HOA Tree Disputes: What the Board Must Document

Trees generate an outsized share of HOA disputes. A dying oak drops a limb on a car. Two owners argue over who maintains the tree straddling their shared fence line. A homeowner demands the association remove a neighbor's tree that's blocking their view. Roots from a common-area tree crack a driveway.

Every one of these situations requires a board decision — and that decision needs to be documented carefully, because trees also generate an outsized share of HOA litigation.

The Threshold Question: Whose Tree Is It?

Before the board can decide anything, it needs to establish ownership and maintenance responsibility. This depends on where the tree is located:

• Common area trees: Trees on association-maintained common areas are the association's responsibility to maintain and, if necessary, remove
• Owner's lot: Trees on an owner's individually maintained lot are generally the owner's responsibility, subject to any restrictions in the CC&Rs or design guidelines
• Boundary trees: Trees whose trunks straddle a property line are often considered jointly owned by both adjoining owners under state law — but HOA governing documents may modify this
• Easement areas: Trees in drainage, utility, or landscape easements may be subject to special rules about who can maintain or remove them

Document which category applies and the basis for that determination (CC&R provision, survey, site inspection).

Diseased, Dead, or Hazardous Trees

Hazardous tree decisions are high-stakes because of liability. If the association knows a tree is diseased or hazardous and fails to act, and the tree later causes injury or property damage, that prior knowledge becomes a problem.

When the board discusses a potentially hazardous tree, document:

• How the board learned of the concern (owner complaint, manager inspection, arborist report)
• Whether a certified arborist assessed the tree and what they found — include the arborist's recommendation
• The board's decision: remove, treat, cable/brace, monitor, or no action
• The basis for the decision (arborist recommendation, governing document authority)
• The timeline for action
• Whether the owner was notified if the tree is on private property

If the board decides not to remove a tree an arborist flagged as hazardous, document the specific basis for that decision and ensure it was made with full board awareness — this is the kind of decision that surfaces in litigation discovery.

Tree Removal on Common Areas

When the association removes a common-area tree, document:

• The reason for removal (disease, death, hazard, infrastructure damage, aesthetics/community plan)
• Any arborist or contractor assessment that informed the decision
• The cost and which budget line it will be charged to
• Whether a replacement tree is planned, and if so, species/location/timeline
• Whether any owner objected, and how that was handled

Some governing documents require owner notice or input before removing mature trees from common areas. Check before acting.

Owner Requests to Remove Their Own Trees

Many CC&Rs require ARC approval before an owner removes a tree on their lot — particularly mature trees. When the board or ARC reviews such a request:

• Note the owner's stated reason for removal
• Reference the governing document provision requiring approval
• Document what the committee considered (aesthetics, tree health, effect on surrounding lots)
• State the decision: approved, denied, or approved with conditions (replacement required, stump removal required)

If approval is denied, be specific about why — vague denials invite appeals and accusations of arbitrary enforcement.

Boundary Tree Disputes Between Neighbors

When two owners dispute responsibility for a boundary tree, the board is often caught in the middle. Document:

• The nature of the dispute (who is responsible for maintenance, who has the right to trim, who pays for removal)
• What the governing documents say (if anything) about boundary tree responsibility
• What state law says — in most states, each owner can trim branches and roots that encroach onto their property, up to the boundary line, but cannot kill the tree
• Whether the board has authority to resolve the dispute or whether it's a private matter between the owners
• Any action the board took or declined to take, and why

The board generally cannot force one owner to remove or maintain a boundary tree unless the CC&Rs specifically grant that authority. Document clearly if the board is declining to intervene because it lacks jurisdiction — this protects the board when the frustrated owner complains.

Root and Branch Damage Claims

When a tree causes property damage — roots cracking a driveway, branches falling on a vehicle or structure — the board faces two questions: who is responsible for repairs, and is the association liable?

Document:

• The nature and location of the damage
• Whether the damaged property is common area or individually owned
• Whether the association had prior notice that the tree was potentially hazardous
• The insurance implications — was a claim filed? Which policy covers what?
• The board's determination of responsibility (association, owner, or disputed)
• Whether repairs will be made and at whose cost
• If the owner is asserting a claim against the association, document that the matter was referred to insurance and/or counsel

View Obstruction Complaints

View obstruction is one of the most contentious tree issues because it pits one owner's desire to keep their tree against another's desire for a view. Unless the CC&Rs contain explicit view protection provisions, the board typically has limited authority to force tree trimming or removal for view reasons.

When handling a view obstruction complaint:

• Review the CC&Rs and design guidelines for any view protection provisions
• Document whether the tree is on common area or private property
• If on common area and the CC&Rs support view maintenance, document the board's decision on whether to trim and to what height/extent
• If on private property without view protection provisions, document that the board lacks authority to compel the tree owner to act — and suggest the owners attempt to resolve the dispute directly or through mediation
• Be consistent: if the board trims trees for one owner's view, document the precedent and apply it uniformly

Emergency Tree Situations

Storm damage, sudden lean, severe disease — sometimes a tree needs to come down before the board can meet. If the manager or board president authorizes emergency tree removal:

• Document the emergency action at the next board meeting for ratification
• Note the specific hazard that required immediate action
• Note who authorized the action and when
• Confirm the cost and budget impact

Emergency ratification is standard procedure. The failure to ratify it in the next meeting's minutes is what creates problems.

Sample Minutes Language

Hazardous Tree Removal (Common Area)

Common Area Tree Removal — Oak Tree near Unit 22: The board reviewed the arborist report from Green Valley Tree Service dated April 1, 2026, which assessed the 60-year oak tree adjacent to Unit 22 as structurally compromised due to significant internal decay and recommended immediate removal to prevent risk of failure. The board voted 5-0 to authorize removal. Manager directed to contract with Green Valley Tree Service at a cost not to exceed $3,200, charged to the common area maintenance budget. A replacement tree (species TBD after owner input) to be planted within 90 days.

ARC Approval for Owner Tree Removal

ARC Application — Owner Patricia Han, Lot 18 — Tree Removal: Ms. Han requested approval to remove a 30-foot silver maple in her rear yard, citing root intrusion into her irrigation system. The ARC reviewed the application and determined the tree is not a specimen tree requiring special review under Section 7.4 of the Design Guidelines. Approved, subject to: (1) stump grinding to grade within 30 days of removal, and (2) planting of one replacement tree of at least 2-inch caliper within one growing season.

View Obstruction Complaint — No CC&R Authority

Owner Complaint — View Obstruction (Unit 34 vs. Unit 36): Owner David Kim (Unit 34) complained that the Italian cypress trees on Unit 36 have grown to block his mountain view. The board reviewed the CC&Rs and Design Guidelines. No view protection covenant exists in the governing documents. The board determined it lacks authority to require Unit 36's owner to trim or remove trees for view purposes on private property. The manager was directed to respond to Mr. Kim explaining the board's position and suggesting he contact Unit 36's owner directly or pursue voluntary mediation.

MinuteSmith for Tree and Landscaping Disputes

Tree decisions involve multiple overlapping issues — ownership, liability, governing document authority, neighbor relations. MinuteSmith helps boards capture the full context of these decisions in meeting minutes that are clear, complete, and defensible.

Try MinuteSmith free for 14 days.