San Diego, CA
Two yoga teachers sue over San Diego's stricter beach enforcement
Two San Diego yoga instructors are suing the city over its stricter new enforcement on classes at parks and beaches, saying it violates First Amendment free-speech rights.
The lawsuit by Steve Hubbard and Amy Baack, filed June 3 in federal court, also contends the city didn’t give the public adequate opportunity to weigh in before enforcement began last month.
The crackdown, which applies to classes of four people or more, came as part of amendments the City Council approved in February to a much wider city law governing street vendors.
That ordinance, approved in March 2022, requires permits and includes health and safety regulations and partially bans street vendors in parks, at beaches and in certain pedestrian-heavy areas, though they are allowed to keep operating on some cross streets and side streets.
In La Jolla, the law aimed to block vending year-round at Scripps Park, the Children’s Pool, the Coast Boulevard boardwalk between Jenner and Cuvier streets, and on main thoroughfares in some business districts, such as the La Jolla Shores boardwalk.
Faced with claims by many operators that their activities were protected by the First Amendment, city officials over the past winter analyzed which vendors were eligible for free-speech protections.
Among the activities deemed protected are political efforts, selling self-made art, fortune telling, face painting, singing and street performing.
Yoga and other fitness-related classes didn’t make the cut, nor did dog training or selling food, clothing, jewelry, soaps, oils and creams.
But the lawsuit argues that city officials didn’t adequately explain the potential impact on yoga classes.
“It is unclear how and when these provisions specifically targeting the free teaching of yoga in city parks were added to this ordinance amendment,” the 16-page lawsuit states. “Yoga was not mentioned in the staff report, agenda or minutes of this meeting.”
The lawsuit says the city did not seek to gather public input in its traditional ways.
“There appear to have been no town council or planning group recommendations on this surreptitiously inserted provision either, nor any community input or public comment whatsoever, because the general public and stakeholders were never given notice that this was even being considered,” the suit says.
The suit also contends that yoga classes are protected free speech.
“Plaintiffs are engaged in pure speech, teaching yoga to anyone who wishes to listen and participate,” the suit states. “They are not charging fees and they are not blocking or restricting access to any public space.”
The issue of blocking or restricting access is important because city officials say the crackdown on yoga and other activities has been motivated by concerns about public access and safety.
Kohta Zaiser, Mayor Todd Gloria’s City Council affairs adviser, said last month that some classes are so popular that they take over parks or beach areas. “We’re talking about dominating parking lots and rows and rows of people,” he said.
City officials say that while analyzing the street vendor amendments, they became aware that many residents were quietly upset about the increasing commercial use of their favorite parks and beaches — including yoga classes — and subsequent impacts on beach access, crowding and parking.
That prompted city officials to target activities that in some cases they contend have had restrictions already on the books but that hadn’t been enforced in years.
Hubbard says he has been cited twice for his classes in Pacific Beach. Baack says she has been threatened with citations if she continues her free yoga classes in Ocean Beach.
Hubbard and Baack say they’ve been holding classes for years without any problems.
Their lawsuit also disputes city claims that permits can be obtained for yoga classes in parks and beaches.
“In practice, the city refuses to issue any permits for this activity in any city park except Mission Bay Park, Balboa Park and Liberty Station,” the suit states.
Another lawsuit over the city’s vendor-related enforcement was filed in early May by artist William Dorsett and street performer Rogelio Flores, who say the amended law violates their free-speech rights.
They argue they should be able to operate without restriction instead of being limited to 4-by-8-foot “expressive activity” pads that are open to operators with free-speech protections in coastal parks, including La Jolla’s Scripps Park, Kellogg Park and Children’s Pool.
— La Jolla Light staff contributed to this report. ◆
San Diego, CA
Former City Manager, Jack McGrory: Straight Talk About San Diego, Part 2
Skip to content
San Diego, CA
Feds Will Finally Help Oceanside 73 Years After Admitting Fault for Its Disappearing Beaches
When the U.S. military built the Camp Pendleton Harbor complex just north of Oceanside in 1942, it didn’t set out to steal Oceanside’s beaches for decades to come.
But that’s exactly what’s been happening for the past 73 years.
In 1953, the federal government admitted that construction of harbor jetties at Camp Pendleton was directly contributing to the erosion of Oceanside’s beaches. The jetties block the ocean’s currents that carry sand along the coast, which causes Oceanside’s beaches south of the military base to lose out on sand that would have naturally flowed to them.
Rising sea levels caused by climate change also play a part, but in Oceanside, naturally occurring erosion has been exacerbated by the military base.
But the military is only just now stepping in to help. While the government’s admission of guilt seemed like a win, it somewhat backfired; because the federal government was on the hook for the entire cost, the project got swallowed by a bureaucratic black hole. Tired of waiting, Oceanside launched its own plan to save its beaches, one the military now refuses to help fund.
What Took so Long
In 2000, Congress passed a law mandating the Army Corps to study how it could restore Oceanside’s beaches to pre-harbor conditions.
The government was supposed to pay for the study and complete it in 44 months. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers finally released the draft report of the study earlier this month – 26 years later.“Studies require both authorization and funding,” said Shawn Davis, public affairs specialist for the Army Corps, via email. “While the study was initially authorized in 2000, there have been gaps in funding that have impacted the timeline to complete the study.”
Those funding gaps happened until 2022 when Rep. Mike Levin, D-San Juan Capistrano, whose district includes much of North County’s coastal cities, helped secure $1.8 million in federal funding and another $2.27 million in 2025 to complete the study.
