cityhall3.jpg4:32 PM: A ban on nudity in San Francisco was given final approval by the city’s Board of Supervisors today in a raucous meeting in which several people stripped naked in board chambers and one person was arrested.

The ordinance, authored by Supervisor Scott Wiener, prohibits nudity on city streets, sidewalks, plazas and other public spaces, with exceptions for permitted street fairs, parades and other events and for children under 5 years old.

The legislation was given initial approval by a 6-5 vote at the board’s Nov. 20 meeting and was passed by the same vote this afternoon.

Supervisor Jane Kim initially gave the legislation a seventh vote of support today but later rescinded her vote, saying she was distracted and accidentally voted yes.

John Avalos, David Campos, Eric Mar and Christina Olague were the other four supervisors to oppose the ban.

Wiener thanked the rest of his colleagues for approving the ordinance, telling reporters it was “a very difficult decision” with “strong views on both sides.”

Several men and women stripped down after the first vote this afternoon and began yelling at the supervisors.

A total of four women and three men were led out of board chambers by sheriff’s deputies, who draped blankets over them since public nudity is not allowed at City Hall.

One female protester, whose name was not immediately available, was arrested on suspicion of interfering with lawful business and resisting arrest, sheriff’s Chief Deputy Kathy Gorwood said. The other six protesters were released.

The group of nudists was still holding a small rally outside City Hall late this afternoon.

Once the ordinance is signed by Mayor Ed Lee, who has expressed support for it, the law will take effect on Feb. 1. However, four of the nudists have filed a lawsuit seeking to block the legislation on constitutional grounds in a case that is still pending in federal court.

Wiener called it “a very weak lawsuit,” saying that courts have repeatedly upheld anti-nudity laws in other jurisdictions in California.

Violators of the ordinance would face initial fines of $100 that would increase for additional offenses, but they would not have to register as sex offenders.

3:30 PM: A ban on nudity in San Francisco was given final approval by the city’s Board of Supervisors today in a raucous meeting at which several people stripped naked in board chambers.

The ordinance, which will prohibit nudity on city streets, sidewalks, plazas and other public spaces, was initially passed 6-5 during the board’s Nov. 20 meeting and was approved again this afternoon by the same vote.

Supervisor Jane Kim initially gave the legislation a seventh vote of support but later rescinded her vote, saying she had been distracted and accidentally voted yes.

Supervisors John Avalos, David Campos, Eric Mar and Christina Olague were the other four supervisors to oppose the ban.

Several men and women stripped down after the first vote this afternoon and began yelling at the supervisors. They were led out of board chambers by sheriff’s deputies, who draped blankets over them since public nudity is not allowed at City Hall.

One protester was taken into custody for resisting arrest, according to Christina DiEdoardo, the attorney representing the group of nudists.

Once the legislation is signed by Mayor Ed Lee, who has expressed support for it, it will take effect on Feb. 1.

It allows exceptions for street fairs, parades and other permitted public events and does not apply to children under 5 years old.

Opponents of the ban have filed a lawsuit seeking to block the legislation on constitutional grounds, and that case is still pending in court.

Violators of the ordinance would face initial fines of $100 that would increase for additional offenses.

Dan McMenamin, Bay City News

Want more news, sent to your inbox every day? Then how about subscribing to our email newsletter? Here’s why we think you should. Come on, give it a try.

Please make sure your comment adheres to our comment policy. If it doesn't, it may be deleted. Repeat violations may cause us to revoke your commenting privileges. No one wants that!
  • Martin

    I would sign a petition to recall Scott Wiener. There are far more pressing issues that should/need to be addressed in District 8, yet this closet republican presses on with something that’s isn’t a quality-of-life issue.

  • Martin

    I would sign a petition to recall Scott Wiener. There are far more pressing issues that should/need to be addressed in District 8, yet this closet republican presses on with something that’s isn’t a quality-of-life issue.

  • Martin

    I would sign a petition to recall Scott Wiener. There are far more pressing issues that should/need to be addressed in District 8, yet this closet republican presses on with something that’s isn’t a quality-of-life issue.

  • Martin

    I would sign a petition to recall Scott Wiener. There are far more pressing issues that should/need to be addressed in District 8, yet this closet republican presses on with something that’s isn’t a quality-of-life issue.

  • Martin

    I don’t know why my comment appeared twice.

  • Martin

    I don’t know why my comment appeared twice.

  • Soonerdiver

    Could it be because you are a Democrat and feel a need to repeat yourself so that you might have a better understanding of what you think you might have said?

    To you this may not be a quality of life issue, but to others it is… as for Mr Wiener’s political leanings I really don’t think you have a say and to what closet he may be hiding in…

    Thank you Mr Wiener and the other board members for showing some ‘backbone’ in passing this legislation.

  • Soonerdiver

    Could it be because you are a Democrat and feel a need to repeat yourself so that you might have a better understanding of what you think you might have said?

    To you this may not be a quality of life issue, but to others it is… as for Mr Wiener’s political leanings I really don’t think you have a say and to what closet he may be hiding in…

    Thank you Mr Wiener and the other board members for showing some ‘backbone’ in passing this legislation.

  • Soonerdiver

    Could it be because you are a Democrat and feel a need to repeat yourself so that you might have a better understanding of what you think you might have said?

    To you this may not be a quality of life issue, but to others it is… as for Mr Wiener’s political leanings I really don’t think you have a say and to what closet he may be hiding in…

    Thank you Mr Wiener and the other board members for showing some ‘backbone’ in passing this legislation.

  • Soonerdiver

    Could it be because you are a Democrat and feel a need to repeat yourself so that you might have a better understanding of what you think you might have said?

    To you this may not be a quality of life issue, but to others it is… as for Mr Wiener’s political leanings I really don’t think you have a say and to what closet he may be hiding in…

    Thank you Mr Wiener and the other board members for showing some ‘backbone’ in passing this legislation.