AJ Gubash argues that Minnesota lawmakers should extend election-season sign protections to homeowners living under HOA rules.
By AJ Gubash
A Minnesota homeowner recently put a political sign in her yard supporting a local candidate. It was a simple act of political expression during election season, something Americans do in neighborhoods across the country. Then a letter from her homeowner’s association (HOA) arrived commanding her to take it down immediately.
The association’s rule goes further than regulating the sign’s size or placement. Political or campaign signs are “never allowed” on the property, building exterior, or even in windows visible from outside.
Think about that for a moment. A private organization governing an entire residential community can tell you that you cannot display a political sign in the heart of election season, even in the window of the home you own.
Minnesota law creates a strange imbalance when it comes to political signs.
During the statutory election period, municipal ordinances cannot restrict the size or number of noncommercial signs. In other words, Minnesota has limited how far local government may go in regulating this traditional form of political expression.
But homeowners living in common-interest communities can find themselves subject to a very different set of rules.
Minnesota law separately gives common-interest associations authority to regulate “signs and other displays,” which apparently includes political campaign signs, even when those displays are located inside of a home.
Your local government is rightfully prohibited from telling you that you have too many political signs in your yard during election season, while your HOA may prohibit you from displaying one at all, even from the window of your own home.
An HOA is not the government, so its restriction on political signs does not technically constitute a First Amendment violation. But that legal distinction is precisely why this issue deserves attention.
A private organization exercising substantial control over an entire residential community can completely restrict a form of political expression in ways government itself may not.
Of course, there are legitimate reasons for HOAs to regulate signs. Communities have reasonable interests in maintaining their appearance and preventing yards and buildings from becoming cluttered with permanent signage, but this certainly should not extend to campaign signs during election season.
There is a significant difference between reasonable aesthetic regulation and an outright prohibition of political expression.
Perhaps an HOA could establish reasonable rules about where signs may be placed. It could require temporary campaign signs to come down after an election.
But should it be able to tell a homeowner that political signs are never permitted anywhere on the property: not in the yard, not on the exterior, and not even displayed from inside the homeowner’s own window?
Political expression, particularly during an election, occupies a critical place in American civic life. For generations, Americans have used their homes, yards, windows, and front porches to express their views, support candidates and causes, and participate visibly in the democratic process. A yard sign is among the most fundamental ways an ordinary citizen can publicly say: This is what I believe.
Freedom of speech is paramount to maintaining representative government. Elections depend upon citizens being able to express political views, advocate for their beliefs, and communicate those preferences to their neighbors. When political expression is broadly suppressed across a residential community, the issue extends beyond neighborhood aesthetics and raises serious questions about the prevention of civic engagement.
Minnesota should consider legislation establishing specific protections for political signs in common-interest communities, especially during election season.
Minnesota already limits municipal restrictions on noncommercial signs during election season. Lawmakers could consider whether homeowners living under an HOA should receive similar statutory protection against outright political-sign bans.
HOAs are not governments. But when they exercise government-like authority over entire residential communities, the law should carefully consider where that authority ends, particularly when the exercise of that authority threatens to silence free expression.
Your home should amplify your voice, not silence it.
AJ Gubash is a Minnesota paralegal working in nonprofit public-interest law, a graduate legal studies student at Hamline University, and a candidate for the Minnesota House of Representatives in District 53A.
Typically, the outside of an HOA unit and the grounds around the unit are the HOA’s property, not the homeowner’s property. If that is the case, the issue is whether a homeowner should be free to place a political sign on someone else’s property. An HOA should have the right to choose not to use its property for political signs.
The issue is more complicated where the homeowner wants to use their own property for political messages. Allowing political messages inside a unit’s window facing outward may be a reasonable balance. However, bear in mind that once an HOA opens the door to political signs, it can be difficult to justify allowing some messages but not others. Some political messages are based on anger and hate. People have a right to their opinions, but other HOA residents have a legitimate interest in being free from forced exposure to these messages.
A HOA is a voluntary, private association – if you don’t like the rules, don’t join. The right to free expression does not carry with it the right to a forum. It is perfectly reasonable for HOA members if they so wish to prohibit signs that disturb the peace and tranquility of their community. You can always live somewhere else if you need to politicize every corner of your environment and antagonize your neighbors.
Counterpoint: The world would be a much better place without the constant barrage of political signs, billboards, and various other in-your-face advertisements.
Generally I think HOA boards are a bunch of fascist dictators, but I’m on their side this time. Just this time.
I think HOA boards each have their own leadership culture. I’ve heard stories that make you shake your head, but have experienced good governance over the last 17 years with our condo board.
As far as rules go, any person buying a property with a HOA knows the rules before they purchase the property, and sign an agreement to abide by them. I don’t see what the issue is. And the bylaws can be changed based a vote of residents.
As far as political campaigns go, State law allows for candidate access to all residential properties for door knocking and literature drops.