Enforceable Landscaping Rules

Reasonableness depends on who you ask - what's reasonable to you or I may be different from another. As far as enforcement goes, the key is fairness and consistency. You can't beingvtge hammer down on one homeowner but tiptoe around another because he or she threatens lawsuit. Anyone can sue, but you have to prove your case and win - something a lot of people forget and then they're stunned when they crash and burn in court.

The best you can do is make sure everyone knows what's expected of them, how ruke enforcement will work, the appeals process, etc. Once you get your policy establish, adopt to through a formal resolution during an open board meeting and send copies to everyone with an effective date. Some people will test you, but that's when you stick to your guns. Once you win a few cases, people will see 5hat tge board means business and might think twice before FAFO (you know what I mean!)

It's OK to fine, but first you need to read your documents to see if this is allowed, as well as state law. For example, the documents might say the board can enact additional rules that flesh out the documents and so you should be able to enact a fining schedule. On the other hand your state HOA laws might put a cap on how much the fine can be or disallow them entirely. That's why you should talk to your attorney as you get underway because you want all this to stand up in court.

Personally I think if you're going to fine people it should be pased on what it might ultimately cost the association to correct the problem, along with the printing and postage needed to send notices, especially if you have to send it certified with a return receipt. One way to approach this is to consider what the city or county would fine for overgrown vegetation - you could copy that fining schedule and send it to homeowners. In fact, why not look at what the city requires and adopt that as the community standard, or at least use it as a starting point?

Until then, try calling the city about the abandoned house- that has to be some sort of code violation and the city or county could file a lien against the property. That won't guarantee tge problem will go away quickly, but it's a start. Your attorney can also do a search to see who owns the house and try to contact him/her/it and then review your options if tge association decides to clean thus 70, put a lien against the house for the costs

As for the other house, you should have already sent the owner a nastygram requesting that he clear up tge area because it's encroaching on the common area. Give him 30 days to fix it and if not, send a stronger letter with a copy to the association attorney and a 15 day deadline. Offer him an appeals process if he wants to explain himself. After that, turn this over to the association attorney. You should tell the owner that if the association has to pursue legal remedies, he will be responsible for reimbursement of the association's legal expenses as well as the cleanup costs.

That's what our board tried to do. That would be trespass.

I believe this is unenforceable. A rule can't be adopted that eliminates a property right...in this case the fundamental right to exclude others.

Most HOA’s have the authority to enter a lot, address the rule violation and charge the homeowner.

I would consult with an arborist in your area that can give you guidance on what trees, shrubs and flowers to plant.

Trees can be a very tricky area because tree root love storm and sewer drains and you do not want a mess on your hands.
Some trees have invasive root systems that don't necessarily attack sewer and storm pipes, their roots pose a tripping hazard.

Not in Maryland. See my post of earlier today.

Already been there, done,that.

If weeds get too high, contact the local authorities (might be the health department, might be a different department).

They have far more authority than the HOA and will address the issue if needed.

My previous association did that for one property. There was a large green notice taped to the door saying fix or be fined and the county would fix.

Amazingly, there was never an issue with that property maintaining their lawn again.

" - At the risk of second-guessing you (and others on this group may disagree with what I’m going to say): has your HOA reached out to the two neighbors and asked them what is going on with the state of their property? Granted, it takes skill to make this a low-key conversation that doesn’t get anyone’s back up. It strikes me that yours is a small-ish community that has been around for a long time, and thus many of your residents might know each other well enough to have an effective conversation on the topic. Perhaps you’ve already done this. Or perhaps you have good reasons for *not* doing it. But it strikes me as something to think about.

- you specifically asked about enforcement. The governing documents of my HOA do allow for mgmt/Board members to inspect properties when required - when a fence has fallen down, for instance, or when there may be some hazard. If this were challenged in court, I have no idea how it would go. Living where I do in Texas, my primary concern would be that a homeowner might confront a work crew with a gun.

- I am not sure what else is going on in your neighborhood, but 16 homes / 35 years and you’ve had no cause to enact landscaping rules? If it is only these two properties that are an issue, I’d really be more interested in attempting to reach out and help the owners deal with the problems on an individual basis (if possible) versus putting together a set of rules and enforcement stuff.

- I’m especially curious about the ‘abandoned’ property: is the owner ill? That has happened at least once in my neighborhood, and the children were attempting to help out but were clueless about (in this instance) paying back-dues. Once they were informed they immediately brought everything current. I don’t know what it’s like there, but around here there are large numbers of lawn services that will do basic landscape maintenance on a weekly or monthly basis; I naively wonder if someone were to suggest engaging with such a service, that they might say “good idea” and do so. (and ride off into the sunset and live happily ever after, I know, I know). Have they been keeping up on their dues / taxes / insurance?"

