NAC Advisory - California

**********************************************************************
                    NATURIST ACTION COMMITTEE
                            ADVISORY
**********************************************************************
                  http://www.naturistaction.org
**********************************************************************

Copyright 2009 by the Naturist Action Committee, which is responsible
for its content. Permission is granted for the posting, forwarding or
redistribution of this message, provided that it is reproduced in its
entirety and without alteration.

DATE   : September 4, 2009
SUBJECT: San Onofre Advisory
TO     : All naturists and other concerned citizens

Dear Naturist,

This is an advisory from the Naturist Action Committee (NAC) concerning an important situation in the state of California.

NAC has learned that the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) intends to ignore the law and will begin issuing citations for nudity in the traditional clothing-optional area at San Onofre State Beach, beginning Tuesday, September 8, 2009.

According to DPR, the citations will be issued under Title 14, Section 4322 of the California Code of Regulations. That regulation allows an individual to be charged for nudity in a state park. Conviction under that section is NOT a sex offense.

Such ticketing, if it takes place, would be improper and illegal. The Naturist Action Committee and Friends of San Onofre Beach have petitioned the California Supreme Court to consider their lawsuit against DPR. Until the Supreme Court indicates whether it will hear the matter, the ruling of the Superior Court stands. Though DPR won a subsequent appeal, the ruling that's currently valid is the one that favored the naturists.

The court order that remains in effect until further notice was issued by Orange County Superior Court Judge Sheila Fell on August 27, 2008. It refers to the Department of Parks and Recreation as "Parks." The court order reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

"PARKS IS ORDERED TO MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO, AND ENFORCE THE CAHILL POLICY."

CHOICES:

A number of naturists have indicated their willingness to be cited for nudity at San Onofre on Tuesday so that a court may decide the matter of citations that have been issued while an existing court order is in effect forbidding them.

NAC recognizes that the choice to participate in such civil disobedience must be left to each individual. If you'd like more information on the choices and their possible ramifications, you may contact NAC board member Allen Baylis by e-mail at rab@bayisaw.com or by phone at (714) 962-0915.

DISCUSSION:

The order mandating that the Parks Department continue to apply the Cahill/Harrison regulation which was issued by Orange County Superior Court Judge Sheila Fell has not been rescinded because the case is still under appeal. This order will remain in place until a higher court issues an order to Judge Fell to rescind her prior order. If that happens at all, it will be unlikely to take place before mid October. Therefore, if State Park Rangers issue citations for nudity without having first received a public complaint and allowing the nude person to get dressed to avoid a pubic nudity citation, they will be violating a court order. That is true in any traditional clothing optional area in a California State Park.

Over the past few days, Rangers  have told people that trail 6 is no longer a nude beach and that they must get dressed. That is not accurate information. We expect that the rangers will continue the misinformation over Labor Day weekend.

As most of you know, the Parks Department has taken the battle statewide. In a blatant reversal of their position, the DPR chose to request publication of the Appellate Court opinion, which has the effect of abrogating the Cahill/Harrison regulation state wide. Their reason for doing this has been stated as: to avoid the significant cost of litigating the issue at other state parks, thereby giving them the ability to close other traditional clothing optional beaches at will. Clearly, what happens at San Onofre will certainly affect our right to be nude in other state parks.

We recognize that the level of resistance and the extent one will go to fight injustice is an individual decision. However, we must take a stand here and now to protect our nude beaches in California. There is nothing to be gained and much to be lost by acquiescing to government tyranny. It's a matter of LIBERTY! The founding fathers of our country would be proud of us for standing up against big government. Information about what happens if you get a citation is available here:  http://www.friendsofsanonofre.org/whatif.htm

Friends of San Onofre Beach and the Naturist Action Committee intend to make sure that those who receive citations in this circumstance will not have to bear the full burden of dealing with the courts. First, it must be remembered that the original court order is still in place and  enforceable. So, any citations issued should be easily dismissed. Also, if citations are issued, we will be back in court asserting our right to enforce the August 27, 2008 order.

Please continue to visit Trail 6 at San Onofre and continue to exercise your right to be nude there. If we simply walk away from San Onofre, we risk not only losing that beach, but all of the clothing-optional beaches in a Caifornia state parks.

Please report beach incidents to: NAC board member Allen Baylis 714-962-0915 - rab@baylislaw.com

MORE INFORMATION

NAC will continue to issue Action Alerts, Advisories and Updates on this issue as circumstances require. Look for them.

