Missouri HOA ADUs & Modifications

Key Findings

Start with the one rule that actually overrides a Missouri association: rooftop solar. Everything else in this space runs on the recorded declaration, checked by a pair of condominium acts, a handful of federal rules, and a single owner-protective statute that reaches planned communities alone. Here is what that means, point by point.

• Section 442.404 protects solar, but only for planned communities. The statute defines "homeowners' association" to exclude a condominium unit owners' association and a residential cooperative. For a condominium, then, solar is a question for the declaration and Chapter 448 — not for § 442.404.
• The solar protection now reaches old covenants. In Eikmeier v. Granite Springs Home Owners Association, decided January 23, 2026, the Supreme Court of Missouri — unanimously, in an opinion by Judge Robin Ransom, reversing a Greene County judge — held that § 442.404.3 applies to every covenant, including those recorded before the statute took effect on January 1, 2023.
• Two condominium acts, split by date. The Missouri Uniform Condominium Act governs condominiums created on or after September 28, 1983; the older Condominium Property Act governs those created before it.
• ADUs answer to the declaration. No Missouri statute overrides a covenant on accessory dwelling units. That is the opposite of California and Colorado, which preempt HOA authority here.
• The 2024 "chicken" amendment is, for now, void. A Cole County court struck down HB 2062 in its entirety in October 2025. That ruling is on appeal, so the chicken provision is not currently enforceable.
• A common secondary-source error to avoid. Several HOA-guidance sites say § 442.404 protects display of the U.S. or Missouri flag. The statute's text does not. Flag display is protected by federal law, and this page treats it that way.

Details

Section 1: Overview — ADUs and modifications in Missouri

Missouri bars a planned-community homeowners' association from prohibiting or restricting rooftop solar panels under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 442.404,¹ and in January 2026 the Supreme Court of Missouri made that protection reach back to older covenants in Eikmeier v. Granite Springs Home Owners Association.² The solar statute stops at the planned-community line: it does not reach condominium associations, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and most other exterior changes stay under the recorded declaration.

Missouri writes no umbrella HOA statute. Condominiums fall under a date-split pair of acts in Chapter 448,³ and planned-community associations answer to their covenants, the Missouri Nonprofit Corporation Law (Chapter 355) when they incorporate,⁴ the common law, and the narrow owner-protective overlay at § 442.404. That overlay covers planned communities alone; the statute expressly excludes condominium unit owners' associations and residential cooperatives. Whether an owner may build an ADU turns on two layers — municipal zoning plus the declaration — with no HOA-level preemption of the kind California⁵ and Colorado⁶ have enacted. Four federal overlays bind every Missouri association no matter what the state does: the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, the FCC's OTARD rule for antennas and small dishes, the Fair Housing Act's reasonable-modification duty, and ADA Title III for common-area facilities that operate as public accommodations. The sections that follow lay out the framework, the compliance duties it creates, the recent legislative and judicial activity, and where Missouri stands nationally.

Section 2: The legal framework

2A. Condominium acts and the planned-community framework

Missouri splits condominium law by the calendar. A condominium created on or after September 28, 1983 falls under the Missouri Uniform Condominium Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 448.1-101 through 448.4-120, which adopts the 1980 Uniform Condominium Act.³ One created before that date falls under the older Condominium Property Act, §§ 448.005 through 448.210.⁷ Both live inside Chapter 448, and they cite differently: the older act uses single-number sections (448.005), and the Uniform Act uses article-style numbering (448.1-102). Under the applicability provision at § 448.1-102, the Uniform Act also reaches pre-1983 condominiums for events and circumstances occurring on or after September 28, 1983, without invalidating what a pre-1983 declaration, bylaw, or plat already provides. Missouri is not a UCIOA state; its uniform act covers condominiums only.

Planned-community associations get no equivalent statute. A Missouri planned-community HOA runs on its recorded declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions; on the Missouri Nonprofit Corporation Law (Chapter 355) when it incorporates as a nonprofit;⁴ and on the common law, with the § 442.404 overlay described in 2B laid on top.¹ Cooperatives sit under Chapter 357.⁸ Because no comprehensive planned-community act exists, the governing documents carry more weight in Missouri than in most states.

