Montana has no shared solar for associations — the veto was not overridden
Montana has no shared solar for associations — the veto was not overridden
2026-09-15 · Montana · Legislation · Did not pass
What happened. Montana came closer than it ever has to a shared solar framework, and then did not get one. The bill was vetoed and the override failed — which matters to any association that has looked at a single array serving multiple units.
The bill and the veto
Senate Bill 188, “Revising solar energy policy laws,” would have added new sections to Title 69, chapter 3, distinguishing shared solar customers from net-metering customers, with Public Service Commission rulemaking within one year.1
- Vetoed by the Governor — June 9, 2025
- Override vote in progress — June 19, 2025
- Override failed — July 14, 2025
No chapter number was assigned. Confirmation from the other direction: Montana Code Annotated Title 69, chapter 3 contains no shared-solar part.
A reading trap worth naming
Montana's bill-status system labels the override poll “Veto Override,” which reads like success. The outcome lives in a separate result field, and for SB 188 it reads VETO_NOT_OVERRIDDEN. Across the 2025 session there were 26 override polls and only 2 successful overrides — House Bill 368 and House Bill 643, neither related to housing.
Any tracker that keys off the status label alone will report these bills as enacted. They are not. Two other sustained vetoes are worth knowing about because they would have helped owner-members: House Bill 831, increasing the elderly homeowner and renter income tax credit, and Senate Bill 424, revising the disabled veteran property tax assistance program.
What an association can and cannot do about solar in Montana
Take the three questions separately, because Montana answers them differently and boards routinely run them together.
1. Can the association host or subscribe to a shared solar facility? No state program exists. That is what SB 188 would have created, and its failure is the operative fact. A single array serving multiple units through a subscription arrangement has no statutory framework in Montana.3
2. Can a covenant prohibit an owner's own solar installation? Montana has no statute voiding an association's solar prohibition. The solar easement statutes in Title 70, chapter 17, part 3 were not amended in 2025. This is the point most often stated incorrectly — many states void such covenants; Montana does not.
Beware the preamble of House Bill 760, Chapter 719 of the 2025 Laws, which asserts that “Montanans have the right to install, interconnect, and use energy generation and storage systems on their property.” That is a WHEREAS clause, not operative law. It preempts nothing and voids no covenant, and nobody should be citing it as though it did.
3. What did HB 760 actually do? It created a consumer protection: a residential solar buyer has three business days to rescind an installation contract in writing. The required disclosure must be “written in all capital letters” with space for the customer to initial an acknowledgement:
“YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO CANCEL THIS CONTRACT WITHIN 3 BUSINESS DAYS AFTER YOU SIGN THIS CONTRACT. TO CANCEL, YOU MUST NOTIFY IN WRITING THE PERSON IDENTIFIED FOR THIS PURPOSE IN THIS CONTRACT BY E-MAIL OR BY CERTIFIED POSTAL MAIL”
If the buyer rescinds within three business days, “the contract is terminated,” and the solar company “may not enforce any terms of the rescinded contract and may not file any claims for labor and materials.” It took effect on passage and approval, May 13, 2025.2
The practical point for an architectural review committee
Three business days is short, and it creates a sequencing problem that an association can solve for free.
An owner who signs with an installer before getting architectural approval has a 72-hour escape hatch and then a contract for a system the committee may reject. A committee that cannot turn a solar application around inside three business days — which is nearly all of them — should say so in writing, in the application materials, and tell applicants to submit before signing.
That is a one-line addition to a form, and it prevents the worst version of this dispute: an owner financially committed to equipment the declaration does not permit, which is when an architectural denial stops being a process question and becomes a fight.
The other 2025 energy change that did land
Associations did get one genuine win in 2025, and it was on the electric-vehicle side rather than solar. Senate Bill 228, Chapter 216, effective July 1, 2025, rewrote the definition of “charging station” to exclude equipment “owned by an association of real property owners including a homeowners' association as defined in 70-17-901.” That removed the 3-cent-per-kilowatt-hour tax, the dedicated-meter requirement and the Department of Transportation registration duty from association-owned chargers.
The asymmetry is striking and worth stating plainly: in the same session, Montana exempted association-owned EV charging from a tax regime, and declined to create any framework for association-owned solar at all.4
Related Montana HOA Topics
- Senate Bill 188 (2025), enrolled bill — the shared and community solar framework that was vetoed (Montana Legislature document store) ↩
- House Bill 760 (2025), enrolled bill — Chapter 719, Laws of 2025, solar consumer protection and the three-business-day rescission right ↩
- Montana Legislature Bill Explorer API — veto and VETO_NOT_OVERRIDDEN results for SB 188, HB 831 and SB 424, and the two successful 2025 overrides ↩
- Mont. Code Ann. Title 69, chapter 3 parts index — confirming no shared-solar part exists (official) ↩
Stay on top of Montana HOA law
Every week: new Montana legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.