Nuisance ordinance

Last updated

A nuisance ordinance, also referred to as a crime-free ordinance or a disorderly house ordinance, is a local law usually passed on the town, city, or municipality level of government that aims to legally punish both landlords and tenants for crimes that occur on a property or in a neighborhood. These laws impose penalties under programs referred to as nuisance abatement when crimes are reported, regardless of whether crimes actually occurred or what the police action entailed. The result of these ordinances is for landlords to tell tenants to not report crimes, refuse to renew the lease of anyone involved in reporting a crime, and eviction of tenants involved in any crimes, even if the tenants were the victims of said crimes.

Contents

According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), while supporters of these ordinances argue that they prevent criminal activities in the areas under the ordinances, the actual result is instead a reduction in overall public safety and harm brought to victims of crime, particularly those suffering from domestic abuse, that are deterred from reporting the criminal activity committed against them. These ordinances have also been found to be disproportionately applied to people of color and communities that have a high minority population in general. [1]

Definitions

The original nuisance ordinances were derived from the common law system, where local governments employed prosecutions against individual citizens under the guise of the actions of said individuals hampering the "right common to the general public". These were then established into law with the creation of the legal term of nuisance. Later laws in the late 20th and into the 21st century would expand upon these laws for any desired usage of criminalizing activities by placing it under the same title of nuisance as a catch-all term. Because of this, what falls under the definition of nuisance is unclear within the legal system of any country with such a legal term and can be applied to multiple unrelated actions. However, these laws are always tried in criminal court and not civil court, making nuisance ordinance violations always a criminal act. [2]

A variation of these ordinances are referred to legally as chronic nuisance ordinances, which are functionally identical to nuisance ordinances but allow a vague leeway of multiple "nuisance" charges being required before eviction is enacted. How many times are allowed varies between municipalities, along with whether they are applied to only rental properties or residential homes as well. Some versions of these ordinances also have a "buffer zone" determined around a residence that is considered a part of the property as well and any crimes committed within the bounds of that zone, even if the rental or home owner was uninvolved in the criminal incident, are used as a penalty against the owner. [3]

History

The laws for nuisance doctrines (or what was referred to as the "doctrine of private nuisance") were first recorded in England during the Middle Ages and were exclusively used to refer to someone who interfered with the owner of a piece of land from utilizing that land. Changes to the laws were made in the 13th and 14th centuries to also apply to any interference with land owned by the King of England, which included most public roads and other areas. Violations of these public locations were eventually made into a separate set of laws dubbed the "doctrine of public nuisance", with the only difference legally being whether a private citizen or the government is the prosecuting party. [2]

The expansion of nuisance doctrines to include violations of anything deemed against the public order occurred over the following centuries, with the 18th century on seeing them applied commonly to prevent practices such as the sale of alcohol and prostitution. But modern implementations of the ordinances in the late 20th and 21st centuries have returned to the original subject of misuse of property, particularly under the type of housing that is leased. [2] The current implementation of the ordinances first began being passed in the 1980s as a method to deter crimes involving the drug trade in various major cities. A federal United States law was first passed in 1986 as a part of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 and was given the nickname of the "crackhouse statute" and which made landlords criminally liable if they rented housing units to anyone they knowingly understood to be trafficking in or using illegal drugs. This led to the first nuisance ordinance under the modern usage being passed in 1987 in Portland, Oregon, as a method to evict all of the tenants in claimed drug houses. [4]

As of 2021, 37 out of the 40 largest cities in the United States have implemented some form of nuisance ordinance law, with more than half having eviction of the tenant as the penalty for violation and with 5 of the cities including calling for emergency services as a form of nuisance. [5]

One of the earliest recorded cases in the United States to deal with a property nuisance ordinance law was Bouley v. Young-Sabourin in 2005 that involved a tenant being evicted after she called the police because of a domestic violence attack from her husband. The landlord then sent an eviction notice because calling the police was a violation of a provision within the lease contract that disallowed tenants from letting the premises be used for "unlawful purposes". The tenant argued in the case that, as a victim of domestic violence, eviction for being assaulted was a violation of non-discrimination law regarding sex-based protections. The court agreed with the argument from the tenant and ruled in her favor. Further cases involving domestic violence have used the case of Bouley v. Young-Sabourin as precedent in court filings involving nuisance ordinances and domestic abuse, such as in Meister v. Kansas City that also invoked the Violence Against Women Act. Many prosecutions by tenants in the years since have involved the ACLU settling the cases and pushing for stronger legislation against nuisance ordinances. [6]

