Oregon HOA Solar Rights

1. Overview: Solar rights for HOAs in Oregon

Oregon stands as a solar-protection state. The Oregon Planned Community Act makes void and unenforceable any provision in a planned community's declaration or bylaws that prohibits an owner from installing or using solar panels on a roof or other exterior portion of a building the owner controls, treating such a prohibition as a violation of state public policy.¹ That provision sits at ORS 94.778, inside the Planned Community Act rather than in the property-rights chapter. The protection isn't absolute: the same statute lets a homeowners association adopt and enforce reasonable size, placement, or aesthetic requirements for the panels.¹ A separate and older statute, ORS 105.880 in the property-rights chapter, voids any provision in an instrument conveying fee title that prohibits the use of solar energy systems, and applies across property types.² Oregon's two governing statutes split community types: condominiums fall under the Oregon Condominium Act, ORS Chapter 100, and planned communities fall under the Oregon Planned Community Act, ORS Chapter 94.³ Utility-side programs such as net metering and community solar are regulated by the Oregon Public Utility Commission and stay separate from an association's authority over installations. Nationally, Oregon belongs in the protection category, alongside states whose statutes void association solar prohibitions. The sections that follow set out the statutory framework, the operational rules, and recent activity.

2. The statutory framework

2A. The solar provision

The operative HOA solar provision is ORS 94.778, enacted in 2017. It states that, except for the reasonable-restriction allowance, a provision in a declaration or bylaws of a planned community that prohibits an owner of the roof or other exterior portion of a building on which solar panels may be installed from installing or using solar panels for obtaining solar access "is void and unenforceable as a violation of the public policy to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the people of Oregon."¹ An owner subject to such a provision may petition to remove it under ORS 93.272, the procedure for removing certain restrictions from recorded instruments.¹ The standard runs qualitative, not numeric. Subsection (3) permits an association to adopt and enforce a provision that imposes reasonable size, placement, or aesthetic requirements for the installation or use of solar panels.¹ The statute contains no cost-or-efficiency threshold and no numeric ceiling on added cost or lost output. That distinguishes it from California's rule, where a restriction is unreasonable if it increases photovoltaic system cost by more than $1,000 or decreases efficiency by more than 10 percent as originally proposed.⁴ Oregon's text expressly permits aesthetic requirements, provided they stay reasonable and don't amount to a prohibition.

A second provision, ORS 105.880, sits in the property-rights chapter, ORS Chapter 105, under the solar-energy-easement heading. Enacted in 1979, it bars any person conveying or contracting to convey fee title to real property from including, in the conveyance instrument, a provision prohibiting the use of solar energy systems on that property, and it makes any such provision void and unenforceable.² It defines a solar energy system broadly as any device, structure, or mechanism using solar radiation for heating, cooling, or electrical energy.² Because it reaches conveyance instruments generally, it applies across community types, but only to instrument provisions that prohibit use.

Two adjacent frameworks stay distinct and don't, by themselves, constrain an association. ORS 105.885 to 105.895 authorize voluntary solar energy easements, which are private, recorded agreements creating a right to sunlight across a neighboring property.⁵ Separately, ORS 215.044 and 227.190 authorize counties and cities to adopt local solar-access ordinances governing the orientation of new streets, lots, and buildings.⁶ Neither a voluntary easement nor a local ordinance works as a source of authority over an association's review of an owner's system. On the utility side, net metering and the community solar program stand as Public Utility Commission matters concerning the customer-utility relationship, not association governance, and sit outside the scope of this page.

