The matching exclusion is the mechanism

Of everything on that exclusions list, siding and roofing matching is the one that quietly converts a storm into a special assessment.

Minnesota hail damages some elevations of a townhome fleet and not others. Where the policy pays to replace the damaged materials but excludes the cost of making the undamaged remainder match, the association is left holding the difference — and for a fleet whose original siding or shingle line has been discontinued, that difference is routinely larger than the covered loss itself.

Stack a percentage-based wind and hail deductible on top, and the arithmetic that produces a five-figure per-home assessment after one afternoon of weather becomes visible.

The market context, from the carriers' side

The Minnesota Star Tribune, reporting in March 2025, cited Insurance Federation of Minnesota data that Minnesota carriers paid $1.92 in claims for every $1 collected in 2022, and returned to profit in 2024 after five consecutive loss years.²

That is not an argument that the increases were unjustified. It is the reason they are unlikely to reverse quickly: the repricing followed a sustained underwriting loss, and the exclusions followed the repricing.

The same reporting recorded a case at Windwood Condominiums in Edina — three buildings, built 1972 — where the property manager told the board the master property insurance would rise 400 percent, disclosed on 29 December, two days before the policy expired at midnight on 31 December. Monthly dues rose by an average of $262 for a roughly 1,250 square foot two-bedroom. Board leaders from the HOA Leadership Network said their own 84-unit Lakeville townhome community had seen a 400 percent increase over five years.

What the Legislature did about it: disclosure

Minnesota's answer in Chapter 82 was not to regulate premiums, deductibles or exclusions. It was to make the exposure visible.

Section 5 — the only section of the act with no effective-date clause, and therefore in force since 1 August 2026 under Minn. Stat. § 645.02 — requires the annual report's insurance description to state the association's deductible and carry this notice in capitals: “IF THE ASSOCIATION LEVIES A LOSS ASSESSMENT, THE UNIT OWNER IS PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING IT, EVEN IF THE UNIT OWNER DOES NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT INSURANCE COVERAGE.”

From 1 January 2027, parallel language reaches the declarant disclosure statement and the resale certificate, with a recommendation that owners carry loss-assessment coverage “in an amount at least equal to the association's deductible.”³

What Chapter 82 did not do: it did not amend Minn. Stat. § 515B.3-113, the MCIOA insurance section, at all. It did not require owners to carry an HO-6. It did not cap special assessments. And it did not create any state backstop for an association that cannot place a master policy.

What a Minnesota board can actually control

Know the wind and hail deductible as a dollar figure. Most Minnesota master policies carry a modest flat all-peril deductible and a separate, far larger percentage-based wind and hail deductible. “Five percent of total insurable values” is not something an owner can insure against; the dollar amount it produces at current values is.

Find out whether matching is excluded, in writing. This is a policy-language question with a specific answer, and it should be asked at every renewal rather than discovered at the first partial loss.

Compare the binder to the issued policy. A Minnesota case arising from the May 2022 storms turned on a one-line difference: a broker's quote showed a wind and hail deductible of “$50,000 per location per occurrence,” while the issued policy read “FIVE PER CENT (5%) of the total insurable values, subject to a minimum of $50,000.” On a $1,446,736.43 adjusted replacement cost the association bore the entire repair, because the loss did not exceed a deductible of roughly $1,546,766.⁴

Tell owners what their HO-6 needs to carry. Loss-assessment coverage is commonly written at $1,000 or $2,000 by default. That is the gap the capitalised warning exists to close, and from January the resale certificate says so too.

What is proposed, and what is not law

Minnesota's bipartisan Task Force on Homeowners and Commercial Property Insurance — which included a member appointed by the Community Associations Institute — adopted seven recommendations on 5 February 2026 and reported them on 13 February 2026.⁵ Two reach associations directly:

Amend § 515B.3-113 to require owners to carry an HO-6 policy and to name the association as an additional insured; add language to the § 515B.4-107 resale disclosure; and carve insurance-driven increases out of assessment-increase limits at § 515B.3-115. Separately, direct and fund the Minnesota FAIR Plan to study offering products including coverage for “common interest communities.”

None of it is law. The task force expired upon submitting the report, no bill has been introduced, and the 95th Legislature does not convene until 12 January 2027. There is no FAIR Plan product for Minnesota associations today — the recommendation is only that the FAIR Plan study one.

What to watch next

The 2027 session is the first opportunity for any of the task force's MCIOA recommendations to become a bill, and no sponsor has been named. With the task force dissolved, there is no standing body pushing them.

These are reported figures from a member survey and from press coverage, together with the text of enacted and proposed measures. They describe the market, not any particular policy or claim.