The first week of the Denny Blaine Park trial has concluded, and it was spent on neighbors and their lawyers making the case that the nude beach is an out-of-control public nuisance.
The trial is existential for a legendary, decades-old queer hangout. If neighbors get their way, the city could be forced to ban nudity at the beach or even close it.
Understanding what is going on here requires a preamble: The trial is really the culmination of a years-long battle over a 200-foot-wide, three-level waterfront park where people, many of them gay and trans, have enjoyed taking their clothes off. That park is at the end of a cul-de-sac/roundabout in one of the city’s wealthiest Lake Washington neighborhoods. In 2023, the beach’s millionaire next door neighbor and U Village owner Stuart Sloan anonymously pledged $1 million to build a playground on the beach, and officials in Bruce Harrell’s administration, as well as the former mayor himself, met with Sloan multiple times to discuss plans later foiled by an outraged queer community. For a time, that seemed like the end of the conflict, but no.
There were disagreements between beachgoers and neighbors about where nudity should be allowed at the nude beach, and how much lewd behavior is going on. Neighbors posted private security at the beach, and after they sued the city, alleging the beach was a public nuisance, King County Superior Court Judge Samuel Chung ordered the city to come up with a plan to curb urination and masturbation at Denny Blaine. The city settled on a big ugly fence that blocks the view from the parking lot, but interestingly enough, it was the first time Seattle had explicitly allowed nudity in a public park. Washington State law explicitly allows topless nudity for the breasted and the flat-chested, a fact Judge Chung reiterated in court last month after the neighbors’ private security told topless people perceived as women to go into the clothing optional area. The legality of full-frontal is more nuanced because while nudity in and of itself is not criminalized, it can be deemed indecent exposure if it is “open and obscene,” intended to cause alarm to others and likely to cause a reasonable affront to someone else. That is why some public nudity, such as during Fremont’s solstice parade, is considered legally protected.
Dissatisfied with the fence, which they say does nothing at all to stop masturbation, neighbors group Denny Blaine Park for All pushed for a bench trial. Judge Chung granted the petition, and allowed Friends of Denny Blaine, the beachgoers group, to become a third party in the case.
So the weeks-long trial is broken into three segments, with plaintiffs speaking first this week, then the city, respondents, and then Friends of Denny Blaine.
The trial began on May 27 with the plaintiffs’ arguments and witness testimony. Lawyers for Denny Blaine Park for All showed Judge Chung videos and photos of naked people at Denny Blaine, including evidence of masturbation and oral sex acts. The videos were recorded from next door, where Sloan, who seldom has his picture taken, and his wife Molly Nordstrom live.
Sloan had a lot to say on the stand.
He was questioned by his lawyers about the purchase and construction of his house as well as his lobbying efforts against nudity at Denny Blaine. Sloan described an instance of trespassing by park users in which he later discovered they had used his jacuzzi all night. That case occurred before the abatement fence was installed, and Sloan did not recall if the man he saw was naked or just in a speedo. He also said that on nice days, he regularly sees naked people paddle or float by his house, which looks over the water.
Sloan said shortly after the public learned of the $1 million pledge for the playground, someone had spray painted “Kill Stuart Sloan” near his home, and that protesters have chanted “Fuck Stuart Sloan” outside his gate. After Sloan and his neighbors sued the city, he hired 24-hour security for his mansion.
Nordstrom claimed seeing public sex and nudity have taken a toll on her. Whenever she has people over, there is a chance they will be exposed, she said. Portions of the fenced off area can be seen from the top floors of their mansion, she said, and it is impossible to leave their house without passing by the park.
“I’m so sick and tired of this,” Nordstrom said. “I can’t have my grandkids over.”
Many of the photos presented by the plaintiffs were taken by Sloan, Nordstrom, and their house manager Carrie Christensen.
Park users say the videos are isolated incidents of bad behavior. In a pre-trial brief, Friends of Denny Blaine argued that masturbation and urination happen all over Seattle and that “there is no evidence supporting the assumption that the presence of simple nudity increases this activity.” The group also called Denny Blaine Park heavily surveilled because neighbors on both sides of the park have installed cameras pointed toward the beach. They’re plainly visible.
Neighbors testified that the popularity of the nude beach had decreased their quality of life.
Sarah Richmond, a mother of a teenager who lives just north of Denny Blaine, said beachgoers park in front of her driveway, and that naked people often walk around the neighborhood.
Richmond and others suggested Denny Blaine was a low-profile destination for topless sunbathing, and it has spun out of control. Friends of Denny Blaine say the nudity is not new, and neighbors should’ve been aware of that naked truth.
Real estate agent Betsy Losh, who has brokered the sales of several multi-million dollar properties adjacent to the park, said Denny Blaine has become “a Mecca for people who want to have and do lewd behaviors.”
The plaintiffs also called several outside witnesses to the stand. These included Jeff Darrow, an employee of the King County Assessor’s office, who explained that 12 properties in the area had been given 10 percent reductions on their valuations due to their proximity to the park and one property that was granted a 20 percent discount. Dr. Stephanie Wolf, a licensed psychologist and expert witness for the plaintiffs, discussed the potential impacts witnessing nudity could have on a bystander. She said that for some people with past trauma, seeing unexpected nudity could be shocking or even triggering.
The plaintiffs also argued that the fence at Denny Blaine violated the guidelines of Seattle’s Shoreline Master Program, which say development near the coast must preserve a view corridor from public streets to the water.
However, during cross examination, the Parks employee who submitted the permit for the fence, David Graves, said that permit has not yet been approved by Seattle’s Department of Constructions and Inspections—and any appeal would be premature. If the fence was replaced with greenery, or hedges, the stipulations about lake view would not apply.
Next week, the City of Seattle will defend its abatement plan and say that it is working to reduce bad behavior at the park. It will also seek to brand the plaintiffs as unreasonable, uncollaborative and unwilling to accept “anything short of eliminating the lawful and longstanding nude use of the Park.”