A letter of guidance by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development was released in 2016 that specifically pointed out nuisance ordinances as a violation of the Fair Housing Act and of multiple laws on government requirements toward preventing domestic violence. [7]

Impacts and outcomes

A 2018 study by Mead et al. found that there are four primary kinds of crimes that are reported and then charged under nuisance ordinances: domestic violence, mental health crises, drug overdoses, and non-criminal activities such as children playing in the area around the property and being reported as nuisances. The study also found that housing that is commonly targeted by nuisance ordinances are those under a housing choice voucher program that allow for poorer residents to afford rent in higher income housing. These targeted tenants were also determined by Mead et al. to be commonly racial in nature, with municipality governments wanting to reduce the number of people of color and people with disabilities in the housing areas under their control. [8] Jarwala and Singh (2019) found that not only is discrimination against people with disabilities likely severely underreported when it comes to nuisance ordinance evictions, but also that such tenants are more likely to require routine medical services because of their disabilities that can result in a nuisance charge against them. [9]

A case study by Gretchen W. Arnold (2016) on the impact of nuisance ordinances on women undergoing domestic violence found that these laws reduced the health and safety of women in neighborhoods with such ordinances and significantly reduced the likelihood of the abuse victims calling emergency services. This not only caused an escalation in the level of abuse, but also reduced the safety and quality of the neighborhoods as a whole and resulted in greater criminal activity in the municipalities in question. [10]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eviction</span> Removal of a tenant from rental property by the landlord

Eviction is the removal of a tenant from rental property by the landlord. In some jurisdictions it may also involve the removal of persons from premises that were foreclosed by a mortgagee.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Civil Rights Act of 1968</span> United States law

The Civil Rights Act of 1968 is a landmark law in the United States signed into law by United States President Lyndon B. Johnson during the King assassination riots.

One strike, you're out, is a colloquial term for a policy which allows tenants living in housing projects or otherwise receiving housing assistance from the federal government to be evicted if they, or any guest or visitor under their more-or-less direct control, engage in certain types of criminal activity on or, in some cases, even off the premises of said housing. This term is used because housing authorities do not have to offer a second chance. The term is apparently a back-formation of the "three strikes, you're out" concept embodied in the mandatory sentencing laws for repeat criminal offenders that began to be enacted in various American states in the 1990s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 (c.38) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which almost entirely applies only to England and Wales. The Act, championed by then Home Secretary, David Blunkett, was passed in 2003. As well as strengthening the anti-social behaviour order and Fixed Penalty Notice provisions, and banning spray paint sales to people under the age of 16, it gives local councils the power to order the removal of graffiti from private property.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Distraint</span> Seizure of property to obtain payments

Distraint or distress is "the seizure of someone’s property in order to obtain payment of rent or other money owed", especially in common law countries. Distraint is the act or process "whereby a person, traditionally even without prior court approval, seizes the personal property of another located upon the distrainor's land in satisfaction of a claim, as a pledge for performance of a duty, or in reparation of an injury." Distraint typically involves the seizure of goods (chattels) belonging to the tenant by the landlord to sell the goods for the payment of the rent. In the past, distress was often carried out without court approval. Today, some kind of court action is usually required, the main exception being certain tax authorities – such as HM Revenue and Customs in the United Kingdom and the Internal Revenue Service in the United States – and other agencies that retain the legal power to levy assets without a court order.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Violence Against Women Act</span> United States crime legislation

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) is a United States federal law signed by President Bill Clinton on September 13, 1994. The Act provided $1.6 billion toward investigation and the prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress when prosecutors chose to not prosecute cases. The Act also established the Office on Violence Against Women within the U.S. Department of Justice.

