Click here to skip to main content.
scenic picture from Washington state
SUBJECTS › LEGAL › NUISANCES › Methods of Nuisance Abatement
Updated 05/07

Methods of Nuisance Abatement

Contents

About Nuisance Abatement

Nuisance abatement may relate to specific violations of building, fire, and zoning regulations or it may address problems related to animals, noise, juveniles and health. State law provides procedures for the abatement of nuisances. See Authority to Regulate and Abate Nuisances. This page contains information on the process of abating nuisances. It includes sample ordinance provisions and program information. The text for this page was adapted from a paper presented to the Washington Association of Municipal Attorneys, by William L. Cameron, City Attorney of Kennewick, entitled Nuisance Abatement. Information Bulletin No. 497 (1997), Legal Notes, Proceedings of April 23-25, 1997, pp. 17-1 -17-28. This paper was also presented at the WSAMA 1999 spring meeting.

General Reference

  • Nuisance Abatement, by Christine Ulrich,  ICMA MIS Report,  v.28 no.7, 1996 MRSC Library loan
  • There Are Good Ways to Take Care of Nuisance Abatement  by Donnie Tuck,  Public Management,  April 2006 MRSC Library loan

Voluntary Abatement

The most desirable course of action is to obtain the voluntary cooperation of the public in seeking the abatement of nuisances. With few exceptions, convincing someone to take care of their problem is most cost effective way of dealing with any nuisance. If someone is charged with the responsibility of seeing that a community is kept clean, the person will quickly find that it saves time and energy to talk property owners into bringing their places up to a socially acceptable standard. Dilapidated buildings, weed infested lots, and all those other little things that make urban life just a little less pleasant will begin to look better. The judicious application of a few citations and bills for clean up work is a necessary adjunct to polite conversation, but some people do not keep their premises clean, because nobody ever told them that their citizenship and neighborliness was in question. A number of jurisdictions have included voluntary agreements in their nuisance provisions. Samples of voluntary agreement forms appear with information on Citations below.

District or Municipal Court Proceedings - Citations

If voluntary compliance is not forthcoming, the next step may be to issue a citation. Issuing a citation for an infraction (civil offense) or misdemeanor (criminal offense) will often rectify even the worst problem. Citations are most effective when there are clear violations of particular ordinances or where the conduct of the violator is patently outrageous.

Many jurisdictions have decriminalized nuisance provisions and are using a civil infraction system. In 1987 the legislature established a civil infraction system codified as RCW 7.80 to allow minor offenses to be decriminalized and to receive a civil fine or infraction. Infractions are defined as a non criminal violation of a local ordinance. The civil infraction system is patterned after the traffic infraction system adopted in 1981. The statute authorizes cities and counties to create civil infractions enforceable in the municipal or district court. Civil infractions are initiated by the issuance, service, and filing of a notice of civil infraction issued by a person authorized to enforce ordinance provisions. The citing officer can be a law enforcement officer or other official authorized by law to issue notices.

Jurisdictions have variations on the process used to obtain compliance before citations are issued. Many jurisdictions issue some sort of warning notice with a deadline for compliance before a notice of infraction. See the discussion in the Voluntary Abatement section above.

Writing a ticket has disadvantages. The enforcement official must be able to prepare and present a case with what can be seen from the sidewalk unless there is both probable cause and the time, money, and energy to obtain a warrant. A municipal or district court can order an individual to abate a nuisance, but it does not have jurisdiction to issue an order authorizing abatement by a city, town or county. A warrant of abatement can only be issued by a superior court.

A municipal or district court can issue a judgment providing for a daily fine of a prescribed amount for each day that a person allows a nuisance to continue after the court has issued an order to abate the nuisance. The City of Kent reports that subsequent actions to collect on such fines have been a very effective way to obtain the cooperation of those who ignore a court order to abate a nuisance. After talk, a ticket or criminal complaint is sometimes the cheapest remedy.

  • Sample Code Provisions
    • Bellevue Municipal Code Ch. 1.18 - Civil Violations
    • Everett Municipal Code  Ch. 1.20 - Enforcement Procedures
    • Kitsap County Code Ch. 2.116 - Civil Enforcement Ordinance
    • Vancouver Municipal Code Ch. 22.02 - Uniform Enforcement Code - Enforcement
      • Vancouver Municipal Code Section 22.02.040 - Notice of civil violation and order - Order to revoke permit.

    Civil Proceedings - Warrants of Abatement

    When voluntary compliance and administrative proceedings still do not solve the problem, it may be necessary to go to superior court and obtain a warrant of abatement. The warrant authorizes the jurisdiction to enter onto private property, abate the nuisance, and hold the property owner responsible for all of the abatement costs. If there have been earlier administrative proceedings and there is a clear record that due process has been followed, a petition for a warrant of abatement may be handled expeditiously, particularly where the property owner chooses not respond to the superior court filing.

