Michigan Voids HOA Solar Bans Under the Homeowners' Energy Policy Act

Michigan had no solar-access law at all until 2024 PA 68 took effect on April 2, 2025. The act is codified at MCL 559.301 to 559.317 and is cited as the "homeowners' energy policy act". It speaks of a "member", defined at MCL 559.303(e) as an owner of a home or unit within the jurisdiction of the homeowners' association, so it reaches site-condominium and subdivision associations as well as unit owners, rather than only the condominium associations governed by the Condominium Act.

The core rule is short. MCL 559.307 says a provision in a homeowners' association agreement, or in the policy the association adopts under section 9(1), that prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting installation of a solar energy system is invalid and unenforceable as contrary to public policy. The "has the effect of prohibiting" language matters: a rear-roof-only rule or a shade-tree condition that makes a system pointless is attacked on the same footing as an outright ban.

MCL 559.309(1) required each Michigan association to adopt a written solar energy policy statement within one year of the act's effective date, which put the deadline at April 2, 2026. The policy may not prohibit elements of the system from being installed on a roof face, and it may not force a particular technology, so an association cannot insist on solar shingles instead of conventional panels. Any standard the policy enforces is capped twice over: it may not reduce the system's estimated annual electrical production by more than 10%, and it may not raise the member's total installation cost by more than $1,000.00.

The statute also lists things the policy must promise in writing. The association will not inquire into a member's energy usage, impose conditions that impair operation of the system, impose conditions that negatively affect a component's industry standard warranty, require post-installation reporting, charge a higher application fee than it charges for other applications to change the property, or bar a member from resubmitting after a denial. It must state that an adjacent owner's approval is not required, and that the association will not deny an application because of who owns the system or how the member financed it, which protects third-party ownership, leases and power purchase agreements.

Denial grounds are enumerated at MCL 559.309(1)(f)(iv). An association may deny or require removal only where a court has found the installation violates a law; the installed system does not substantially conform to the approved application; or, for a roof mount, the system extends more than 6 inches above or beyond the roof, does not conform to the roof slope with a top edge parallel to the roof line, or has a frame, support bracket, or visible conduit or wiring that is not a silver, bronze, or black tone commonly available in the marketplace. For a ground mount, the association may object only where the system sits in a fenced yard or patio and stands taller than the fence line. The policy may impose reasonable maintenance, repair, replacement and removal conditions for a damaged or inoperable system, but no more burdensome than those imposed on non-solar projects.

MCL 559.311 sets the paperwork. A member submits a written application carrying the member's name, the street address where the system will be installed, the installer's name and contact information, an image showing the layout of the system on the home or unit, and a description of the system. The association must approve or deny within 30 days of receipt, extended to 120 days where the application arrived before the association adopted its policy. Members whose applications were denied before April 2, 2025 may resubmit, and the association must reevaluate the old application under the new act.

Two limits cut real projects. MCL 559.313 says the act does not apply to installation of a solar energy system in a common area or on a shared roof, and MCL 559.303(g) defines a shared roof as one serving more than one home or unit, including a contiguous roof over adjacent units. Attached townhouse and stacked-condominium owners therefore fall back on their declaration. Separately, section 9(1)(f)(v) preserves state and local building codes and permit requirements, so the member still pulls the electrical permit and passes inspection.

Enforcement is private. MCL 559.315 lets a member bring a civil action against the homeowners' association for damages if the association violates the act, and a prevailing member may be awarded reasonable attorney fees and the costs of bringing the action. There is no state agency that polices association solar policies; the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs reviews condominium documents at registration but does not adjudicate these disputes. The strongest self-help remedy is in MCL 559.311(3): if the association failed to adopt its solar energy policy statement by the deadline, or failed to approve or deny a complete application within the 30-day or 120-day window, the member may simply proceed with the installation, and the association may not impose fines or otherwise penalize the member for doing so. Any provision of an adopted policy that conflicts with the act is void under MCL 559.309(3), so a fine levied under such a provision has no lawful basis.