So, why did the funding dry up for so long at the federal level? According to Davis, “federal projects can only proceed and continue with appropriations from Congress.”
In other words, the project was stuck in bureaucratic limbo; it had the legal authorization to exist, but it couldn’t secure funds in a highly competitive budget that favored bigger projects.
Jayme Timberlake, Oceanside’s coastal zone administrator, told Voice of San Diego that the city and its representatives tried lobbying Congress for years, but there are often a lot of unknowns when it comes to Army Corps projects.
“It’s very political. It’s very much dependent on what the rest of the nation is going through and where the funds are going and how they’re getting allocated,” Timberlake said. “It’s very tough to navigate and there’s a lot of risk associated with it, meaning we can’t really rely on it.”
Other coastal cities received a plan before Oceanside did: The Corps completed similar studies for two sand replenishment efforts. One is a joint effort in Encinitas and Solana Beach, the other in San Clemente. Congress has already approved both of these projects for sand deliveries every seven to 10 years for the next 50 years.
“The difference is that the … projects that are happening in Encinitas, Solana Beach and San Clemente were initiated by a request to the Army Corps from these cites, and they were cost shared,” Timberlake said.
That means these cities are paying 35 percent of the costs, and the federal government is paying 65 percent. That also applies to sand deliveries every seven to 10 years. These types of projects can cost upwards of $100 million.
“In Oceanside, our mitigation project, at least the study was not cost shared. It was the full responsibility of the federal government because they admitted fault,” Timberlake said. “So, it’s really unfortunate that the mitigation for Oceanside beaches didn’t happen before those requested projects.”
Meanwhile, Oceanside’s Sand Was Disappearing

While Oceanside officials and residents waited for the government’s help, the city’s beaches were rapidly disappearing before their eyes.
Previous Army Corps studies estimate the Harbor has caused a loss of 1.4 to 1.6 million cubic yards of sand volume from Oceanside’s beaches since 1942, with some areas retreating at a rate of 6.6 feet per year. That’s 84 years of consistent and severe sand loss.
El Niño conditions over the years have also exacerbated the problem.
“There was such a dramatic loss of sand that the community really started asking for solutions,” Timberlake said. “There’s a whole generation that has been able to use the beach and then have it be gone, so it has triggered a lot of community interest.”
After 20 years of waiting, Oceanside decided to take matters into its own hands.
“Once there was momentum to fix the problem itself and not rely on the Army Corps any further, the city did a feasibility study in 2020, and that study really unearthed all the possible things that Oceanside could do in the short and long term to fix its beaches,” Timberlake said.
A few years later, city officials held a competition that brought together three design teams from around the world to develop sand retention pilot projects. They chose a concept that includes the construction of two headlands that will aim to stabilize sand on the back beach, with an offshore artificial reef aimed at slowing down nearshore erosive forces.
The project is called RE:Beach and it’s already funded up to the construction phase, Timberlake said. The city has applied for a few different grants to cover construction, which will cost upwards of $60 million.
Timberlake said the city asked the Army Corps to help fund the rest of the RE:Beach project, and the Army Corps denied the request.
The Government’s Plan

Oceanside’s RE:Beach project and the federal government’s recent recommendations won’t conflict with each other, Timberlake said. In fact, the two projects will complement one another.
The Army Corps’ draft feasibility report identified beach nourishment (a lot of sand) as the tentatively selected plan to restore Oceanside’s beaches.
It calls for dredging 4 million cubic yards of sand from an offshore borrow site and then placing it along Oceanside’s beaches, with the goal of sustaining a minimum 85-foot wide beach from Oceanside Harbor south to Buena Vista Lagoon. Sand replenishment would be 1 million cubic yards the first cycle, then repeated every 10 years.
Realistically, though, it could be another couple decades before Oceanside’s beaches start receiving sand, Timberlake said.
That’s because there are other competing projects the Army Corps is working on. Plus,, Congress still has to appropriate funding for the rest of the project to move forward once the feasibility study is completed. Initial costs of construction are currently estimated to be $243,540,000, Davis, spokesperson for the Army Corps, said via email.
It’s still unclear if the government will cover the full costs of construction and the subsequent sand renourishments for Oceanside, but Levin told Voice he thinks it’s unlikely.
“I will advocate for every penny to come from the federal government, given that the government did acknowledge responsibility,” Levin said. “But I do also know how the Army Corps works, and it’s very likely they’ll want some sort of cost share.”
Meanwhile, the Trump administration is proposing major funding cuts to the Army Corps’ budget for fiscal year 2027. If those cuts are approved by Congress, it could have an impact on projects like this one.
Related Posts
San Diego, CA
Mischief San Diego Comic-Con 2026 Exclusive Pins
-
Utah28 seconds agoUtah firefighter fears job loss after answering wildfire call
-
Vermont5 minutes agoPolice searching for missing Troy woman
-
Virginia12 minutes agoVirginia to allow recreational marijuana to be sold in retail stores beginning in 2027
-
Washington15 minutes ago
Port Washington weekly vigils honor community members arrested by ICE
-
Wisconsin20 minutes ago3 dead after crash involving UTV, truck in western Wisconsin
-
West Virginia27 minutes agoJudge blocks West Virginia SNAP soda ban, restoring benefits for soft drinks
-
Wyoming30 minutes agoAt 6,000-year-old crossing, Gov. Gordon OKs Wyoming’s first-ever designated pronghorn migration route
-
Crypto35 minutes ago
Consumer alert issued for Bitcoin cryptocurrency ATMs