May 7, 2026 | Mark Luis Foster
The Star Tribune wrote about passage of SF 1750 in the Minnesota Senate. The article seems to be just in their digital version and I didn’t see it in their Thursday printed product. Maybe it gets printed tomorrow.
Reporter Nathaniel Minor leads with this paragraph:
Homeowners associations across Minnesota will see their powers diminished under a far-reaching “HOA Bill of Rights” approved by state lawmakers this week.
He called and interviewed me yesterday afternoon, and I basically waved the surrender flag. As HOA Leaders, we will simply need to comply with this legislation, and the network we operate will help fill the education gap that would otherwise create confusion and anxiety among volunteer board leaders.
He did misquote me, however. I will get to that in a moment.
The bill’s passage marks a “pivot point” for HOAs in the state, said Mark Luis Foster, co-owner of HOA Leadership Network, a Minnesota company that educates HOA board members.
Pivot, indeed. Spinning on our heals to try to keep up with all the changes.
More:
Foster’s was one of several HOA advocacy groups that argued against the bill during committee hearings this session, saying that lawmakers should focus on education, not regulation.
But in a Wednesday interview, Foster said he expects HOA boards will embrace the new rules and learn to comply.
“They’re not lawyers, and they just want to do a great job for their HOAs,” Foster said. “They just want to maintain property values. And it will be a test of the legislation as to whether what the state has passed will make those things better or worse.”
Here comes the misquote:
Foster said that while he supports some of the bill’s provisions, like capping fines, he’s worried that overall it will worsen the perennial problem HOAs have of attracting new volunteers. He also worries that last-minute amendments made in the House could be problematic.
Let’s be clear. I do NOT support capping fines as that’s severely limiting for HOAs who are dealing with difficult rule-breakers. What I did say is that I support transparency of a fine schedule for all residents to see or access, a common best practice.
Perhaps the best paragraph about objections on this ever-changing bill came from the reporter himself, who wrote:
A handful of senators also objected to the House bill in a Wednesday floor debate, saying it could run afoul of a federal debt collection law and hasn’t been publicly vetted by experts yet.
You can try to read the digital version HERE, but it’s behind a paywall.