The declaration, not a statute, sets the architectural-review structure. A typical declaration creates an architectural review committee, demands a written application before any exterior change, and lets the committee apply design standards and approve or deny. Missouri courts read restrictive covenants as private contracts and enforce them as written; they construe an ambiguous restriction in favor of the free use of property, and they generally uphold a committee decision made in good faith and within the authority the declaration grants. The Supreme Court of Missouri reaffirmed in Trustees of Clayton Terrace Subdivision v. 6 Clayton Terrace, LLC (2019) that the right to enforce a restrictive covenant is a property right — a point the court repeated in Eikmeier.^9,2

2B. Solar, signs, and the Eikmeier retroactivity ruling

Section 442.404 defines a "homeowners' association" as a nonprofit corporation or unincorporated association of homeowners, created under a declaration to own and operate portions of a planned community or other residential subdivision, with power to assess its members. The same section says the term "shall not include a condominium unit owners' association as defined and provided for in subdivision (3) of section 448.1-103 or a residential cooperative." Its reach is therefore planned communities and nothing else.¹ The solar and sign provisions arrived with Senate Bill 820, which then-State Senator Eric Burlison sponsored and Governor Mike Parson signed in June 2022; the legislature delayed the effective date to January 1, 2023 to give associations time to comply.¹⁰ The chickens provision came later, in HB 2062 (2024).¹¹

The solar provision, § 442.404.3, bars any deed restriction, covenant, or similar binding agreement from limiting or prohibiting — or having the effect of limiting or prohibiting — the installation of solar panels or collectors on a rooftop. An association may still adopt reasonable placement rules, but only so far as those rules do not prevent installation, impair functioning, restrict use, or adversely affect the device's cost or efficiency. The protection covers rooftops the individual owner owns, controls, and maintains, which is one more reason it does not reach a condominium's common-element roof.¹

The sign provisions bar prohibiting political signs (§ 442.404.2) and prohibiting or restricting sale signs (§ 442.404.4). For each, an association may set reasonable rules on time, size, place, number, and manner, and it may not remove a sign or impose a fine without prior written notice naming the rule and the violation — with three business days' notice specified for sale signs. A separate chickens provision, § 442.404.5, added in 2024, says no covenant "shall prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting ownership or pasturing of up to six chickens on a lot that is two-tenths of an acre or larger." Section 4 takes up that provision, because its enforceability is now in doubt.¹

Then came Eikmeier. In Eikmeier v. Granite Springs Home Owners Association (No. SC101152, decided January 23, 2026, opinion by Judge Robin Ransom, all concurring), the Supreme Court of Missouri held that § 442.404.3 applies to all covenants, including those already in place before the statute's January 1, 2023 effective date.² The court reasoned that the statute works prospectively — after January 1, 2023, a targeted restriction is unenforceable going forward — so it does not run afoul of the Missouri Constitution's bars on retrospective laws (Art. I, § 13) or on impairing contracts. The court also struck the association's rule confining panels to non-street-facing rooflines: the owners' street-facing layout would have produced 11,492 kWh a year against just 8,741 kWh on the non-street-facing roof, a 24 percent cut that would have required a system roughly 32 percent larger and nearly $17,000 more upfront — evidence the association never rebutted. The upshot is plain. A planned-community HOA holding old anti-solar covenant language can no longer enforce it.

2C. ADUs and federal overlays

No Missouri statute overrides a covenant on ADUs, and § 442.404 says nothing about them. So the ADU question runs on two layers: first, whether municipal or county zoning allows an accessory dwelling on the lot; second, whether the declaration allows it. Zoning binds the locality, but inside a community the covenants are the binding constraint, and an HOA may enforce a covenant against second dwellings even where local zoning would permit one. That is the reverse of California, where Civil Code § 4751 (added by A.B. 670, effective January 1, 2020) voids and makes unenforceable any governing-document provision that "either effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts the construction or use of an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit on a lot zoned for single-family residential use" in a planned development,⁵ and of Colorado, where HB 24-1152 (signed May 2024, ADU allowance effective June 30, 2025, codified in CCIOA at C.R.S. § 38-33.3-106.5) bars common interest communities from ADU restrictions more onerous than the reasonable ones state law permits.⁶ Missouri has enacted no preemption of that kind.