Details of this situation and specifics of the Cahill/Harrison Regulation and associated documents may be found on the NAC Web site:  http://www.naturistaction.org/sanonofre/

There, you will find background documents related to the Cahill Policy, the Harrison letter and NAC's lawsuit. You will also find this NAC Advisory on the NAC Web site: http://www.naturistaction.org.  Click on ALERTS, ADVISORIES & UPDATES, and look under Current Advisories.

PLEASE HELP NAC TO CONTINUE HELPING NATURISTS!

The Naturist Action Committee remains committed to the vigorous defense of the clothing-optional use of public land. Activism on behalf of naturists can be expensive. NAC relies entirely on the voluntary financial support of people like YOU.

Won't you please send a generous donation to:

  NAC
  PO Box 132
  Oshkosh, WI 54903

Or call toll free (800) 886-7230 (8AM-4PM, Central Time, weekdays) to donate by phone using your MasterCard, Visa or Discover Card.. Or use your credit card to make a convenient online donation: http://www.naturistaction.org/donate/

Thank you for choosing to make a difference.

Naturally,

Allen Baylis
Board Member
Naturist Action Committee

---------------------------------------------------------------
Naturist Action Committee (NAC) - PO Box 132, Oshkosh, WI 54903
Executive Dir. Bob Morton       - execdir@naturistaction.org
Board Member Allen Baylis       - rab@baylislaw.com
Online Rep. Dennis Kirkpatrick  - naturist@sunclad.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
D. Kirkpatrick......| 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
-

Go Topless Sunday

According to the website, Go Topless, (http://www.gotopless.org/index.php), Sunday, August 23rd is Go Topless Day, in celebration of Womens Equality Day.

I'm not exactly sure who is behind the Go Topless website, although there is a link to Rael, a Frenchman who was a singer and race car driver before meeting an alien from another planet. Yeah, I'm a bit confused, too. You can see his website at http://rael.org/rael_content/index.php

So back to Go Topless day. Apparently, there are several celebrations/protests set for Sunday, in New York City, Miami Beach, Venice Beach, Portland, Oregon, Columbus Ohio and Chicago.

Noticeably absent from the list is Austin, Texas, where topfree sunbathing used to be the norm at Barton Springs, and is still technically legal, if not practiced.

Personally, I think its a good idea, but we've seen this type of promotion before, and it has been a bitter failure, mainly due to lack of participation, or too many people who are there for sexual reasons.

But anyway, happy Go Topless Sunday.

NAC Advisory - California

***********************************************************************
                    NATURIST ACTION COMMITTEE
                            ADVISORY
**********************************************************************
                  **http://www.naturistaction.org*
**********************************************************************
Copyright 2009 by the Naturist Action Committee, which is responsible
for its content. Permission is granted for the posting, forwarding or
redistribution of this message, provided that it is reproduced in its
entirety and without alteration.

DATE   : July 21, 2009
SUBJECT: California Advisory
TO     : All naturists and other concerned citizens

Dear Naturist,

This is an advisory from the Naturist Action Committee (NAC) concerning an
important situation in the state of California.

Responding to a request from legal counsel for the California Department of
Parks & Recreation (DPR), the California Court of Appeal for the 4th
District has published the previously unpublished ruling it rendered last
month in the San Onofre State Beach case. The recent appellate ruling
overturned a 2008 Superior Court victory by the Naturist Action Committee
and Friends of San Onofre Beach, a local naturist group.

At issue is whether DPR has followed proper procedure in abruptly ending the
application of the Cahill/Harrison regulation at San Onofre State Beach.
Cahill/Harrison is long-standing and well-known means for managing and
regulating the clothing-optional use of portions of state parks.

The unpublished ruling applied only to San Onofre State Beach. However,
publication gives the ruling greater precedential effect and allows the
possibility that rangers may ignore the Cahill policy and may begin issuing
citations for nudity at other state parks under Title 14, Section 4322 of
the California Code of Regulations.

CAHILL

It has been suggested by some that the Cahill Policy has remained in effect
throughout the years entirely through the good will of the California Parks
Department. If that has been so, then the good will ended in May, 2008, when
Parks Director Ruth Coleman singled out San Onofre State Beach and said,
"Cahill does not apply there."

>From that moment, the Cahill Policy became badly damaged goods. If it could
be terminated abruptly and without appropriate process or public involvement
at one state park, then it could happen at any state park, at any time. So
much for good will.

Trusting the good will of public officials for something as important as
protection from arrest for benign behavior has never been an intelligent
choice. Relying on that same promise of good will after the trust has been
publicly and intentionally broken is simply folly.

CHOICES

Confronted with the crippling damage dealt to the Cahill Policy at San
Onofre, the Naturist Action Committee faced a basic choice. It could accept
the loss of San Onofre, it could negotiate, or it could fight.