To shed a little light on this situation: the "abandoned" property has been vacant since the owner died 7 years ago. He passed ownership to his son, who lives in an almost identical but separate HOA development (16 single family homes) two blocks to the North of ours. The son's home is meticulously maintained; indeed, I'd say it is one of the most attractive properties in his HOA. However, the son appears to be a rather petty sort; when he was recently denied reelection to the BOD there, he decided he'd leave his trash can in the road and just leave trimmings from his plants on the adjoining common area. This caused that HOA President to call me and ask what our landscape appearance rules were (they had none too). This son is in his late fifties, and could easily employ a service to maintain his "abandoned" property. But he won't.

This HOA, since its inception, has been run much like a club without much attention to the rather minor (from my viewpoint) rules that establish and maintain a pleasing aesthetic, essential to maintaining property values. Thus, no rules on landscape appearance. A few homeowners have constructed hardscapes in adjoining common areas without proper approval (in our case, that would have required unanimous approval by all lot owners and never would have been granted). Exterior painting of homes in many cases has been done without approved colors. Planting beds have been enlarged by homeowners into the common areas. When I was elected President last October, having only lived here for 4 months at that point, I found our registered agent (in Maryland, a "resident agent") had been dead for 20 years. There was zero knowledge in the outgoing BOD of the Maryland HOA law; no reserve planning had been done (indeed, no one knew what "reserve planning" was). Much of routine maintenance on HOA assets was accomplished by an enthusiastic homeowner , who, unfortunately, lacked skills equal to his enthusiasm. I could go on, but to sum up, there's been a drip-drip-drip of decline here for many years. My goal is to stop the decline, first, and then climb back to the top.

These landscape issues are part of the drip drip drip. Finally, about that Laurel. We had some good luck, in that the person with that home is moving. When I make up the "Resale Packet" for the home, I'll indicate the new homeowner may cut it back, or elect to have the HOA do it. The latter action would already be covered by our Landscaping contract.

Cities have police power; associations don’t. That’s why it’s not a trespass if the city does it.

Our city has very little in the way of appearance standards such as those needed in this situation. They don’t care if you are raising weeds as long as your grass is kept cut below a foot. Of course, this being an HOA, the grass is cut weekly around all homes, even those surrounded by weed filled beds and overgrown shrubs.

And if you go back and read the quote I posted from our CC&R’s, you’ll see that lot owners agreed to reimburse the HOA for maintenance that they eschew, and it IS NOT “trespassing.”

An association can not force a homeowner to relinquish the right to exclude others as a condition of membership. Unconstitutional.

Were we to hire someone to go onto a lot to bring it up to "standard", I would want police protection so the owner does not call trespassing and start shooting.

https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1470&claw_journal_law_policy#:~:text=Professor%20Jan%20Laitos%20describes%20the,taken%20for%20public%20use%2C%20without

This 2021 Georgia Supreme Court ruling makes clear that a covenant permitting self-help and declaring this self-help will not be a trespass means what it means (at least in Georgia):
https://casetext.com/case/polo-golf-country-club-homeowners-assn-v-cunard-1

Excerpt:

... the trial court found that "exercising self-help and entering [a homeowner's] lot [would] not commit a trespass," in part because the HOA "would be acting pursuant to the terms of the declaration that the lot owner subjected herself to when she purchased her lot within the subdivision." We agree.

Fact:
One can contract such that one loses certain constitutional rights. E.g. when Jane contracts to work for another, and a term of the contract says Jane may not criticize the other party to the contract, Jane has lawfully forfeited her right to free speech with regard to criticism of the other party.

I'll repeat our restated CC&R 2022 section because it was written by an HOA attorney for our multi-story condos. I'm pretty sure he knew what he was doing though perhaps only within Calif. :

"4.3.5 Right of Entry and Enforcement. Except in the case of emergencies in which case no prior notice need be given, the Board or any authorized representative thereof shall have the right, upon forty-eight (48) hours prior written notice and during reasonable hours, to enter into a Unit for the purpose of inspection, construction, maintenance or emergency repair for the benefit of the Common Area, ....or the other Condominiums or to perform its obligations under the Declaration or to cure any default by an Owner under this Declaration. Such persons shall not be deemed guilty of trespass by reason of such entry. If any such repair or maintenance is due to the failure of an Owner to perform its obligations hereunder, the cost of such maintenance or repair shall be assessed against said Owner as an Enforcement Assessment."

Condos, of course, are different than detached homes, but prior to this new CC&R section, our assoc. could not enter condos solely for, say, inspection without owners' permission. Even in detached homes, I can see where badly-kept yards can attract vermin, odors, etc., that can affect the common areas or other homes.

Part of our declaration statement is that a purpose of our HOA is to maintain the "attractiveness" of the project. That's the reason we can make rules about what may or may not be exclusive use common area balconys. IF owners don't comply with the Rules, the assoc. may enter the unit to gain access to the balcony to remove or correct violations. Btw, I do not think that's ever been needed in 20+ years.

Re-read the poster's situation JohnC & BillD.