It’s the middle of winter, and peeling off the layers of Patagonia to go skinny-dipping is the last thing any self-respecting Seattleite has on their mind. But nudists, and occasionally naked queer people, rejoice! There’s a new party in the legal fight over Denny Blaine Park, Seattle’s most beloved clothing-optional beach, and they have nothing to do with a prudish wealthy neighbor of the park doing whatever the opposite of sexting is with the mayor.
In early January, Friends of Denny Blaine (FoDB), a group formed in 2023 to represent beachgoers after that neighbor, Stuart Sloan, anonymously donated $1 million to build a playground on the grassy shelf overlooking the rocky shore and its many … moons, incorporated as a nonprofit. And on January 20, FoDB put its new nonprofit status to use by filing as an intervening party in a lawsuit against the city to shut down the park from arch-enemy Denny Blaine Park for All, the ironically-named coalition of wealthy neighbors that did not provide comment.
Denny Blaine Park for All claimed in-hand masturbation and nudity were out of hand. While beachgoers say neighbors were exaggerating, a judge was convinced and ordered the city to come up with a solution. To satisfy him, it erected a butt-ugly anti-masturbation fence (a wrinkled tarp strapped to a chainlink fence).
The court granted FoDB motion to intervene, making the nonprofit a formal party in the case, empowered to appeal court rulings, submit evidence, and fight directly for their cause.
“This is public land, and a lot of what people are asking for is that they just close the park,” says Jesse Swirl, one of FoDB’s elected co-leads. “I think that what happens with public land should be defined by the people who use it and care for it and keep it alive every day. When those decisions are made without us, then the best decisions aren’t being made. To be inclusive, we have to include all voices, not just the city and one party.”
On February 13, the judge could decide to resolve the suit without moving toward a full trial. Swirl didn’t say what they thought may happen, or what legal steps FoDB might take. But firm Perkins Coie is representing them pro bono. Perkins Coie did not return our requests for comment.
Swirl hopes the city tears down the wall he sees as an eyesore and hazard—someone could be hurt or harassed behind it, away from friendly eyes. If the court rules that some sort of partition must remain, FoDB hopes it can be replaced with sustainable foliage, more like a community fig leaf than steel underwear.
“We just want to make sure that our community is safe, and protected. And where the fence lies, I just don’t see how that can happen.”
But if worse comes to worse, perhaps beachgoers can just spend this summer gumming the wall. (And no, that’s not a euphemism.)
Daniel Renfrow
Source link