When the Parks Department refused to negotiate, NAC chose to fight.

NAC did not, and does not, look on the Cahill/Harrison regulation as a
matter of good will. It's a regulation, and it has been used exactly as
regulation by each successive administration of the California Parks
Department for THIRTY YEARS.

The Superior Court accepted NAC's contention that Cahill/Harrison is a
regulation. The Court of Appeal recognized it as a regulation, too, though
its different view concerning quality and extent were what allowed the
reversal of the Superior Court's procedural requirements for undoing the
regulation.

NAC's legal challenge to DPR's arbitrary destruction of Cahill at San Onofre
did not cripple Cahill. That damage quite clearly had already been
inflicted. Trusting "good will" while waiting for the next shoe to drop will
NOT restore the damaged Cahill Policy. And at NO point has it EVER been true
that accepting the loss of San Onofre will somehow inoculate naturists
against the similar loss of another California beach or another California
state park.

TICKETS?

DPR spokespersons have given conflicting information. One predicted that the
Department would "tread lightly" on the matter of citations for nudity in
state parks. Referring to San Onofre, another has said that no action was
planned until at least after Labor Day. The truth is that there's really no
way to know for sure.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Later this week, the Naturist Action Committee will file its petition to
have the case heard by the California Supreme Court.

NAC will continue to issue Action Alerts, Advisories and Updates on this
issue as circumstances require. Look for them.

MORE INFORMATION

Details of this situation and specifics of the Cahill/Harrison Regulation
and associated documents may be found on the NAC Web site:
http://www.naturistaction.org/sanonofre

There, you will find background documents related to the Cahill Policy, the
Harrison letter and NAC's lawsuit. You will also find this NAC Advisory on
the NAC Web site: http://www.naturistaction.org . Click on ALERTS,
ADVISORIES & UPDATES, and look under Current Advisories.

PLEASE HELP NAC TO CONTINUE HELPING NATURISTS!

The Naturist Action Committee remains committed to the vigorous defense of
the clothing-optional use of public land. Activism on behalf of naturists
can be expensive. NAC relies entirely on the voluntary financial support of
people like YOU.

Won't you please send a generous donation to:

 NAC
 PO Box 132
 Oshkosh, WI 54903

Or call toll free (800) 886-7230 (8AM-4PM, Central Time, weekdays) to donate
by phone using your MasterCard, Visa or Discover Card. Or use your credit
card to make a convenient online donation:
http://www.naturistaction.org/donate/

Thank you for choosing to make a difference.

Naturally,

Bob Morton
Executive Director
Naturist Action Committee

---------------------------------------------------------------
Naturist Action Committee (NAC) - PO Box 132, Oshkosh, WI 54903
Executive Dir. Bob Morton       - execdir@naturistaction.org
Board Member Allen Baylis       - rab@baylislaw.com
Online Rep. Dennis Kirkpatrick  - naturist@sunclad.com
---------------------------------------------------------------

NAC Alert - Florida

**********************************************************************
                    NATURIST ACTION COMMITTEE
                          ACTION ALERT
**********************************************************************
                  http://www.naturistaction.org
**********************************************************************
Copyright 2009 by the Naturist Action Committee, which is responsible
for its content. Permission is granted for the posting, forwarding or
redistribution of this message, provided that it is reproduced in its
entirety and without alteration.

DATE   : July 19, 2009
SUBJECT: Florida: Key West
TO     : Naturists and other concerned citizens

Dear Naturist,

Together with local naturist groups, the Naturist Action Committee is asking for your immediate action on an important matter in Florida. With permission and by request, this NAC Action Alert follows (and is largely taken from) a similar alert released by South Florida Free Beaches/Florida Naturist Association, B.E.A.C.H.E.S. Foundation Institute and the Florida Keys Free Beaches Committee.

NAC asks that you email and/or fax a letter immediately to Key West city officials, requesting designation of a clothing-optional beach in the City of Key West. Details follow.

BRIEF BACKGROUND

South Florida Free Beaches (SFFB)/Florida Naturist Association (FNA), B.E.A.C.H.E.S. Foundation Institute and the Florida Keys Free Beaches Committee have been working to establish a designated clothing-optional naturist family beach in Key West, a European-style facility in the tradition of Haulover Beach. The selected section of beach is located at the east end of Smather's Beach.

For the past several months, the local naturist team has met with members of the county and city commissions, the city manager, and other community leaders, providing them with information required to make an educated and informed decision. Comparative information shows an economic impact of about $900 million annually with 2008 parking revenues of $1,770,834 from Haulover's clothing-optional beach.