    In rare circumstances, where it is obvious that voluntary or administrative proceedings will not bring about compliance, enforcement can be initiated in superior court. A contested nuisance suit in superior court is generally not a speedy way to resolve a nuisance problem, except in a rare case where a court order or injunction can be obtained to stop a nuisance while the matter is being adjudicated.

    A civil nuisance abatement case brought in superior court often involves complex factual or legal issues, a large parcel of property (or several properties), or a violator whose attitudes or, in some cases, mental fitness, make it unlikely that the nuisance situation can be resolved without a warrant of abatement. One advantage of court action is that the court discovery rules will allow access to the perpetrator's premises.

    Summary Abatement

    Summary abatement involves the actual removal of conditions constituting a nuisance by administrative officials without resorting to judicial proceedings. Summary abatement may or may not be specifically authorized by a jurisdiction's ordinance. Sometimes a situation is so dangerous that it should be repaired or eliminated immediately. Open wells, discharges of sewage, abandoned refrigerators and similar types of nuisances are extreme hazards especially in populated areas. If the owner will not fix them upon request or cannot be found, the local government should take it upon itself to make the correction and decide later who should pay.

    There is some potential liability exposure for cities and towns that initiate summary abatement procedures. As a practical matter, the city should protect itself by assembling evidence, such as photographs, to support its findings that an emergency exists. If an action were brought against the city, and the court determined that the condition abated did not in fact constitute a fire or health hazard, or a nuisance, the city would probably be liable for damages sustained by the property owner. A sample summary abatement provision from Port Angeles appears below.

    • Vancouver Municipal Code 22.02.050 - Summary Abatement - Stop Work Order 

    Administrative Enforcement - Unfit Dwellings, Buildings and Structures

    Administrative enforcement refers to the establishment of a non-judicial hearing and decision-making process for nuisance abatement. An administrative hearing provides the opportunity for property owners to present their side. These proceedings are much less time-consuming and expensive than a full court adjudication. However, because nuisance enforcement and abatement deal with property rights, the process must include a right to appeal any final administrative decision to district or superior court. The hope is that an administrative decision will satisfactorily resolve the issue without an appeal to superior court. If it is clear from the outset that a property owner wants to vigorously contest an administrative nuisance action, regardless of cost, it might be wise to initiate the enforcement action through court proceedings.

    Sometimes an administrative process will consist of a hearing before an individual or board, followed by an administrative appeal to another board, and then an appeal to district or superior court. If the problem can be resolved through an administrative process (without a judicial appeal) it is generally simpler, faster, and less costly than initiating the enforcement action in court.

    For an example of a full administrative enforcement process, including a level of administrative appeal prior to superior court appeal, see Chapter 35.80 RCW, which establishes a process for dealing with unfit dwellings, buildings, and structures.

    The key to any administrative nuisance abatement ordinance is a clear and detailed definition of what constitutes a nuisance. Clear and unambiguous administrative procedures must give all those affected an opportunity to have decisions reviewed before any abatement action is taken. See Memphis Light Gas & Water v. Craft, 436 U.S. 1 (l978) Via FindLaw. Finally there must be an effective follow-through by physically abating the nuisance if the property owner or occupant fails or refuses to comply.

    Judicial Procedure for Abatement of Nuisances

    If the summary method of abatement is not followed, an ordinance may be enacted declaring the building or condition to be a fire or health hazard and a nuisance and directing its abatement by the owner within a specified time and requiring an action to be brought in court to abate the nuisance in the event the owner fails to comply with the ordinance. Under this procedure the court, prior to abatement, determines whether or not the building or condition is a nuisance in fact and should be abated. If the court finds there is a nuisance that should be abated, it directs the abatement pursuant to order of the court. Under this longer procedure, the abatement pursuant to court order protects the municipality against any claim for damages.

    Sample Forms

    • Burien
      • Administrative Notice of Violation ( 22 KB)  - Violation notice of a nuisance form for removal of a nuisance from property; per Ordinance 383, Ch. 8.45
      • Second Notice ( 25 KB)- Letter to property owner regarding nuisance; failure to voluntarily remove it in two weeks will result in court action
      • Right of Limited Entry ( 16 KB) - Form for removal of a nuisance from property; per Ordinance 383, Ch. 8.45 - Nuisance code
    • Everett (Adobe Acrobat Document 208 KB) - Letter to Owner/Resident, Violation Citation, Violations Hearing Examiner
    • Lakewood (Adobe Acrobat Document 698 KB) - Letter to Owner/Resident, Enforcement Warning, and Compliance Agreement
    • Kennewick (Adobe Acrobat Document 460 KB) - Correction Notice, Notice of Civil Violation, Voluntary Correction Agreement

Return to Nuisances Main Page