

Political Party: American Independent Party.

Background and History: Templin got her BA and JD from SUNY Buffalo. She passed the bar in 1979 and currently works in Escondido as the head of a firm that defends low-income people. She has run for President three times on the Independent American Party ticket.

Candidate Platform: Her website says that she favors a “government based on the 10 commandments.”

Prop. 8: Her official stance is unclear but she has said that marriage is between a man and a woman and that she wants to “assert the role of the law in establishing and reinforcing the mutual rights and obligations of that God-ordained contract.”

Fun Facts: Templin’s website says she’s a big fan of swing dancing.

Sources: Templin Campaign Website; SFGate; Smart Voter

Some disclaimers: This guide is a volunteer operation, not produced by GOOD. Due to research fatigue, lame candidate websites, and Murphy’s Law, you may spot a mistake or two. Some candidates simply don’t provide a lot of info, and our researcher styles varied, so some profiles may differ or seem a bit incomplete.

  • How to be grateful to someone – even when you really don’t want to
    Photo credit: Focus Pixel Art/Moment via Getty ImagesAt times, feeling personally grateful to someone can feel like a big ask – but there are other forms of gratitude.
    ,

    How to be grateful to someone – even when you really don’t want to

    A change in perspective can make gratitude easier.

    There are few greater feelings than the sense of heartfelt gratitude to another human being who has done you a solid. Sincere thanks and reciprocation are part of the glue that binds us in human relationships.

    But sometimes you’re just not feeling it. You know that you have benefited from what someone has done for you, but you don’t really feel grateful to them for doing it. Most teenagers go through this period with their parents. Maybe you take your partner or colleague for granted.

    For me, 14 years ago, it was my mother-in-law. She had upended her life to move from South Dakota to California to live with my wife and me to assist with childcare after our daughter was born; no other source of childcare fit with our demanding work schedules and my commute. She made a huge sacrifice that transformed our lives, but there were moments when I really struggled to feel grateful.

    Since that time, I’ve come to devote much of my research as a philosopher to studying how the way that we interpret each other as people shapes our relationships. That work has helped me to understand why I struggled to be grateful – and taught me a little bit about how to do better.

    Personal gratitude

    I’ve found that the hardest part of feeling grateful to someone is the “to” part. It is one thing to be impersonally grateful that something happened and another thing to be personally grateful to someone for doing it. These are not the same.

    Both forms of gratitude require seeing something as a benefit. And they both require a humble recognition of how easily things could have been otherwise. When the rain ends a drought, an atheist can feel grateful that the tomatoes will survive. But the atheist isn’t grateful “to” anyone for the rain.

    A line of around a dozen men wearing white sarongs stand in waist-high water, holding their hands up in prayer.
    Priests offer prayers to Varuna, the Hindu god of rain, as they stand in the Osman Sagar on the outskirts of Hyderabad, India, on July 16, 2013. AP Photo/Mahesh Kumar A

    Personal gratitude requires more than impersonal gratitude. It is an example of what the philosopher Peter Strawson calls a “participant” attitude: an attitude that we have toward people, but not toward things. And a large theme in my work is that participant attitudes such as gratitude involve giving someone credit for what the attitude responds to.

    But which benefits we give people credit for is complicated. As philosophers such as Tony Manela have argued, actions motivated primarily by money, self-interest or insecurity don’t merit personal gratitude, even when they benefit you. Actions motivated by love, generosity or concern, on the other hand – or other “pro-social” motives – do.

    Sometimes people fail to feel gratitude because they take someone for granted, not noticing how easily they could have done otherwise. This wasn’t my problem with my mother-in-law. It was obvious that she didn’t have to move across the country to live with us.

    But it was hard to avoid noticing that she had always wanted to live in California. Sometimes it is hard to feel grateful because of how we interpret someone’s motives. They could have done otherwise, but we don’t think their action was really “about us.”

    Bad motives are easy to find

    Sometimes ungenerous motives can help people to be generous. Your child’s kindergarten teacher isn’t a volunteer. They may be a naturally generous person – but still, they probably wouldn’t be working with your child on spelling, arithmetic and handling adversity if they weren’t getting a paycheck.

    It’s still appropriate to be grateful to them. Their financial incentive to show up for work enables their generosity, rather than competing with it.

    A row of young children sit on the floor, clapping, as they face a seated teacher in a striped yellow shirt.
    Your child’s teacher might be generous, but their job enables them to act on that generosity every day. svetikd/E+ via Getty Images

    Elementary school teachers are not alone. After all, people’s decisions are often driven by many factors: some that merit gratitude and others that don’t. So if you go looking for selfish motives, you are bound to find some.

