New Dress Code at Lakelands Pool

Anyone headed to the Lakelands pool this year will have to abide by a new dress code.

The board of directors voted on March 14 in favor of a new requirement that anyone at the pool must be wearing attire that is “family friendly.”

This was in response to a request by the community’s pool committee targeted at thong bathing suits. The committee felt that while there was not a huge problem with thong-clad bathers, the pool management company RSV should have regulations in case they received resident complaints about the swimwear style.

Committee chairman Paul Lumsden said thong suits were not a “big issue” but said on a couple of occasions pool-goers complained when bathers wore the skimpy suits.

“In a family-friendly environment like this a thong is inappropriate, and we felt it ought to be reflected in the rules,” he said.

Board President Andy Inkeles and Vice President Mike Aubrey disagreed.

“I do not want to restrict people’s rights,” Aubrey said.

The committee had sought a regulation specifically saying that thongs were not permitted at the Lakelands pool; however the board voted instead to require bathers to wear “proper attire for a family friendly environment.”

Inkeles questioned the interpretation of “proper attire.”

“You go to Miami, and there are lots of people in thongs. It is our interpretation of personal expression that I feel should be protected,” he said.

Aubrey stated he wished to be notified if RSV employees force a bather to leave due to a violation of the proper attire rule.

“This rule is ambiguous,” he said.


3 comments for “New Dress Code at Lakelands Pool

  1. Jay Horman
    April 8, 2011 at 11:53 am

    Good stuff! a few points:

    1. (seriously) While it is a little silly, there’s good reason to have such a rule, and keep it vague. It is the same principle as the Supreme Court upholding pornography restrictions but leaving the definition as community defined and “I know it when I see it.” The whole purpose is to be able to address the absurd case (a man going bottomless for instance) and being able to point to a rule for fixing that onsite, then allowing the debate to continue offsite.

    Without a rule, there might not be a recourse at the time, and the person could make the case that they paid their dues and have a right to the pool, and there’s nothing that says what he can or can’t wear. And, he’d be right. Such a rule allows the issue to be addressed and is the norm in such places (Disney, for instance, is pretty strict about this.)

    Now, the question is, will the rule ever be invoked? I hope not – it shouldn’t have to be. And a dislike of another’s look shouldn’t be reason to invoke the rule. But it should be there for quick action in the obvious cases. If the pendulum swings too far and people start being booted for ugliness, mismatched clothing, etc- then address that issue.

    I’m not one for more rules. But a general cap for decorum isn’t the end of the world.

    2. (jokingly) Kathy, can I expect you’ll be there on Memorial Day in your patriotic thong, maybe with “right to bare arms” in grease paint across your back? :) You really should make this stand. I support you! I’ll be there in my wetsuit, just to provide a counterpoint. Solidarnosc!

    3. (seriously) To some degree, the irony is that creating a rule (and an article) probably draws attention to this and *may* cause someone to push the envelope who might not have before. I hope not. But there’s the classic story of a guy in Garrett Park who showed up naked to a neighborhood parade, protesting the food selection at the BBQ earlier in the day. You just never know.

    4. (jokingly) I’m kicking myself for having missed the board meeting; I would have loved to see Andy and Mike takes stances in sort-of defense of the thong wearers. I might have stood up and called for a more in-depth investigation; a kind of tiger team to really uncover the facts and explore the possible violations. ;)

    5. (seriosuly) I don’t see this as too embarassing. Sometimes things have to be addressed, each resident has a right to be heard and ultimately the board’s job is to act prudently in the best interest of the neighborhood at large. But I’d be lying if I said I didn’t smile my way through the article!

    Thanks Krista, good stuff.

  2. Kathy McKee
    April 8, 2011 at 8:59 am

    The fact that something so RIDICULOUS had to be discussed at the Lakelands board level is embarrassing to me. Are we to assume that whomever made such a stink about policing for “family friendly attire” at the pool doesn’t watch t.v., go to the movies, view the internet, or even leave his/her house? Have they only witnessed ‘proper attire’ in their world??? Get real! What MUST readers in our neighborhoods think of us???

    • Kathy McKee
      April 8, 2011 at 9:00 am

      I meant ‘other’ neighborhoods in the last sentence…

Comments are closed.