In the case of Denny Blaine Park for All v. City of Seattle, a coalition of neighboring lakefront property owners is targeting the long-standing clothing-optional use of the public shoreline at the historically recognized LGBTQ+ nude beach, seeking a permanent court order to completely prohibit nudity or close the park entirely.
“In an attempt to erase that history and fundamentally change the long-standing
character of the Park, Plaintiff Denny Blaine Park for All distorts the public nuisance doctrine
beyond recognition,” the trial brief from the Friends of Denny Blaine community group defending the park begins. “Plaintiff’s claim is, at bottom, that lawful, non-sexual nudity at an
established public nude beach is a nuisance.”
The trial brief filed by the intervenor group represented by Perkins Coie promises an aggressive defense of the beach’s four-decade history as a sanctuary for the LGBTQ+ and naturist communities along with the city’s efforts to defend the public space.
Supporters argue that simple, non-sexual public nudity is entirely lawful. FDB outlines that “RCW 9A.88.010 prohibits only ‘open and obscene’ exposure with a ‘lascivious’ or sexual element,” directly invalidating the public nuisance framework pushed by the plaintiffs’ legal counsel, Foster Pepper.
How we got here
The case comes two and a half years after a ploy to add a children’s play area paid for by an “anonymous donor” to the popular nude beach park was stopped in its tracks by public outcry. Neighbors reported illegal drug use and sexual activity around the park as well as more mundane complaints around issues like parking and public urination.
It was later revealed that text messages showed Bruce Harrell championed the “philanthropic position” of multimillionaire mall developer and Denny Blaine resident Stuart Sloan as the then-mayor pushed officials to address nudity in the park that has served as a gathering space for queer and naturist communities for decades.
In April 2025, the neighbors sued the city over its management of the lakefront public space.
“It is now a regional venue for criminal and uncivil behavior that includes public masturbation, public sex and other types of indecent exposure, drug use, unlawful public nudity, environmental damage to the shoreline, and scofflaw parking that prevents fire trucks and ambulances from reaching neighborhood homes,” the complaint from lawyers representing the Denny Blaine Park for All “association of concerned neighbors” read.
Along with the legal pressure, the Seattle Police Department responded to neighbor complaints with “directed patrols” at the park including incidents in which police targeted legal behavior. Last May under public pressure and an OPA investigation, SPD Chief Shon Barnes ended the patrols.
Joy Hollingsworth, who represents the area around the park in the District 3 seat on the city council, told CHS at the time she had been in “active communication” with the Seattle Police Department, Seattle Parks and Recreation, and the Mayor’s Office about the enforcement, and expressed her concerns over the situation, “underscoring the need for a thoughtful, community-centered approach moving forward.”
In August, Seattle Parks added new signs and fences to the park establishing a “nude zone” at the beach — though somebody immediately tried to tear the new fencing down.
In October, a judge ruled against the immediate closure of the park as the case moved toward trial, saying the city was displaying “reasonable efforts in abatement” around illegal activity at the park.
2026 began with a boost in legal power for the park’s defense as the court proceeded toward trial.
CHS reported in January as the Friends group filed to become “an intervening party” represented pro bono by law firm Perkins Coie in the lawsuit brought by a group of anonymous neighbors and property owners against the city over the longtime queer and nude hangout.
In the court’s most recent ruling, the judge sided with the Friends group and the city, confirming that legal toplessness could continue at Denny Blaine after the group said private security hired by neighbors has been telling people to cover up and reporting nudity to police.
Last August, the park was filled for a puppet show and protest
The trial begins
With the trial set to begin, the FDB has outlined its legal defense of the park: “Simple, non-sexual nudity at Denny Blaine is lawful, historic, and not a public nuisance under Washington law.”
The group’s brief names primary complainant Sloan, a serial property-tax appellant who acquired his neighborhood home in 1991 after renting in the area. FDB says Sloan rebuilt his home despite knowing the park’s character, and funded the masked proposal for a children’s playground to displace parkgoers.
According to the trial brief, “Mr. Sloan’s property has only limited sightlines into the Park, and so he affirmatively seeks evidence of alleged misconduct including by directing his retained security service to photograph all nude parkgoers and any purportedly objectionable conduct.”
Other named property owners include David Rinn, who the group says admitted in depositions that he knew the shoreline was historically nicknamed “Dykiki” and a “topless lesbian beach” before closing on his adjacent home for $5.68 million in 2012. FDB says Rinn twice petitioned for downward property valuation adjustments before turning around and selling the home in 2021.
The buyer was Dr. Frederick Moll, a medical professional whose primary residence is in California. Moll bought the property and joined the anti-nudity legal push despite having actively signed a neighborhood petition complaining about the park years prior, the group says.
FDB says it also intends to introduce expert testimony from Michael Houser, Washington’s State Architectural Historian, who will defend the park’s inclusion on the Washington Heritage Register.
To counter neighbor claims of psychological harm, Dr. Kevin Delucio will testify on the profound psychological and body-positive benefits the space provides to transgender, non-binary, and asexual individuals.
Criminological analysis from Dr. Loren Atherley of the Seattle Police Department will testify that there is no causal link between public nudity and crime, characterizing the neighbors’ legal crusade as a localized “moral panic.”
The case will not be decided by a jury of Denny Park-goer and neighbor peers. In Washington, claims seeking equitable relief — such as a permanent injunction to ban an activity or close a public park — are decided directly by a judge.
To protect this critical public space, the defense urges Judge Samuel Chung to deny the severe overreach of a total ban or closure, noting that “each of Plaintiff’s principal witnesses voluntarily acquired property next to the Park with knowledge actual or constructive of the Park’s longstanding use as a nude beach.”
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you. Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month — or choose your level of support 