A civil gang injunction or CGI is a type of restraining order issued by courts in the United States prohibiting gang members in particular cities from participating in certain specified activities. It is based on the legal theory that gang activity constitutes a public nuisance that can prevent non–gang members of the community from enjoying peace and public order. An injunction is obtained against the gang itself, after which the police and district attorney may decide against whom they will enforce it. Law enforcement use gang injunctions as a tool to label people as gang members and restrict their activities in a defined area (ACLU).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public-order crime</span> Type of crime; running contrary to social order

In criminology, public-order crime is defined by Siegel (2004) as "crime which involves acts that interfere with the operations of society and the ability of people to function efficiently", i.e., it is behaviour that has been labelled criminal because it is contrary to shared norms, social values, and customs. Robertson (1989:123) maintains a crime is nothing more than "an act that contravenes a law". Generally speaking, deviancy is criminalized when it is too disruptive and has proved uncontrollable through informal sanctions.

Habitability is the adequacy of an environment for human living. Where housing is concerned, there are generally local ordinances which define habitability. If a residence complies with those laws, it is said to be habitable. In extreme environments, such as space exploration, habitability must take into account psychological and social stressors, due to the harsh nature of the environment.

Self-help, in the context of a legal doctrine, refers to individuals exercising their rights without resorting to legal writs or consulting higher authorities. This occurs, for example, when a financial institution repossesses a car on which it holds both the title and a defaulted note. Individuals may resort to self-help when they retrieve property under the unauthorized control of another person or abate nuisances, such as using sandbags and ditches to protect land from flooding.

Landlord harassment is the willing creation, by a landlord or their agents, of conditions that are uncomfortable for one or more tenants in order to induce willing abandonment of a rental contract. This is illegal in many jurisdictions, either under general harassment laws or specific protections, as well as under the terms of rental contracts or tenancy agreements.

The Arkansas Legal Services Partnership was a consortium of two nonprofit legal services programs, the Center for Arkansas Legal Services and Legal Aid of Arkansas, that worked together to provide free civil legal assistance to low-income residents throughout Arkansas. While the two nonprofits still collaborate, the Arkansas Legal Services Partnership no longer exists.

An emotional support animal (ESA) is an animal that provides support to individuals with a mental health or psychiatric disability. Emotional support animals are not required to be trained. Any animal that provides support, comfort, or aid, to an individual through companionship, unconditional positive regard, and affection may be regarded as an emotional support animal.

Nuisance abatement is a growing area within policing and code enforcement. The term refers to using building codes, fire codes, zoning, etc. in order to improve the quality of life and resolve life safety issues within neighborhoods. Nuisance abatement programs are most often a component of problem oriented or community policing programs. In most Canadian jurisdictions, bylaw enforcement officers handle nuisance abatement.

Fergus and Judith Wilson are a British married couple who were among the UK's largest buy-to-let investors. At peak, they owned approximately 1,000 two- and three-bedroom properties around Ashford and Maidstone in Kent. In 2008 they were listed at #453 on The Sunday Times "rich list", with a fortune of £180 million. By 2019 it was incorrectly reported that they had sold all their properties, however in 2022 in the High Court, Ashford Borough Council secured a permanent Freezing Injunction against Mr Fergus Wilson, the effect of which prevents him from disposing of assets, including in the form of five named properties, the Council took the action because Mr Wilson defaulted on three Court judgments relating to the payment of legal costs. Mr Wilson and his wife were rapidly disposing of their assets and the Council believed there is a real risk that the costs orders of the court will go unsatisfied.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Landlord–tenant law</span> Law that details rights and duties of landlords and tenants

Landlord–tenant law is the field of law that deals with the rights and duties of landlords and tenants.

The Costa–Hawkins Rental Housing Act ("Costa–Hawkins") is a California state law, enacted in 1995, which places limits on municipal rent control ordinances. Costa–Hawkins preempts the field in two major ways. First, it prohibits cities from establishing rent control over certain kinds of residential units, e.g., single-family dwellings and condominiums, and newly constructed apartment units; these are deemed exempt. Second, it prohibits "vacancy control", also called "strict" rent control. The legislation was sponsored by Democratic Senator Jim Costa and Republican Assemblymember Phil Hawkins.