On Tuesday, July 7th, naturist leaders spoke before the Key West City Commission, presenting the economic impact that would be the projected
result of a designated naturist beach.

CURRENT STATUS

The Key West City Commission is composed of six commissioners and a mayor. The mayor votes when there is a tie vote of the commission. Naturists have three firm votes in favor of a designated clothing-optional beach. The mayor has stated he would vote against a designated beach if there is a tie vote, even though recent local Florida Keys polls have been favorable to a designated naturist beach.

This coming Tuesday, July 21, City Commissioner Bill Verge intends to offer a resolution that would place the issue of a designated naturist beach on the ballot for an October referendum vote, in which the citizens of Key West would cast their ballots directly on the issue. An unfavorable referendum vote would have serious delaying consequences. The strategy of Commissioner Verge is to preempt the City Commission with a vote of the people, forestalling the Commission's future consideration of a designated beach.

Some Commissioners are already concerned that a Commission vote in favor of a designated beach will result in a church-sponsored backlash among registered voters. However, there are other ways to facilitate a clothing-optional beach without requiring Commissioners to vote directly for the issue. One alternate path includes a carefully crafted revision of the City's existing anti-nudity code.

NATURIST POSITION

This issue does not require a voter referendum. Commissioners are elected to make the tough decisions, and this decision is not as difficult as many others. The establishment of a clothing-optional beach would not even require the expenditure of city money.

Naturists have the support of the Lodging Association, the Hotel Association, the Business Guild and most members of the Chamber of Commerce, as well as the support of local media.

Key West greatly values visitors and the city relies on the tourist trade. Naturists who send their E-mailed comments immediately to the City Commissioners will create additional awareness and help affirm the idea that naturists and others will spend money in Key West if they have a designated naturist beach to visit.

WHAT IS NAC ASKING YOU TO DO?

The Naturist Action Committee is asking you to do just ONE thing:

  1) Immediately send your comments by e-mail, supporting a
     clothing-optional beach in Key West. Send your E-mail
     to Key West's mayor and city manager, to members of
     the Key West City Commission and to two important
     local agencies.

WHO SHOULD WRITE?

NAC is asking ALL NATURISTS and other concerned individuals to write, regardless of your residence. Key West recognizes the value of attention (and dollars) from tourists and other visitors.

WHOM TO CONTACT

Time is short. Please e-mail your comments immediately to:

  Mayor Morgan McPherson - mayor@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3886

  Commissioner Bill Verge - Bverge@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3886

  Commissioner Mark Rossi mrossi@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3886

  Commissioner Barry Gibson - bfgibson@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3886

  Commissioner Teri Johnston - johnston@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3886

  Commissioner Clayton Lopez - clopez@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3886

  Commissioner Joe Pais - jpais@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3886

  City Mgr. Jim Scholl - jscholl@keywestcity.com
  Fax: 305-809-3771

  Tourist Development Council (TDC) - research@fla-keys.com
  Fax: 305-296-0788

  Keys Tourism Agency - webeditor@fla-keys.com


NAC would enjoy the opportunity to read your notes. Please send a copy to:

  NAC
  P.O. Box 132
  Oshkosh, WI 54903
  flkeys@naturistaction.org

WHAT TO SAY?

Here are some suggested points you may wish to make:

 1. Identify yourself. Anonymous correspondence is often
    disregarded. If you are a past or prospective visitor
    to Key West, please say so prominently.

 2. Be brief and polite.

 3. Request that the commissioners themselves vote on the
    issue and NOT refer it to a ballot referendum.

 4. Remind the Commissioners that you would visit Key West
    if it had a naturist beach. Skinny-dipping and nude
    sunbathing are valid recreational choices.

 5. Your vacation dollars are primarily (or exclusively)
    spent in cities or countries where there are naturist
    facilities.

 6. You visit South Florida because of Haulover Beach's
    legal clothing optional status.

MORE INFORMATION AND RESOURCES

Additional information and links are available, along with this NAC Action Alert on the Web site of the Naturist Action Committee.

  http://www.naturistaction.org

Select "Alerts" and find this NAC Action Alert under Current Alerts. There you will find the agenda for the July 21 meeting of the City Commission, as well as the complete text of the proposed anti-naturist ordinance.

You will also find valuable information at the Web site of South Florida
Free Beaches: http://www.sffb.com .

PLEASE HELP NAC TO CONTINUE HELPING NATURISTS!

Of course, local naturists are accepting donations to support this effort. Additionally, however, South Florida Free Beaches has indicated that it may have to call on NAC for help as this issue moves forward. Richard Mason, President of SFFB has suggested that you consider a contribution to NAC to assure that NAC will be able to help.

