Zoning Board Rules That Bathhouse Is Sex Club : Regulation: Decision means officials will seek to close Wilmington operation. Owner denies sex was allowed on the premises and blames actions on homophobia.

Los Angeles zoning officials have ruled that a gay bathhouse in Wilmington is functioning as a sex club, not a health spa. The decision Tuesday by the Zoning Board of Appeals means that the city will prepare a criminal case against the club and seek its closure in court.

In deciding against the club’s owner, Martin Benson, the appeals board found that the club violated city ordinances forbidding sexual entertainment clubs from being within 500 feet of churches, schools or residential neighborhoods. Testimony by a Los Angeles police officer who said he witnessed sexual activity at the club during an undercover visit there earlier this month was key to the board’s ruling.

Benson has denied that sex was allowed at the club.

The zoning board’s decision was prompted by complaints by Wilmington residents who argue that the club should be closed because it violates city zoning laws and has a corrupting influence on the city.

Benson told the board that the Wilmington residents are homophobic and have no actual complaint against his club’s patrons. But zoning officials did not agree.

“It think it’s just that it’s open sex in that club,” board member Chris Kezio said, explaining her decision to side with residents. “That’s why the citizens are against it.

“I think it’s the fact that young children know it’s there permanently that makes it difficult for adults,” Kezio said. “Its being there says it’s OK.”

*

The club, which has no formal name but is known as Wilmington, has faced closure before. In 1988, when the city tightened its laws governing such facilities, the club was given until 1991 to close. But Benson bought the club and promised that it would no longer allow sex on the premises.

The city, however, issued a second closure order in April after Los Angeles Police Department officers inspected the premises and reported sexual activity.

Benson appealed that order last summer, and at an August hearing, zoning administrator James Crisp said he did not have enough evidence to say that the club was used specifically for sexual encounters. Crisp allowed it to remain open.

Jo Ann Wysocki, president of the Wilmington Home Owners group, appealed Crisp’s decision to the zoning board of appeals. It was the appeal that prompted Tuesday’s ruling.

“It is our strong belief that this business does not enhance the community and, in fact, is viewed negatively by the majority of our community,” Wysocki said to the board. “We urge you to reverse the hearing examiner’s decision . . . and to rid us of this pestilence.”

*

Community sentiment against the club, however, did not sway the zoning board of appeals as much as the testimony of LAPD Vice Officer John Motto, who went to the club undercover as a patron.

On Nov. 3, Motto entered the club, took off his clothes, wrapped a towel around himself and inspected the premises.

Descending into the club basement, he told the board of appeals Tuesday, he saw men fondling themselves in and around 30 or so private rooms furnished with beds. Some of the doors to the rooms were closed and had towels stuffed in the keyholes. Some of the men invited Motto into their rooms.

A nude man lay on a couch in the basement’s lounge area masturbating while watching homosexual pornography on television, Motto said.

“When I sat down, three or four others came and sat next to me,” Motto said. “And when I got up to go they followed me.”

Benson remained impassive during Motto’s testimony, but the Wilmington residents in attendance muttered in disgust.

When it was his turn to speak, however, Benson accused Wilmington residents of wanting to close his business because it caters to gay people. In the club’s 19-year history, neither he nor the police had ever received any complaints about trouble caused by patrons, he said.

“And the thing that really irks me is when they say ‘Our kind” of people,” Benson said. “We are citizens of the United States and citizens of Los Angeles. I will be paying $8,000 in property taxes and I do contribute as much as these (Wilmington residents).”

Tuesday’s ruling does not automatically put Benson out of business in Wilmington.

Senior Building and Safety Inspector Dan Snyder said he will prepare a case to hand to the city attorney’s office. But to prepare the case properly, he said, the city must conduct another inspection of the club and document instances of sexual activity.

If none is found, the club will be able to stay open at its present location, Snyder said.

Benson, who says he has not been aware of any sexual activity in his club, vowed that he will redouble efforts to ensure that club patrons do not engage in such behavior on the premises. His lawyer, Roger J. Diamond, said his client might seek to overturn the zoning board’s decision on grounds that it was made improperly.

“The only thing the zoning board was supposed to do here today was to determine if the zoning administrator acted appropriately, given the testimony he had at the time,” Diamond said after the hearing. “They were not supposed to take new testimony and come to a decision.”

Diamond raised that objection during the hearing, but to no avail.

Some of the Wilmington residents at the hearing expressed frustration that their victory did not ensure that the club will close. Wysocki, however, said that, sooner or later, the closure will occur.

“Even if they do clean up their act for a while, there’s always afterward when they go back to doing business as usual,” Wysocki said. “And when they do that, we’ll be right there to (pounce) on them.”