Domestic violence and abuse in the United Kingdom are a range of abusive behaviours that occur within relationships. Domestic violence or abuse can be physical, psychological, sexual, financial or emotional. In UK laws and legislation, the term "domestic abuse" is commonly used to encompass various forms of domestic violence. Some specific forms of domestic violence and abuse are criminal offences. Victims or those at risk of domestic abuse can also be provided with remedies and protection via civil law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eviction in the United States</span> Landlord removals of rental housing tenants in the North American country

Eviction in the United States refers to the pattern of tenant removal by landlords in the United States. In an eviction process, landlords forcibly remove tenants from their place of residence and reclaim the property. Landlords may decide to evict tenants who have failed to pay rent, violated lease terms, or possess an expired lease. Landlords may also choose not to renew a tenant's lease, however, this does not constitute an eviction. In the United States, eviction procedures, landlord rights, and tenant protections vary by state and locality. Historically, the United States has seen changes in domestic eviction rates during periods of major socio-political and economic turmoil—including the Great Depression, the 2008 Recession, and the COVID-19 pandemic. High eviction rates are driven by affordable housing shortages and rising housing costs. Across the United States, low-income and disadvantaged neighborhoods have disproportionately higher eviction rates. Certain demographics—including low income renters, Black and Hispanic renters, women, and people with children—are also at a greater risk of eviction. Additionally, eviction filings remain on renters' public records. This can make it more difficult for renters to access future housing, since most landlords will not rent to a tenant with a history of eviction. Eviction and housing instability are also linked to many negative health and life outcomes, including homelessness, poverty, and poor mental and physical health.

The Crime-Free Multi-Housing (CFMH) program is a crime-free ordinance program, which partners property owners, residents, and law-enforcement personnel in an effort to eliminate crime, drugs, and gang activity from rental properties.

References

  1. ↑ "I Am Not A Nuisance: Local Ordinances Punish Victims Of Crime". aclu.org. American Civil Liberties Union. 2021. Retrieved December 17, 2021.
  2. 1 2 3 Katach, Salim (Spring 2015). "A Tenant's Procedural Due Process Right in Chronic Nuisance Ordiance Jurisdictions". Hofstra Law Review . 43 (3): 875–908. Retrieved December 20, 2021.
  3. ↑ Gavin, Amanda K. (2014). "Chronic Nuisance Ordinances: Turning Victims of Domestic Violence into "Nuisances" in the Eyes of Municipalities" (PDF). Penn State Law Review . 119 (1): 257–278. Retrieved January 4, 2022.
  4. ↑ Kastner, Anna (August 2015). "The Other War at Home: Chronic Nuisance Laws and the Revictimization of Survivors of Domestic Violence". California Law Review . 103 (4): 1047–1079. Retrieved January 4, 2022.
  5. ↑ Haderlie, Elizabeth; Shaaban, Layla (April 2021). "Domestic Violence Victims, A Nuisance to Society?: Moving Toward A More Equitable System in Protecting Vulnerable Women". Brigham Young University Prelaw Review . 35 (12): 139–154. Retrieved January 4, 2022.
  6. ↑ Holtzman, Emily (2020). "Protecting Victims of Domestic Violence from Chronic Nuisance Ordinances". Tennessee Journal of Race, Gender, & Social Justice . 9 (1): 44–65. Retrieved January 4, 2022.
  7. ↑ "Office of General Counsel Guidance on Application of Fair Housing Act Standards to the Enforcement of Local Nuisance and Crime-Free Housing Ordinances Against Victims of Domestic Violence, Other Crime Victims, and Others Who Require Police or Emergency Services" (PDF). hud.gov. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. September 13, 2016. Retrieved January 4, 2022.
  8. ↑ Mead, Joseph; Hatch, Megan E.; Tighe, J. Rosie; Pappas, Marissa; Andrasik, Kristi; Bonham, Elizabeth (March 24, 2018). "Treating Neighbors as Nuisances: Troubling Applications of Criminal Activity Nuisance Ordinances" (PDF). Cleveland State Law Review . 66 (3): 1–15. Retrieved January 4, 2022.
  9. ↑ Jarwala, Alisha; Singh, Sejal (July 2019). "When Disability Is a 'Nuisance': How Chronic Nuisance Ordinances Push Residents with Disabilities Out of Their Homes" (PDF). Harvard Civil Rights–Civil Liberties Law Review . 54: 875–915. Retrieved January 4, 2022.
  10. ↑ Arnold, Gretchen W. (May 2016). "From Victim to Offender: How Nuisance Property Laws Affect Battered Women". Journal of Interpersonal Violence . 34 (6): 1103–1126. doi:10.1177/0886260516647512. PMID   27150284. S2CID   41566514 . Retrieved January 4, 2022.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.