The Naturist Action Committee is a volunteer nonprofit organization that exists to advance and protect the rights of naturists throughout North America. To do its job, NAC relies entirely on the voluntary generosity of supporters like you. To donate to NAC, use the address below

  NAC
  PO Box 132
  Oshkosh, WI 54903

Or call toll free (800) 886-7230 to donate by phone using your MasterCard, Visa or Discover Card. Or use your credit card to make a convenient online donation: http://www.naturistaction.org/donate/

Thank you for choosing to make a difference.

Naturally,

Michael Kush
Morley Schloss
Board Members
Naturist Action Committee

---------------------------------------------------------------
Naturist Action Committee (NAC) - PO Box 132, Oshkosh, WI 54903
Executive Dir. Bob Morton       - execdir@naturistaction.org
Board Member Michael Kush       - michael@gatorlake.net
Board Member Morley Schloss     - morleynaturist@hotmail.com
Online Rep. Dennis Kirkpatrick  - naturist@sunclad.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
D. Kirkpatrick......| 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
-

NAC Update - Texas

**********************************************************************
                      NATURIST ACTION COMMITTEE
                            ADVISORY
**********************************************************************
                   http://www.naturistaction.org
**********************************************************************
Copyright 2009 by the Naturist Action Committee, which is responsible
for its content. Permission is granted for the posting, forwarding or
redistribution of this message, provided that it is reproduced in its
entirety and without alteration.

DATE   :  July 9, 2009
SUBJECT:  Success in Texas! Dangerous legislation modified, derailed
TO     :  All naturists

Dear Naturist:

The Naturist Action Committee (NAC) announces significant successes in the Texas legislature.

Working behind the scenes with a professional legislative lobbyist, NAC has been instrumental in derailing four Texas legislative measures that threatened the interests of naturists. NAC quietly offered substitute language for two of the bills and then worked to see that the bills were not adopted.

None of the four bills was passed into law.

SUMMARIES OF THE LEGISLATIVE BILLS:

House Bill 123 - Sponsor: Rep. Jim Jackson (R-Carrollton) - This legislation would have added "employment harmful to children" to the state's list of "common nuisances." Although the proposed new law was touted as "an additional tool to prevent children from being employed in sexually oriented businesses," it would have applied more generally to "the employment, authorization, or inducement of a child to work in a place of business permitting, requesting, or requiring a child to work nude or topless." Certain restrictions already apply in such instances. However, a naturist or nudist resort that might consider providing part time work (like sweeping the clubhouse or mowing the grass) for the nude sons and daughters of members, could additionally find itself at risk of being declared a nuisance.

Senate Bill 1307 - Sponsor: Sen. John Carona (R-Dallas) - Senate companion to HB 123 - Essentially identical in language and intent, this measure would also have added "employment harmful to children" to the state's list of "common nuisances."

House Bill 124 - Sponsor: Rep. Jim Jackson (R-Carrollton) - This bill sought to escalate to felony status the penalty for second or subsequent convictions for "employment harmful to children." Regardless of the intent, the proposed law would have increased the threat to naturist or nudist resorts.

House Bill 736 - Sponsor: Rep. Chente Quintanilla (D-El Paso) - Texas counties do not have general ordinance-making power, and the ability of counties to make regulations is limited. As introduced, HB 736 proposed to grant counties the authorization to adopt and enforce regulations having to do with nuisances and disorderly conduct. Each of the 254 counties in the state would have been allowed to create its own regulations.

BRIEF DISCUSSION:

Nuisance: Notwithstanding the existing state law addressing "employment harmful to children," naturist and nudist resorts do not wish to be characterized additionally as nuisances. From New York and Tennessee to Colorado and Oregon, laws dealing with the issue of "nuisance" have been at the center of various attempts to shut down naturist venues and activities. The Naturist Action Committee has consistently and successfully opposed the creation of laws that sought to declare nudity to be a nuisance (e.g., Tennessee 1998 HB 3203, Kansas 2000 HB 2726, Michigan 2000 SB 1293 et al.).

Disorderly Conduct: The state's existing disorderly conduct law includes the section that's most frequently used to charge individuals for simple public nudity. The state law requires "recklessness" as an element for conviction, but county regulations, if allowed, would not necessarily follow identically.

WHAT HAS NAC BEEN DOING ABOUT THIS LEGISLATION?

It was clear that this potentially damaging legislation had a chance of passage this session. The Naturist Action Committee took action quickly, hiring a professional legislative lobbyist and offering alternate language for HB 123 and SB 1307, which were companion bills.

Substitute language for HB 123 was endorsed by the legislative committee to which it had been assigned, but it was not language that was acceptable to NAC. Consequently, NAC turned its effort to seeing that none of the bills would pass into law.

