Peter Koch wrote:The Road Association has been in existence since 1943. Each property has a deeded right of way to the road. The Assn has existed, elected officers and paid annual dues for all of these years without an incident of any kind.
If the majority of the road association members vote to ban those vehicles because in their view they are "tearing up the road" and that is contributing to its deterioration and additional maintenance must be undertaken to keep the road performing its function, it seems to me it can do so. If that deterioration is contributing to the road's being an environmental problem, e.g. increased runoff carrying phosphorus into any nearby lake, there's an even stronger case for banning them. This is my opinion and I am not an attorney and if the decision were contested I don't know for sure what might happen in a court, but trying to get the road association vote on this would be the first path I would take.
We had a somewhat similar situation on a lake where people wanted to ban personal watercraft because, among other things, they were stirring up sediment and that is bad for the lake, but the lake has three towns that abut it and only two were in favor of the ban. In that case it was not a single body that voted and the one town was able to prevent the ban. An interesting situation. But in your case (as I see it) the ATV ban (assuming the majority supports it) might work.