Four federal overlays bind every Missouri association, whatever the state framework says. The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005 (4 U.S.C. § 5) stops an association from restricting an owner's display of the U.S. flag on property the owner owns or exclusively controls, subject to reasonable time, place, and manner rules.¹² The FCC's OTARD rule (47 C.F.R. § 1.4000) blocks restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance, or use of antennas and small satellite dishes within the owner's exclusive-use area.¹³ The Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3)) requires an association to permit reasonable modifications for residents with disabilities, generally at the resident's expense.¹⁴ And ADA Title III can reach common-area facilities that qualify as public accommodations.¹⁵ None of these come from Missouri statute.

Section 3: Compliance obligations created by the framework

A. Architectural review process obligations

For a planned-community association, the authority and procedure to review a change come from the declaration, which usually hands approval power to an architectural review committee and lays out the application, decision, and notice steps. For a condominium, the association's power over alterations and its administrative duties come from statute — the Uniform Condominium Act (see, for example, the association's powers at § 448.3-102 and its upkeep duty at § 448.3-107) or, for a pre-1983 condominium, the older Condominium Property Act.^3,7 In both settings the practical safeguard is the same: written decisions and clean records, because Missouri courts enforce covenants as written and review committee decisions for good faith and authority.

B. Modifications the association must permit

A planned community must permit rooftop solar under § 442.404.3, and after Eikmeier that duty reaches old covenants too; the point does not carry over to condominium associations, where solar stays a declaration-and-Chapter-448 question.^1,2 Every association must permit display of the U.S. flag under the federal Freedom to Display the American Flag Act.¹² It must allow antennas and small dishes in areas of exclusive use under the federal OTARD rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000.¹³ It must permit reasonable modifications for residents with disabilities under the federal Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3), generally at the resident's expense.¹⁴ And ADA Title III may require access to qualifying common-area facilities.¹⁵

C. ADU obligations and limits on HOA authority

No Missouri statute makes an association permit an ADU against its covenants; the binding constraint is the declaration. Municipal or county zoning decides whether an accessory dwelling is allowed as a land-use matter, and it binds the locality, but it does not override the covenants inside a community. An association may therefore enforce a covenant against second dwellings even where local zoning would allow one.

D. Enforcement, dispute resolution, and appeal obligations

Any internal enforcement, hearing, or appeal step required before a fine or an action comes from the declaration for a planned community, and from Chapter 448 or the governing documents for a condominium.³ Where § 442.404 applies, its sign-removal rule requires written notice naming the rule and the violation before a political or sale sign comes down or a penalty lands, with three business days specified for a sale sign.¹ Disputes run through the Missouri Circuit Courts, with appeals to the Missouri Court of Appeals (Eastern, Western, and Southern Districts) and discretionary review by the Supreme Court of Missouri. Missouri keeps no dedicated HOA regulator and does not license community association managers.

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent bills

The most consequential recent bill touching § 442.404 is HB 2062 (2024), which added the chickens provision at § 442.404.5 — allowing ownership or pasturing of up to six chickens on lots of two-tenths of an acre or larger, notwithstanding a contrary covenant — and carried unrelated provisions on electric-vehicle charging mandates, business licensing, and home inspections.¹¹ A circuit court struck the entire bill down in October 2025, and that ruling is on appeal, as Section 4B explains. No new bill amending § 442.404 or Chapter 448 became law in the 2025 or 2026 sessions. Two 2026 measures that touched HOA restrictions in Chapter 442 — SB 1059 (Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman)¹⁶ and SB 1313 (Senator Nick Schroer)¹⁷ — went to committee and died when the General Assembly adjourned sine die on May 15, 2026.

B. Recent appellate rulings

Eikmeier is the central ruling here, and a lower-court case bears watching alongside it.

