The issue split into two bills, and the split is why neither passed

Minnesota had a second, broader flag bill in the same biennium, and the two approaches were not compatible.

S.F. 1564 (Sen. Pha, with Sen. Mohamed) would have amended § 500.215 so association documents could not limit display of any flag — not an enumerated list. It added an exception for limits “narrowly tailored… to prevent the incitement of violence or unlawful activity.”

It was introduced 17 February 2025, referred to Judiciary and Public Safety, and never heard. Its last recorded action was a co-author being stricken on 17 February 2026.⁴

So the Legislature had before it an enumerate-specific-flags approach that got to both floor calendars, and a protect-all-flags approach that never got a hearing. Neither passed. Expect the fight to reset from that position in 2027.

Why the drafting choice is hard, not merely political

An enumerated list is administrable. An association can read it and know what it may and may not restrict. Its weakness is that it is a legislative judgment about which flags deserve protection, which invites the next session's additions and the argument about what was left out.

A general rule avoids that but hands associations a genuinely difficult content question. “Any flag” means any flag, and the incitement carve-out in S.F. 1564 is narrow — it reaches violence and unlawful activity, not offence. An association applying it would be making case-by-case judgments about political and expressive content, which is the position most boards least want to be in.

Minnesota associations are not state actors and are not bound by the First Amendment; a Minnesota appellate decision restated that point in February 2026, citing Windcliff Ass'n v. Breyfogle, 988 N.W.2d 911, 920 (Minn. 2023).⁵ That is precisely why the statute does the work here — the constitutional route is closed, so the protection has to be legislated.

What this means for a board now

Nothing changed, but two things around flag rules did change, and both take effect 1 January 2027.

Flag rules are now subject to a statutory reasonableness standard. Chapter 82 provides that association “[r]ules and regulations adopted must be reasonable.” That is not a flag-specific protection, but a blanket ban on all flags in a community where the statute protects two of them, applied to a Gold Star family, is the kind of rule that invites the argument.

Changing a flag rule now takes 21 days. From January, no rule may be adopted, amended or revoked without at least 21 days' notice to owners for review and comment. A board that decides in March 2027 to soften a flag restriction cannot do it at that month's meeting.

There is also a new exposure for getting it wrong. Chapter 82 adds a statutory retaliation claim defining retaliation to include restricting “any right or privilege” or imposing any “fine, penalty, or other charge… not authorized under the declaration, bylaws, or rules or regulations” because an owner asserted a right under the chapter or other law. Those claims plug into § 515B.4-116's existing prevailing-party fees and punitive damages for wilful noncompliance.

The related protections that did not move either

Minnesota's covenant-override statutes were untouched in both sessions, which is worth stating because it is frequently assumed otherwise:

• § 500.215 (US and Minnesota flags) — last amended 2015.
• § 500.216 (native plants and managed natural landscapes) — last amended 2023.
• § 500.217 (child care) — enacted 2024, not amended since.

One indirect change did occur. Chapter 82 adds a new § 515B.3-102(d) requiring association powers to comply with §§ 500.215, 500.216 and 500.217 — a cross-reference tying MCIOA powers to the covenant-override statutes. The three statutes themselves are unchanged; what changes is that compliance with them is now expressly a limit on association power under MCIOA.

What to watch next

Both flag bills must be reintroduced with new numbers in the 95th Legislature, which convenes 12 January 2027. Rep. Witte's and Sen. Duckworth's return depends on the 3 November 2026 election, in which all 201 legislative seats are on the ballot.

The tell to watch for in 2027 is which drafting approach comes back — the enumerated list that twice reached a floor calendar, or the general rule that never got a hearing.

This describes what the bills said and what happened to them. It is not advice about any particular flag dispute.