Nuisance definition

Hello,
I am the new President of our Homeowners Association and am inheriting some issues that were never disposed of by the previous president and board that are coming to light again.

My first question is: what constitutes a 'nuisance'? I realize that "things" are (such as trampolines, basketball goals, parked cars, ...), and noise and barking dogs are all nuisances. Is there a good resource that lists a 'nuisance' within a neighborhood?

We have a situation with two neighbors in which a member of the board has asked if one can be considered a 'nuisance' (the member of the board is speaking on behave of the neighbor who is having the problem). They let their dogs loose to do their business in the neighbors yard, they put their barbecue at the top of their drive and throw their used bones into the neighbor's bushes, they put rude (vulgar) signs on the front of their bar-b-q grill and truck windshield facing the neighbors house, .... Is this considered a nuisance or harassment? If it is a nuisance, then according to our covenants and restrictions "If a dispute or question arises as to what may be or become a nuisance, the issue shall be submitted to the Association's Board of Directors, whose decision shall be dispositive of such dispute or question."

Am I on the right track, that if the neighbor who this is happening to, comes to the board about this, then at that time we will make a decision as to whether it is a nuisance and what shall be done? But it is up to the neighbor to choose to submit this to us (which they have not) - not another board member or association member.

And, if they do submit it, what would be the best way to handle it? It seems that this would be a neighbor to neighbor dispute (and actually harassment) and as such the association should not get involved. On the other hand, we want to support all of our neighbors and do not want the situation to escalate any further.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thank you.

Well, for sure, your Board needs to come up with a policy statement, since your bylaws say the the Board determines the definition of nuisance.

When something is "on-going annoyance or causing trouble" (def) then the Board can step in. But it does not have to step in EVERY situation.

I think that the health, safety and well-being of the neighborhood should be the criteria.

Certainly dog do-do and food waste are health and safety issues, but stickers on a truck are to be ignored.

In any case, your Board has the say!
Good luck.

PS - Don't you have a neighborhood social committee that can handle this for you?

source: dictionary.law.com
nuisance
n. the unreasonable, unwarranted and/or unlawful use of property, which causes inconvenience or damage to others, either to individuals and/or to the general public. Nuisances can include noxious smells, noise, burning, misdirection of water onto other property, illegal gambling, unauthorized collections of rusting autos, indecent signs and pictures on businesses and a host of bothersome activities. Where illegal they can be abated (changed, repaired or improved) by criminal or quasi-criminal charges. If a nuisance interferes with another person's quiet or peaceful or pleasant use of his/her property, it may be the basis for a lawsuit for damages and/or an injunction ordering the person or entity causing the nuisance to desist (stop) or limit the activity (such as closing down an activity in the evening).

public nuisance
n. a nuisance which affects numerous members of the public or the public at large (how many people it takes to make a public is unknown), as distinguished from a nuisance which only does harm to a neighbor or a few private individuals. Example: a factory which spews out clouds of noxious fumes is a public nuisance but playing drums at three in the morning is a private nuisance bothering only the neighbors.

private nuisance
n. the interference with an individual's peaceful enjoyment of one's property, which can be the basis for a lawsuit both for damages caused by the nuisance and an order (injunction) against continuing the noxious (offensive) activity or condition. Examples: fumes from a factory above the legal limit, loud noises well above the norm, directing rain water onto another person's property, operating an auto repair business in a neighborhood zoned residential, or numerous barking dogs.

attractive nuisance doctrine
n. a legal doctrine which makes a person negligent for leaving a piece of equipment or other condition on property which would be both attractive and dangerous to curious children. These have included tractors, unguarded swimming pools, open pits, and abandoned refrigerators. Liability could be placed on the people owning or controlling the premises even when the child was a trespasser who sneaked on the property. Basically the doctrine was intended to make people careful about what dangerous conditions they left untended. Some jurisdictions (including California) have abolished the attractive nuisance doctrine and replaced it with specific conditions (e.g. open pit and refrigerators) and would make property owners liable only by applying rules of foreseeable danger which make negligence harder to prove.

Now with that information added to the post

"They let their dogs loose to do their business in the neighbors yard..." - Tell them to call animal control if they can take a picture- they will have to file and sign a complaint, but they are the ones who are going to be asked to testify if the complaint is not resolved.

"....rude (vulgar) signs on the front of their bar-b-q grill and truck windshield facing the neighbors house..." - From everything I have read, if the statements reference any "protected class status" they should take a picture, submit to HOA, and the Board will have to do something about it as it could be subject to the federal fair housing laws.

Susan's suggestion is absolutely in line - but also be aware that there are "jerks" who live in the world, who will read the resolution/rule and see where the line is and go right up and put their toe on it. - get the book "The No A--hole Rule" if your interesting in calculating the cost of such jerks.

Just watch the language issue and contact the local fair housing group to get their advice - you don't want the department of justice knocking on your door, telling you that you didn't do what you should have done.

Thank you everyone for your great feedback.

A few things.
. The area under "Nuisance" in our CC&Rs is very vague - it is what I put in my original email.
. The rude/vulgar wording that was encountered was not bumper stickers but a spray on paint on the grill and a handwritten note on the windshield - basically telling whoever to .....
. To the person who mentioned the local fair housing group and "... don't want them knocking on my door." I'm not sure if they are referring to doing something (with the offender) or not doing something (for the offended party).
. We are in the county and it doesn't have a leash law. I am under the same opinion this can vbe handled animal control.

I feel that the previous board should have done something when these occurrences happened. Right now, there isn't any specific issue except that the injured party is going to put in a fence to 'draw the line'. In fact, their request is what initiated this talk of a nuisance since they really don't want the fence but feel that it is the only thing that they can do at this time. The ARB wanted to help them out by seeing if the 'nuisance' clause be used.

I can definitely see how you can get wrapped up in the emotions of trying to do what is right for the association and yet getting caught up in 1 parties side and not stepping back to see where the other party's side is coming from. I can see a fine line between doing too much (the previous president basically policed the neighborhood) and not doing enough.

Thank you again for all your responses.
J

I wasn't clear on the ARB. We do allow fences (certain kinds). And they are not changing the fence quidelines because of this issue. It was just that one of the ARB members does not think that the fence will take are of the problem, and wanted us to look into whether the 'nuisance' clause could be applied (instead installing a fence that the neighbor doesn't even want to have but feel it's the only thing to do).
J