C. Active legislative debates

Proposals to build a comprehensive Missouri homeowners' association act — Senator Coleman filed a version in 2024 — and to re-pass the chicken provision as a standalone bill keep surfacing. But nothing touching solar, ADUs, or the core of § 442.404 advanced in 2026, and any renewed push would start in the 2027 session.¹

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

Missouri is a split-posture state. It protects solar for planned-community HOAs through § 442.404, a protection the Supreme Court of Missouri made retroactive in Eikmeier² — but everywhere else it defers to the declaration. Condominiums are cut out of the solar statute and sit on a date-split pair of acts in Chapter 448, and there is no umbrella HOA statute. On ADUs, Missouri does not join the preemption states: California voids governing-document ADU bans in planned developments under Civil Code § 4751,⁵ and Colorado limits HOA ADU regulation under HB 24-1152,⁶ while Missouri's real but narrow solar protection does not reach condominiums and leaves ADUs to zoning plus the declaration. For a multi-state operator, the Missouri rule is short: a planned-community HOA can no longer enforce an anti-solar covenant after Eikmeier, condominium solar stays a declaration matter, and ADUs remain a zoning-and-declaration question.

HOA Weekly updates its Missouri ADUs and Modifications coverage quarterly, as the legislature and the Missouri courts act — including any further reading of § 442.404 after Eikmeier and the outcome of the Four Seasons appeal.¹⁸ The federal frameworks noted above — the Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, OTARD, the Fair Housing Act, and ADA Title III — apply to Missouri associations regardless of the state framework.

Recommendations

1. Planned-community boards and managers: retire anti-solar covenant language now. After Eikmeier, a rooftop-solar prohibition is unenforceable no matter when the covenant was recorded. Replace it with reasonable placement rules that pass the statutory test — nothing that prevents installation, impairs functioning, restricts use, or hurts cost or efficiency. What would change this: an amendment to § 442.404.3, or a later Supreme Court of Missouri decision narrowing Eikmeier.^1,2
2. Condominium boards: do not import the solar rule. Solar on a condominium building is a matter for the declaration and Chapter 448, not § 442.404. Treat a request as a common-element and declaration question, and confirm which of the two Chapter 448 acts applies by checking the condominium's creation date against September 28, 1983.^3,7
3. On ADUs: analyze in two layers, and lead with the declaration. Confirm what local zoning allows, then confirm what the covenants allow; the covenants are the binding in-community constraint. Do not assume Missouri follows California or Colorado. What would change this: a Missouri ADU-preemption statute reaching association documents — none is pending.^5,6
4. On chickens: enforce covenants, but document carefully. Because HB 2062 was struck down in its entirety and is on appeal, § 442.404.5 is not enforceable now, and covenant bans on chickens stand. Watch the Four Seasons appeal; a reversal would revive the provision.^11,18
5. Build the federal overlays into every review checklist. U.S. flag display, OTARD antennas and dishes, FHA reasonable modifications, and ADA common-area access apply regardless of the covenants and regardless of community type. A denial that ignores a federal overlay is the highest-liability mistake a Missouri board can make.^12,13,14,15
6. Correct any internal material that says § 442.404 protects flags. Several widely cited HOA-guidance pages say it does; the statute's text does not. Flag protection is federal.^1,12