    Take your partner, for example. They do something that benefits you: buying you flowers, filling your tank with gas or finally taking their turn to wash the dishes. They are partly motivated by generosity, love or communal spirit. But, as in any close relationship, sometimes they may be hoping to get something out of it: reciprocation, maybe, or getting you off their back.

    It matters which of these you interpret as their “true” motive: Seeing it one way opens you up to gratitude, while the other precludes it.

    What are ‘true’ motives?

    The distinction between someone’s “true” motive and the other motives that enable it looks like the distinction between causes and enabling conditions. For example, when you drop a wine glass, the fragility of the glass enables the drop to cause the break, but it isn’t itself a cause of the break – the drop is.

    In the case of the falling glass, there’s a clear, objective answer to what caused the break and what merely enabled it. But I believe that relating to people is deeply different than understanding physical things.

    The key question in whether to be grateful to someone isn’t about which motives count as “causes.” It is about which cause we need to bring into focus in order to see the other person more clearly for who they are.

    See it their way

    In other words, it’s at least partly a matter of perspective. If someone does you a favor, but you know they’re hoping for something in return, you can see that as their “true” motive. But you don’t have to see it that way. Instead, you could see that motive as the condition they need for their generosity to thrive.

    Shifting perspectives isn’t easy. When you’re doubting someone’s motives, their lack of generosity can feel obvious. But it helps to remember that people tend to believe they’re acting generously. If you want to respond with gratitude, try seeing them as they see themselves.

    What if that doesn’t work?

    Well, the next best thing to being grateful to someone is being grateful for them. Starting there is a good way to remind yourself of why you value this relations

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

  • America’s friendliest states
    Photo credit: New Africa // ShutterstockA young couple talking to a friendly elderly neighbor.
    ,

    America’s friendliest states

    Mountain West states lead the nation in community connection.

    The ways in which Americans connect vary widely by state. A range of factors contribute to a place’s overall character, but the time residents spend socializing, volunteering and helping people outside their own homes can shape how friendly it feels.

    SmartAsset analyzed the 50 states by the number of minutes per day residents spend on these three “friendly activities,” using time and action as measures of how communities connect. The results offer a behavioral snapshot of where residents spend the most time engaging with others in their communities.

    Key Findings

    • The Mountain West leads the rankings. Montana (No. 1), Utah (No. 2), and Wyoming (No. 3) took the top spots in the study, with residents of Montana averaging a nation-leading 95 minutes per day socializing, volunteering and helping others.
    • Mountaineers are the most likely to help others. Although West Virginia ranked No. 24 overall, its residents spent more time than any others providing unpaid help to people outside their own homes, about 30 minutes per day.
    • Rankings challenge some stereotypes. Despite its reputation for “Minnesota Nice,” Minnesota ranked No. 11, just outside the top 10. Washington, home to Seattle and its “Seattle Freeze” reputation, ranked No. 10.
    • Three Northeast states in the top 20. Although residents of Northeastern states are not always seen as especially warm by outsiders, three states in the region made the top 20: Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Maryland.
    Table listing the top 20 friendliest states in America.

    The 20 Friendliest States

    1. Montana
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 43.36
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 35.62
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 15.89
    1. Utah
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 38.24
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 32.46
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 20.95
    1. Wyoming
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 35.57
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 40.49
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 7.07
    1. Oregon
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 53.74
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 14.85
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 12.36
    1. Illinois
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 32.37
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 14.12
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 28.43
    1. Rhode Island
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 52.15
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 5.33
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 17.35
    1. Nebraska
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 39.3
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 11.08
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 24.06
    1. North Dakota
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 35.5
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 24.61
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 12.88
    1. Missouri
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 43.44
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 16.05
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 11.86
    1. Washington
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 30.59
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 24.04
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 14.92
    1. Minnesota
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 30.33
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 11.75
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 25.18
    1. Massachusetts
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 35.38
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 9.63
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 20.91
    1. Wisconsin
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 36.51
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 8.46
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 20.86
    1. Colorado
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 27.08
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 16.82
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 20.31
    1. Maryland
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 26.05
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 25.72
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 12.39
    1. Michigan
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 38.9
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 11.21
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 12.98
    1. Tennessee
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 33.82
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 9.45
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 19.53
    1. South Dakota
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 41.61
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 0.21
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 20.61
    1. Hawaii
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 26.3
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 14.84
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 20.98
    1. Virginia
    • Average Minutes Spent Socializing (daily): 38.96
    • Average Minutes Spent Volunteering (daily): 10.92
    • Average Minutes Spent Helping Others (daily): 11.97

    Methodology

    This study uses data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ American Time Use Survey, extracted from IPUMS, over the most recent available four-year period. For each state, SmartAsset calculated the average daily minutes residents spent socializing, volunteering, and helping people outside the household. Those three measures were then equally weighted and summed to produce a total time value used to rank the states. Source data providers are not affiliated with, and do not endorse or sponsor, this study or its findings.