2B. The two-statute framework and the registration regime

Oregon governs common-interest communities through two separate acts. The Oregon Condominium Act, ORS Chapter 100, governs the creation, disclosure, and administration of condominiums.³ The Oregon Planned Community Act, ORS Chapter 94 — the planned-community provisions run from ORS 94.550 to 94.783 — governs planned communities and their homeowners associations.⁷ The two acts stay separate; Oregon is not a full Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act state, and features of that uniform act shouldn't be imported. The solar provision at ORS 94.778 sits inside the Planned Community Act and, by its terms, reaches planned-community declarations and bylaws. The Condominium Act's void-provisions section, ORS 100.023, currently voids certain governing-document provisions — drought-period irrigation requirements, family child care restrictions, and portable cooling device restrictions — but contains no standing rooftop-solar clause, so a condominium owner's protection rests principally on the conveyance-instrument rule in ORS 105.880.⁸

The Oregon Real Estate Agency administers a registration-and-reporting regime centered on condominiums. Declarants file a Condominium Information Report, and condominium unit owner associations file Annual Reports with the agency through its eLicense system.⁹ This works as a filing and reporting function, not a solar regulator; the agency doesn't adjudicate individual solar disputes. Planned communities are administered largely through self-governance under ORS Chapter 94, with association information recorded at the county level rather than filed with the agency. Registration of an association is also distinct from manager licensing: Oregon has no separate community association manager license, and a broker's license isn't required to manage community or condominium associations, though the agency licenses real estate brokers, principal brokers, and property managers under ORS Chapter 696.¹⁰

On the corporate side, associations organized as nonprofit corporations answer to the Oregon Nonprofit Corporation Act, ORS Chapter 65, which governs corporate structure and procedure.¹¹ The solar provision overlays this framework: it operates on the content of governing documents, independent of the corporate form the association takes.

2C. The reasonable-restriction boundary and the role of governing documents

The boundary is drawn by ORS 94.778 itself. An association may not maintain or enforce a declaration or bylaw provision that prohibits an owner from installing or using solar panels on the owner's roof or exterior building surface; such a provision is void as a matter of public policy.¹ An association may adopt and enforce reasonable size, placement, or aesthetic requirements.¹ The line between the two runs between regulating how a system is installed and effectively preventing installation.

On order of precedence, the statute controls over conflicting governing-document language within its scope: a declaration or bylaw provision that prohibits solar panels is void and unenforceable regardless of when it was recorded, and an owner may petition to strike it from the instrument.¹ Architectural review retains a residual role, but only as a channel for reasonable requirements, not as a basis for denial. The role differs by community type. In a planned community, an owner's request concerns the owner's own roof or exterior surface, and review is limited to reasonable size, placement, and aesthetic terms under ORS 94.778.¹ In a condominium, roofs and building exteriors frequently count as common elements controlled by the association, so an owner's ability to install on those surfaces depends on the declaration and the association's authority over common elements under ORS Chapter 100, with ORS 105.880 barring any conveyance-instrument provision that prohibits the use of a solar energy system.²

3. What an Oregon association can and cannot do regarding solar

A. What an association cannot do

An association may not enforce a governing-document provision that prohibits an owner from installing or using solar panels on the owner's roof or exterior building surface; ORS 94.778(1) makes such a provision void and unenforceable in a planned community, and it is mandatory.¹ It also may not rely on a conveyance-instrument provision that prohibits the use of a solar energy system, because ORS 105.880 voids such provisions across property types.²

B. What an association may do

An association may adopt and enforce reasonable size, placement, or aesthetic requirements for solar panels; this authority is granted by ORS 94.778(3) for planned communities and stays discretionary with the association.¹ The standard is reasonableness, and the statute sets no numeric cost or efficiency threshold, so a requirement so burdensome that it effectively prevents installation falls outside the allowance.¹

C. The reasonable-restriction standard and approval process

Because the standard runs qualitative, an association handling a solar request should apply its architectural or design requirements as reasonable size, placement, and aesthetic conditions rather than as grounds for refusal; the governing basis is ORS 94.778(3).¹ The Planned Community Act doesn't prescribe a statutory approval deadline specific to solar, so the process runs through the association's ordinary architectural review under its governing documents, constrained by the reasonableness limit. By contrast, California imposes a 45-day deemed-approval rule; Oregon has no equivalent solar-specific deadline.⁴

D. Dispute resolution and remedies

A solar dispute counts as a civil matter. Trial-level disputes proceed through the Oregon Circuit Courts, with appeals to the Oregon Court of Appeals and discretionary review by the Oregon Supreme Court. The Planned Community Act supplies a remedy: under ORS 94.780, failure to comply with ORS 94.550 to 94.783 is cause for a suit or action to remedy the violation or to recover actual damages, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorney fees and court costs, and the action must be commenced within one year after discovery of the violation.¹² No Oregon appellate court has issued a published opinion interpreting ORS 94.778 or ORS 105.880 as applied to association solar authority, so the operative text controls without judicial gloss.

4. Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent bills

House Bill 4080 (2026 Regular Session), "Relating to portable solar photovoltaic energy devices," informally the "balcony solar bill," would have extended solar protection to portable plug-in devices.

B. Recent appellate rulings

No Oregon Court of Appeals or Oregon Supreme Court opinion in the past 36 months interprets ORS 94.778, ORS 105.880, or association authority over solar installations. The statutory annotations for both provisions show no case citations, and ORS 94.778 has generated no appellate construction since its 2017 enactment.

C. Active legislative debates

The 2026 balcony-solar effort, HB 4080, reflects an active debate over whether Oregon should extend solar protection to portable plug-in devices and add an express condominium-solar provision, but no amendment to the permanent-panel rule at ORS 94.778 was pending as of July 2026.

5. National positioning and related coverage

Solar-rights states fall into three broad groups: strong-protection states whose statutes void or limit association solar restrictions — for example, California Civ. Code § 714, Florida Fla. Stat. § 163.04, Arizona A.R.S. § 33-1816, Colorado C.R.S. § 38-30-168, Nevada, and Texas Prop. Code § 202.010, under which associations may not ban or restrict solar panel installation;⁴ solar-easement-only states, which enable voluntary easements but don't override associations; and no-protection states, where the declaration controls. Oregon belongs in the protection group: ORS 94.778 voids planned-community solar prohibitions and permits only reasonable restrictions, and ORS 105.880 separately voids conveyance-instrument solar prohibitions. Oregon's distinctive feature runs structural: a two-statute framework separating condominiums, ORS Chapter 100, from planned communities, ORS Chapter 94, a state condominium registration and reporting regime run by the Oregon Real Estate Agency, and a reasonable-restriction standard with no numeric cost-or-efficiency threshold. For multi-state operators, the practical implication is that an Oregon planned community cannot ban rooftop solar but can impose reasonable, well-documented size, placement, and aesthetic requirements, and that condominium treatment runs thinner because there is no express condominium-act solar clause.

HOA Weekly updates its Oregon Solar Rights coverage quarterly as the Legislature and the Oregon courts act. No federal rule comparable to the FCC's OTARD rule, 47 C.F.R. § 1.4000, extends to rooftop solar, so Oregon's state statutes control here.

Footnotes

1. ORS 94.778, Prohibition against installation of solar panels void and unenforceable (Oregon Planned Community Act, 2017 c.282 §2) ↩
2. ORS 105.880, Conveyance prohibiting use of solar energy systems void (1979 c.671 §5) ↩
3. Oregon Condominium Act, ORS Chapter 100 ↩
4. Cal. Civ. Code § 714 (California Solar Rights Act, cost/efficiency thresholds and 45-day rule); Tex. Prop. Code § 202.010 (Texas solar restriction limits) ↩
5. ORS 105.885 to 105.895, Solar energy easements ↩
6. ORS 215.044 and ORS 227.190, Solar access ordinances ↩
7. Oregon Planned Community Act, ORS 94.550 to 94.783 ↩
8. ORS 100.023, Void and unenforceable provisions of condominium governing document ↩
9. Oregon Real Estate Agency, Condominium Unit Owners Associations (Annual Reports) ↩
10. Oregon Real Estate Agency, licensing of real estate brokers, principal brokers, and property managers ↩
11. Oregon Nonprofit Corporation Act, ORS Chapter 65 ↩
12. ORS 94.780, Remedies; attorney fees; statute of limitations ↩
13. HB 4080 (2026 Regular Session), measure overview, text, and staff summary ↩