Read that slowly. Consider and inwardly digest every word. Think very hard about all of the implications.
"The peace" is a community interest. If my activities on my private property "disturb the peace," then the community has a right to curtail my activities.
Case closed.
Communities don't have rights, people do.
Your repeated references to "community interest" is getting on my nerves, really.
My mother retired to a "community" called Butte LaRose, La. upon retirement. She purchased a log house sitting right on the bayou, for a moderate amount of money. Next to her property was a run down camp trailer. Across the narrow bayou was a $500,000 home.
These people of the "community" had gotten together to establish a water district and a volunteer fire department...as was their right to do so. They had monthly "community" meetings to discuss problems. Mostly the problems had to do with the feds dredging the bayou and killing the fish or voting on the Mardi Gras King and Queen.
People who lived there knew and recognized property rights. You would have to be there to know...no one complained about the traffic of the three wheelers on the weekends because they had roosters crowing at daylight. LOL
Anyway, we had no problem selling my Mom's property after her death...at a nice sum...because property values...are sometimes ...in the heart and soul...or a real "community".
Disturbing the peace is engaging in unpeaceful behavior - i.e. behavior which causes the reasonable person to believe that they are threatened by violence to either their property or their person.
Such a threat is a violation of property rights, and is a form of menacing directed at multiple persons rather than just one. It pertains to a "community" insofar as a community is an aggregate of individual property owners whose properties are being severally menaced.
Being too poor to fix your porch is not a peace-disturbing threat.