Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply. To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
|
T O P I C R E V I E W |
Admin |
Posted - 09/20/2008 : 10:51:29 AM From SignOnSanDiego.com
Judge will review decision for nudists Reprieve granted on state crackdown By Terry Rodgers UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER August 21, 2008
An Orange County judge kept everyone in suspense yesterday as to whether she will uphold her preliminary ruling awarding nudists a temporary reprieve from a threatened crackdown at San Onofre State Beach.
After a hearing in Santa Ana, Superior Court Judge Sheila Fell said she will review her initial decision in favor of the nudists. She has up to 90 days to make her final decision.
If she reaffirms her preliminary ruling, state parks officials will be forced to indefinitely postpone plans to issue misdemeanor citations to beachgoers caught in the buff.
In June, parks officials announced they were rescinding their longtime policy of allowing nudity at the Trail 6 area of San Onofre State Beach. Enforcement was scheduled to begin Sept. 2 because of an increasing number of complaints from the public of lewd behavior, officials said.
Nudists have frequented the beach at the south end of the state beach near Camp Pendleton for more than three decades.
“To me, it's a matter of freedom,” said Gerda Hayes, a Huntington Beach resident who said she has enjoyed the beach without a bathing suit for 32 years. “There isn't any other place for (naturists) to go.”
Two groups who support nudists, the Naturists Action Committee and Friends of San Onofre Beach, filed a lawsuit challenging the state's decision.
The suit contends that parks officials cannot unilaterally change a longtime policy without holding a public hearing and codifying the change through the state's Office of Administrative Law.
Since 1979, park rangers statewide have adhered to the “Cahill policy,” issued by then-state parks Director Russell Cahill, which instructs rangers to ignore nudity unless a member of the public complains.
At yesterday's hearing, the state's lawyer, Deborah Fletcher, argued that the Cahill policy is not a regulation but merely “an internal department guideline.”
The attorney for the naturists, Elva Kopacz, said the Cahill policy has created “de facto clothing-optional beaches” throughout the state.
Terry Rodgers: (619) 542-4566; terry.rodgers@uniontrib.com
|
5 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
Admin |
Posted - 09/07/2009 : 10:17:05 PM We have a thread about the September 4 2009 NAC advisory regarding San Onofre Beach here, and another discussion about the situation here.
There is potential here to lose many popular clothing optional beaches across the country if this becomes a precedent. This issue is important. Well-managed nude beaches are essential for the nudism industry, because many people try nudism for the first time at a nude beach. Support your local nude beach, they may be needing it. |
FireProf |
Posted - 09/23/2008 : 01:06:30 AM According to the President of the Friends of San Onofre Beach, the rangers, the dept of parks and rec nor the state will give him the type of complaints lodged, the numbers are always changing and to date there is only been the state's "claim" that all these complaints have been made.
|
VLM34 |
Posted - 09/22/2008 : 4:09:22 PM quote: Originally posted by Admin
The important thing to remember from that first article is the reason all this has happened: "Enforcement was scheduled to begin Sept. 2 because of an increasing number of complaints from the public of lewd behavior, officials said."
Here's what's even more important to remember:
What's said by 'officials' isn't necessarily true. Even if it's technically true, it isn't necessarily meaningful. (One complaint more than last year would be an 'increasing number.')
Allegations in complaints from the so-called public aren't necessarily true either. (Of the complaints actually made, I'd bet that 90% were anonymous, and that nothing alleged in any of the complaints can be verified.)
Been there! (And still have the tee shirt, although it's getting a bit raggedy now.)
|
Admin |
Posted - 09/20/2008 : 12:39:14 PM Good catch, FireProf! Here's a couple that are more recent, from Sep 4th and 5th.
From Los Angeles Times
State parks agency to appeal ruling on nude sunbathing at San Onofre By Susannah Rosenblatt, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer September 4, 2008
Officials seek to overturn an Orange County judge's decision that allowed swimming and sunning in the buff at Trail 6. The department denies that a policy change on the issue needs a public hearing.