    Citation: Sarah M. Flood, Liana C. Sayer, Daniel Backman and Annie Chen. American Time Use Survey Data Extract Builder: Version 3.3 dataset. College Park, MD: University of Maryland and Minneapolis, MN: IPUMS, 2025. https://doi.org/10.18128/D060.V3.3

    This story was produced by SmartAsset and reviewed and distributed by Stacker.

  • One man’s bad day led to a legacy of love from the ‘Kissing Tree’ for the whole Victoria community
    Photo credit: CanvaSneak a kiss while walking the sidewalk.

    There is a spot dedicated to love in Victoria, British Columbia. In it, a billowing tree grows from a woman’s yard into the sidewalk with an arch-like opening. For decades, couples have shared sweet moments under the shady green privacy of the “Kissing Tree.” Not only that, but children have been making wishes and new parents bring their babies to enjoy the quiet tranquility under the tree. Oddly enough, though, the creation of the Kissing Tree wouldn’t have happened if not for a violent riot.

    The story of Victoria’s Kissing Tree actually starts in New York City. In 1972, Bronx native Brian O’Reilly got his car stuck in the middle of a crowd waiting for a Rolling Stones concert. A riot broke out, forcing O’Reilly to protect himself with the only thing he had in his car: a tape recorder.

    “I wasn’t recording on purpose,” O’Reilly explained to CTV News. “I just had the microphone in my hand, and I had my arm up like this to defend myself and I was asking why he was hitting me.”

    Moving toward love

    O’Reilly was so upset at the encounter that he moved away from the United States to settle in British Columbia. That was where he met and befriended Bonnie. Over the years, the two became close. Then, Brian made his move.

    “He said, ‘I don’t want to date you. I want to marry you,’” Bonnie recalled to CTV News. “It felt amazing and wonderful because I had fallen in love with him.”

    They embraced under what is now known as the Kissing Tree.

    That one bad day in New York turned into 38 years of marriage in Victoria. While Brian has passed away, Bonnie has kept the tree the two of them enjoyed kissing under ready and available to all.

    “If you can come here and have an ‘aha!’ moment, isn’t that wonderful? Wouldn’t you like to do that for everyone?” Bonnie said.

    tree, foliage, British Columbia
    Screenshot

    The legacy of the Kissing Tree

    Over the last few decades, the Kissing Tree’s branches have created a natural arch from Bonnie’s yard over the sidewalk. After seeing several couples make a stop to kiss under the privacy of nature, Bonnie hung some lights under the tree to create a more intimate, cozier space.

    Thanks to the O’Reillys, couples have gotten engaged under the tree. Many resident couples have spent years making it a point to kiss under the tree whenever they pass through. That love has extended to children whispering wishes to the tree’s trunk. Pet lovers and new parents also have a nice quiet place for their dogs and babies to enjoy the shade.

    Other ‘Kissing Trees’ in North America

    There are other legendary “Kissing Trees” throughout North America, labeled as such for different reasons. In San Marcos, Texas, a large oak was dubbed “The Kissing Tree” after Sam Houston kissed the cheeks of the women who stitched him the state flag as a gift when he was running for governor.

    The Kissing Trees/Love Trees of St. Augustine, Florida have a legend of their own. These trees are typically an oak and a palm tree that grow intertwined together, symbolizing connection. Legend has it that if you were to kiss under one of these trees, your love will last forever.

    Whether it is imprinting magic onto a landmark or not, it is great to see how something as simple as a tree can connect people across time.

Explore More Stories

Research

Scientists find that Japanese frog gut bacteria destroys cancer tumors in a single treatment

Film & TV

European Broadcasting Union offers guide to reduce sexualizing camera angles of Olympic women athletes

Culture

The summer concert state rankings: Which states pack more festivals, shows, and tours in 2026

Everyday Economics

The states with the highest rates of uninsured drivers and what it costs everyone else