OUTCOME:

None of the four bills passed into law.

HB 123 was reported favorably from the Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence Committee after having been substituted, but the bill did not receive a floor vote in the House.

SB 1307 never made it out of committee.

HB 124 was passed by the House and was assigned to a Senate committee, but was not considered in the Senate.  HB 736 was reported favorably from the House County Affairs Committee. A committee substitute changed the bill so that it would apply only to counties that have a population of 650,000 or more and are located within 100 miles of an international border. In Texas, that description fits only El Paso County, home of the bill's original sponsor. Regardless, the legislation did not make it to a vote on the floor of the House.

These are favorable and important outcomes for naturists, and especially for naturist and nudist resorts, camps and parks in the state of Texas.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND THANKS:

Throughout this entire effort, NAC has had the cooperation of AANR-Southwest, a regional division of the American Association for Nude Recreation. NAC thanks AANR-SW!

WHAT IS NAC ASKING YOU TO DO?

This is an Advisory and an announcement of a specific success. The Naturist Action Committee is NOT asking you to take action at this time. The threats from HB 123, HB 124, HB 736 and SB 1307 have been disarmed. Please watch for NAC Action Alerts, Advisories and Updates on other topics of vital interest to naturists.

MORE INFORMATION:

You can access additional information on the Web site of the Naturist Action Committee.

  http://www.naturistaction.org

Select "Alerts, Advisories and Updates." Under Current Advisories, you'll find the text of this NAC Advisory. The web version includes links to the texts of the various bills

PLEASE HELP NAC HELP NATURISTS:

As the nonprofit volunteer political adjunct to The Naturist Society, the Naturist Action Committee is an important first line of defense against threats to naturists and their interests. Many times, NAC identifies and deals with frightening legislation that others simply miss.

NAC stands up for private naturist and nudist resorts, parks and camps, just as it champions the clothing-optional use of public lands. Both are important, and for both responsibilities, NAC relies entirely on your voluntary support. Hiring lobbyists to defend the rights and interests of naturists is expensive. Please donate generously with a check to:

  NAC
  PO Box 132
  Oshkosh, WI 54903

Or use your credit card to make a direct donation online through NAC's Web site: http://www.naturistaction.org/donate/

Thank you once again for choosing to make a difference!

Naturally,

Bob Morton
Executive Director
Naturist Action Committee

---------------------------------------------------------------
Naturist Action Committee (NAC) - PO Box 132, Oshkosh, WI 54903
Executive Dir. Bob Morton       - execdir@naturistaction.org
Online Rep. Dennis Kirkpatrick  - naturist@sunclad.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
D. Kirkpatrick......| 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
-

Setback at San Onofre (NAC Advisory)

*********************************************************************
              NATURIST ACTION COMMITTEE UPDATE
*********************************************************************
               http://www.naturistaction.org
*********************************************************************
Copyright 2009 by the Naturist Action Committee, which is responsible
for its content. Permission is granted for the posting, forwarding or
redistribution of this message, provided that it is reproduced in its
entirety and without alteration.

DATE    : June 26, 2009
SUBJECT : San Onofre Update
TO      : All naturists and other concerned citizens

Dear Naturist,

This is an update from the Naturist Action Committee on the status of San Onofre State Beach and NAC's ongoing effort on behalf of naturists there.

In an unpublished ruling issued yesterday, a California state court of appeals has ruled in favor of the California Department of Parks and Recreation in its appeal of a Superior Court¹s ruling from 2008 that had favored naturists.

At issue is whether DPR has followed proper procedure in abruptly ending the application of the Cahill/Harrison regulation at San Onofre State Beach. Cahill/Harrison is long-standing and well-known means for managing and regulating the clothing-optional use of portions of state parks.

The ruling allows the possibility that rangers may immediately begin issuing citations for nudity at San Onofre State Beach under Title 14, Section 4322 of the California Code of Regulations. That is exactly the same threat that DPR had originally scheduled to take effect on June 1, 2008.

MORE INFORMATION

Details of this situation and specifics of the Cahill/Harrison Regulation and associated documents may be found on the NAC Web page:  http://www.naturistaction.org/sanonofre

There, you will find background documents related to the Cahill Policy, the Harrison letter and NAC's lawsuit.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

This is a setback, but the battle is not ended. The Naturist Action Committee has fourteen days to file a further appeal. NAC is carefully considering the details of each of its options and the ramifications of each.

NAC will continue to issue Action Alerts, Advisories and Updates on this issue as circumstances require. Look for them.

PLEASE HELP NAC TO CONTINUE HELPING NATURISTS!