The battle to bare it all rages on -- state parks officials filed a notice of appeal Wednesday to overturn an Orange County judge's recent ruling allowing visitors to Trail 6 at San Onofre State Beach to swim and sunbathe in the buff, a department spokesman said.
Responding to complaints of lewd behavior, parks officials earlier this year warned of a crackdown at the longtime nudist spot just south of the San Diego County line near Camp Pendleton.
The clothing-optional crowd took the California Department of Parks and Recreation to court, arguing that any change in policy toward naked beachgoers required a public hearing. Orange County Superior Court Judge Sheila Fell agreed with the naturists, and the frolicking au naturel continued.
Parks officials "respectfully disagree with the judge's ruling," spokesman Roy Stearns said Wednesday.
According to Stearns, the decades-old memo stipulating that nudity should not be subject to enforcement unless a member of the public complains "is not a regulation," as Judge Fell had determined. Regulations, Fell ruled, are subject to public hearings when altered.
The policy "was never adopted as a regulation, but rather was an internal guidance for our peace officers, and we shall now take that argument to the appeals court," Stearns said.
The notice of appeal "illustrates the lengths to which the parks department will go in order to avoid the inconvenience of having to listen to the public that they're supposed to be serving," said R. Allen Baylis, the Huntington Beach attorney and naturist activist named in the original lawsuit -- and a regular fixture at Trail 6.
"They're going to have to really do some fantastic legal work in order to get this ruling overturned."
susannah.rosenblatt
@latimes.com
From SignOnSanDiego.com
State agency appeals ruling permitting nudity on beaches UNION-TRIBUNE September 5, 2008
The state Department of Parks and Recreation has appealed a lower court ruling that blocked it from enforcing a ban on nudity at San Onofre State Beach.
The appeal was filed Wednesday with the 4th District Court of Appeal in San Diego, said a spokeswoman for the state Attorney General's Office.
In June, parks officials said they intended to crack down on nudists who frequent San Onofre's Trail 6 beach because of increasing complaints and a spike in lewd behavior. For nearly 30 years, park rangers at San Onofre have left the nudists alone unless visitors complained.
Two pro-nudity groups filed a lawsuit challenging the change in enforcement. Their suit said the tolerance policy is a de facto regulation that cannot be changed without public input and other procedures.
In August, Orange County Superior Court Judge Sheila Fell ruled in favor of the nudists and ordered the state to maintain the status quo.
A spokesman for the nudists said they intend to seek another court order to force the state to remove signs it installed in the summer warning beachgoers that nudity is illegal.
The important thing to remember from that first article is the reason all this has happened: "Enforcement was scheduled to begin Sept. 2 because of an increasing number of complaints from the public of lewd behavior, officials said."
|
FireProf |
Posted - 09/20/2008 : 12:07:18 PM I think it's important to update this last post with the updated information.
The judge in this case reviewed her initial ruling and within a week and a half finalized her decision on the matter. The Dept. of Parks and Rec must hold public hearings before they can change this policy.
It is correct that there is currently no enforcement of our section of the beach, when it comes to nudity. The Dept. of Parks and Rec have appealed this decision by Judge Fell but no word on whether or not the appeals court will hear this arguement.
Currently the status of San Onofre State Beach Trail 6 clothing optional section is still being used as such and there have been no citations or enforcement of the NO Nudity law.
Some of the signage that was posted has been taken down but done so by some people that obviously felt that without signage...there could be no enforcement. The destruction of state property doesn't make naturist look good and only fuels the states position that we don't intend to obey laws.
This situation can and will be won by the NAC and Friends of San Onofre Beach in court on legal grounds and in the public hearing forum should we ever get to that part in the process. We should, in the mean time, avoid destruction of signage that doesn't mean much, isn't being enforced and gives the authorities more ammo to use against us.......even if it wasn't "nudists" that did this.
|
|
|
|
Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
|
|
|