Caveats

• Eikmeier docket number. The correct citation is No. SC101152, confirmed by the slip-opinion caption and secondary summaries; Justia's case page displays "SC101161," which is a metadata error — do not use it. The Westlaw parallel cite is 2026 WL 202043 (Mo. Jan. 23, 2026).²
• Four Seasons appeal status. The Cole County ruling voiding HB 2062 (No. 24AC-CC07532, Oct. 20, 2025) is confirmed, and the Attorney General's Office has said it will appeal. As of July 15, 2026, no Supreme Court of Missouri docket number, briefing schedule, or decision on that appeal could be confirmed in public sources; run a direct Case.net lookup before republishing this section. Until an appellate court says otherwise, the law reads as if HB 2062 was never adopted, and the chicken provision is not enforceable.¹⁸
• Codification artifact. The Missouri Revisor of Statutes still displays § 442.404.5 (chickens) as effective August 28, 2024, because revisors do not remove text on the strength of a circuit-court ruling. That displayed text is not a reliable read on current enforceability given the Four Seasons judgment.¹
• The "flag" discrepancy. Several secondary sources tie flag protection to § 442.404. The statute's verified text covers political signs, solar panels and collectors, sale signs, and chickens only. Flag display is protected by the federal Freedom to Display the American Flag Act, not Missouri statute.^1,12
• 2026 bills. SB 1059 (Coleman) and SB 1313 (Schroer) were the only 2026 bills directly touching § 442.404 or HOA restrictions in Chapter 442; both went to committee and died at sine die on May 15, 2026.^16,17 The Freedom to Display the American Flag Act carries no private right of action — a limit worth noting in any enforcement analysis.
• EV charging and landscaping. Missouri has no HOA-specific statute on EV charging or landscaping that reaches association governing documents; both remain declaration matters. The EV-charging language in HB 2062 concerned local-government mandates, not HOA authority, and fell with the rest of that bill.¹¹
• This page is regulatory intelligence, not legal advice. Verify current statutory text at revisor.mo.gov and current case status before acting; this analysis reflects Missouri law as of July 15, 2026.

1. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 442.404 (homeowners' association restrictions on political signs, solar panels and collectors, sale signs, and chickens; "homeowners' association" defined to exclude a condominium unit owners' association and a residential cooperative) ↩
2. Eikmeier v. Granite Springs Home Owners Ass'n, No. SC101152, 2026 WL 202043 (Mo. banc Jan. 23, 2026) ↩
3. Missouri Uniform Condominium Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 448.1-101 to 448.4-120; see § 448.1-102 (applicability), § 448.1-103(3) (definition of condominium unit owners' association), § 448.3-102 (association powers), and § 448.3-107 (upkeep) ↩
4. Mo. Rev. Stat. ch. 355, Missouri Nonprofit Corporation Law ↩
5. Cal. Civ. Code § 4751 (governing-document provision effectively prohibiting or unreasonably restricting an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is void and unenforceable; added by A.B. 670, eff. Jan. 1, 2020) ↩
6. Colo. H.B. 24-1152 (2024), codified at Colo. Rev. Stat. § 38-33.3-106.5 (common-interest-community ADU restrictions limited as against public policy; signed May 2024, ADU allowance eff. June 30, 2025) ↩
7. Missouri Condominium Property Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 448.005 to 448.210 (condominiums created before September 28, 1983) ↩
8. Mo. Rev. Stat. ch. 357 (cooperative companies) ↩
9. Trs. of Clayton Terrace Subdivision v. 6 Clayton Terrace, LLC, 585 S.W.3d 269 (Mo. banc 2019) ↩
10. S.B. 820, 101st Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2022) (enacting the § 442.404 solar and sign provisions; signed June 2022, eff. Jan. 1, 2023) ↩
11. H.B. 2062, 102d Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2024) (adding the § 442.404.5 chicken provision; signed July 2024, listed eff. Aug. 28, 2024) ↩
12. Freedom to Display the American Flag Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-243, 120 Stat. 572 (4 U.S.C. § 5) ↩
13. 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000, FCC Over-the-Air Reception Devices (OTARD) Rule ↩
14. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(f)(3), Fair Housing Act (reasonable modifications for persons with disabilities, generally at the resident's expense) ↩
15. 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq., Americans with Disabilities Act Title III (public accommodations) ↩
16. S.B. 1059, 103d Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2026) (Sen. Mary Elizabeth Coleman; HOA restrictions in Chapter 442; referred to committee, died at sine die) ↩
17. S.B. 1313, 103d Gen. Assemb., 2d Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2026) (Sen. Nick Schroer; HOA restrictions in Chapter 442; referred to committee, died at sine die) ↩
18. Four Seasons Lakesites Prop. Owners Ass'n v. State, No. 24AC-CC07532 (Mo. Cir. Ct., Cole Cnty. Oct. 20, 2025) (holding H.B. 2062 unconstitutional in its entirety; appeal announced) ↩