The Naturist Action Committee remains committed to the vigorous defense of the clothing-optional use of public land. Activism on behalf of naturists can be expensive. NAC relies entirely on the voluntary financial support of people like YOU.

Won't you please send a generous donation to:

NAC
PO Box 132
Oshkosh, WI 54903

Or call toll free (800) 886-7230 (8 AM-4 PM, Central Time, weekdays) to donate by phone using your MasterCard, Visa or Discover Card. Or use your credit card to make a convenient online donation: http://www.naturistaction.org/donate/

Thank you for choosing to make a difference.

Naturally,

Bob Morton
Executive Director
Naturist Action Committee

-----------------------------------------------------
Naturist Action Committee (NAC) - PO Box 132, Oshkosh, WI 54903
Executive Dir. Bob Morton       - execdir@naturistaction.org
Board Member Allen Baylis       - rab@baylislaw.com
Online Rep. Dennis Kirkpatrick  - naturist@sunclad.com
-----------------------------------------------------
-
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
D. Kirkpatrick......| 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
-

NAC Update - San Onofre, California

**********************************************************************
                     NATURIST ACTION COMMITTEE
                              UPDATE
**********************************************************************
                   http://www.naturistaction.org
**********************************************************************
Copyright 2009 by the Naturist Action Committee, which is responsible
for its content. Permission is granted for the posting, forwarding or
redistribution of this message, provided that it is reproduced in its
entirety and without alteration.

DATE    : June 21, 2009
SUBJECT : San Onofre Update
TO      : All naturists and other concerned citizens

Dear Naturist,

This is an update from the Naturist Action Committee on the status of San Onofre State Beach and NAC's ongoing effort to assure that it remains open for clothing-optional recreation.

The beach at Trail 6 of San Onofre remains clothing-optional, despite the effort begun by the California Department of Parks & Recreation (DPR) more than a year ago to prohibit nudity at the popular and traditional clothing-optional site. Joined by Friends of San Onofre Beach, the local naturist group, NAC filed a lawsuit against DPR last July.

At issue was whether DPR had followed proper procedure in abrogating the Cahill Policy, a long-standing and well-known means for managing and regulating the clothing-optional use of portions of state parks. The policy was named for former DPR Director Russell Cahill, who issued it in 1979. The Cahill Policy has figured prominently in the successful appeal of a criminal conviction for nudity in a state park (People v. Bost, 1989). The policy was affirmed and interpreted by DPR's Deputy Director for Operations, Jack Harrison, in a 1988 letter. Together, the Cahill Policy and the Harrison letter form a state regulation dealing with clothing-optional recreation in California state parks.

In August of 2008, a California Superior Court ruled in favor of NAC, affirming that Cahill/Harrison is indeed a regulation, and further declaring: "Dept of Parks must comply with the provisions of the California Administrative Procedures Act before it makes any changes in its enforcement." Further, the Court said, "until the administrative process is completed, Parks shall maintain the status quo, and enforce the Cahill Policy as it has done since its issuance and subsequent interpretation by the Harrison letter, at Trail 6 in San Onofre State Beach."

The State has appealed the ruling. The Court of Appeals has not yet ruled. That ruling may come at any time.

OTHER FACETS

Meanwhile, the American Association for Nude Recreation chose to contact and meet with the California Department of Parks & Recreation. However improvident such a meeting may have been, let it not be said that AANR fails to care about public lands or that it hadn't a right to the meeting.

A month prior to the actual meeting, AANR Government Affairs Chair Alonzo Stevens published (in the September issue of The Bulletin, AANR's house organ) the "facts" concerning the numbers of criminal arrests at San Onofre.  Those numbers led Stevens to conclude in print that there certainly seemed to be a problem with criminal behavior at San Onofre. The truth is that Stevens simply used the numbers supplied to him by DPR, and those numbers were fabrications.

DPR was happy for the distribution, and no one at AANR had bothered to check the veracity of the figures. NAC had obtained the actual numbers through multiple and persistent Public Records Acts requests. The real numbers are far different from those supplied by the DPR and passed along by AANR, and they confirm neither DPR's fiction nor Stevens' agreement to it.

AANR's October meeting with DPR would hardly be worthy of comment, except for two factors associated with it.

1)  AANR solicited and subsequently received a letter from Tony Perez, Acting Deputy Director for Park Operations. That letter, now widely circulated by AANR, allowed Perez to declare that the Cahill/Harrison regulation applies only in "remote" areas. The truth of the matter is that neither the Cahill Policy nor the interpretation of it in the Harrison letter ever mentioned anything about remoteness. In fact, the detailed DPR study that led to the Cahill Policy recommended that designated clothing-optional beaches be located near population centers to accommodate the obvious demand.

