Homeowners Association, Common Interest Community Reform Bill Sent to Governor for Signature

The bipartisan bill includes broad consumer protections and limits on homeowners association practices, along with a provision affecting local development approvals.

The “Homeowners Association Bill of Rights,” SF 1750, is headed to Gov. Tim Walz’s desk. Following a House approval on April 30, the Senate passed the bill a second time with an overwhelming 56-9 bipartisan vote. The legislation is sponsored by Sen. Eric Lucero (R-St. Michael) and Rep. Kristin Bahner (DFL-Maple Grove).

Administration staff have indicated that Gov. Walz will sign the bill into law.

Most provisions of the bill will take effect the day after final enactment following the governor’s signature. A provision prohibiting local governments from requiring private common-area property in residential developments that necessitate a homeowners association (HOA) will take effect Jan. 1, 2027.

Broad consumer protections and local government impacts

Changes within the sweeping bill are aimed at reforming HOAs and common interest communities (CICs) to increase transparency and strengthen homeowner protections.

Key provisions:

• Establish conflict-of-interest standards.
• Prohibit excessive fines and fees.
• Require association rules to be reasonable.
• Create alternative dispute resolution options.
• Limit the use of property foreclosure as an enforcement tool.
• Require associations to adopt schedules for fees, fines, and charges.
• Make it easier to dissolve a common interest community or homeowners association.
• Eliminate certain parking restrictions, such as prohibitions on parking work vehicles in residential driveways.

The bill also includes a provision with potential implications for cities. Section 14 prohibits cities and counties from requiring the creation of an HOA — or common property necessitating one — as a condition for approving residential building permits, conditional use permits, or planned unit developments, unless requested by the developer or required by state or federal law.

The House considered an amendment to remove the local government preemption provision. Despite concerns raised by local governments, the amendment failed on a bipartisan 47-86 vote.

Additional details on the legislation will be included in the League’s upcoming Focus on New Laws and 2026 Law Summaries.

Read more news articles.