The notion that a clothing-optional site must be "remote" to be considered under Cahill/Harrison is another fabrication by DPR, contrived only relatively recently to justify DPR's ill-conceived attempt to close San Onofre State Beach to nude use. Despite the court order to "maintain the status quo," DPR has attempted to interject a new condition. DPR's argument is faulty, it's dangerous, and it simply deals in bad faith with the ruling of the California Superior Court that decided the case. AANR's eager acceptance of that deceitful posture shows little understanding of what's at stake.

2)  The second factor that causes AANR's October meeting to become worthy of mention is AANR's own trumpeting of its meeting with DPR's Tony Perez and the letter that followed from Perez as a "Major Public Lands Victory" (AANR Bulletin, June 2009).

It was not a victory for naturists or nudists. Referring, in the June issue of AANR's Bulletin, to the Perez letter that attempts to append "remoteness" as a condition of the Cahill/Harrison regulation, AANR's Executive Director Erich Schuttauf wrote: "there is a big difference in 'getting it in writing.'" Indeed.

Mr. Schuttauf wrote that "[w]ritten reaffirmation of the Cahill Policy is a huge victory for nude recreation."  Unfortunately, the "huge victory" offers very little to celebrate. It has been delivered with the recently invented and completely unacceptable "remoteness" condition attached to it, something AANR appears willing to accept and eager to celebrate, even if it means that DPR has thrown San Onofre under the bus in the process.

In his June article, Mr. Schuttauf complained that AANR's "ongoing discussions about modification of the San Onofre policy" had been "derailed" by NAC's lawsuit against DPR. The truth is that NAC had been involved with DPR and the proposed San Onofre closure for more than a month before AANR engaged. The further truth is that without NAC's prompt action and its lawsuit, there would be no nudity today at San Onofre State Beach.

WHAT ELSE IS NEW?

As she was being lobbied from within the DPR to close San Onofre to nudity, a big concern for DPR Director Ruth Coleman became the specter of a sexual harassment lawsuit. She had been led to believe that such a suit could be filed by an employee whose job was to deal with nude beachgoers. It was of little consequence to Director Coleman that employment law simply doesn't work that way.

Within the last year, however, there has been a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against the Department over alleged activity at its San Onofre unit. The suit, which is ongoing, alleges improper behavior by male rangers toward a female ranger. It does not involve naturists or nudity on the beach.

NAC THANKS YOU!

When the Naturist Action Committee asked for your help last year in contacting the Director of DPR, you responded magnificently. Many of you are demonstrating through your generous contributions to NAC that you understand the significant expense associated with the Naturist Action Committee's important defense of naturism on public lands. NAC continues to rely on your support.

Friends of San Onofre Beach, NAC's co-plaintiff in the lawsuit, continues to do meaningful local fund raising. Also worthy of special mention yet again is the gracious contribution made to NAC last summer by the members of AANR-West.

NAC thanks all those who are choosing to make a difference!

MORE INFORMATION

Details of this situation and specifics of the Cahill/Harrison Regulation and associated documents may be found on the NAC Web page:   http://www.naturistaction.org/sanonofre

There, you will find background documents and important files related to NAC's lawsuit.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

The Naturist Action Committee is in this for the long haul. Our successes have been significant, but the battle is not ended.

NAC will continue to issue Action Alerts, Advisories and Updates on this issue as circumstances require. Look for them.

PLEASE HELP NAC TO CONTINUE HELPING NATURISTS!

NAC is committed to the defense of clothing-optional use of public land. NAC does not hesitate to hire lawyers and lobbyists, and it has done exactly that in the San Onofre situation. That can be very expensive. NAC does not have a membership roster on which it can simply assess dues. NAC relies entirely on the voluntary support of people like YOU.

Won't you please send a generous donation to:

  NAC
  PO Box 132
  Oshkosh, WI 54903

Or call toll free (800) 886-7230 (8AM-4PM, Central Time, weekdays) to donate by phone using your MasterCard, Visa or Discover Card. Or use your credit card to make a convenient online donation: http://www.naturistaction.org/donate/

Thank you for choosing to make a difference.

Naturally,

Bob Morton
Executive Director
Naturist Action Committee

---------------------------------------------------------------
Naturist Action Committee (NAC) - PO Box 132, Oshkosh, WI 54903
Executive Dir. Bob Morton       - execdir@naturistaction.org
Board Member Allen Baylis       - rab@baylislaw.com
Online Rep. Dennis Kirkpatrick  - naturist@sunclad.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
D. Kirkpatrick......| 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
-