Virginia vs. Utah, Maine, Colorado, Maryland

Why compare states?

Virginia's HB 395 didn't appear in a vacuum. The General Assembly's drafting committee studied earlier laws closely, and understanding what Virginia borrowed — and what it changed — helps explain choices in the law that might otherwise seem arbitrary.

It also matters practically: the three states with the most enforcement history (Utah, Maine, Colorado) give us real data on how landlord disputes, HOA conflicts, and utility notification processes actually play out after the law takes effect. Virginia can expect similar patterns.

Side-by-side comparison

Where Virginia borrowed from other states

From Utah: the 1,200 W cap and broad HOA preemption

Utah's HB 340, passed in 2024, was the most influential model for HB 395. Virginia borrowed three things directly from Utah:

The 1,200 W AC cap — Utah established this number first, based on what a typical residential circuit can handle safely and what practical panel-plus-microinverter kits can deliver at household scale. Virginia adopted it without modification.

Broad HOA preemption — Utah took the approach that HOA bans on plug-in solar are preempted statewide, with narrow exceptions. Virginia adopted the same framework: associations can impose reasonable architectural conditions but cannot prohibit compliant systems outright.

Reliance on UL certification as the compliance gateway — Rather than creating a Virginia-specific approval process, both states made UL certification the trigger for legal protection. This keeps the compliance question simple: does the device have the UL mark? Yes → it's protected. No → it isn't.

Virginia's drafting committee cited Utah's experience explicitly during the 2024 stakeholder work group sessions as evidence the broad HOA preemption framework was workable.

From Maryland: the split effective date structure

Maryland's SB 583 introduced the idea of phasing in equipment standards ahead of consumer protections — giving the market time to develop certified products before turning on the enforcement mechanisms. Virginia adopted this structure directly.

Without the split dates, a statewide law that takes effect all at once creates a problem: on day one, landlords are legally required to accept compliant systems, but compliant systems might not yet be widely available because manufacturers hadn't yet gone through UL certification. Maryland's approach solved this by giving manufacturers 15–18 months to certify products before the consumer-rights side kicked in.

From Colorado: the recommended (rather than required) utility notification

Colorado's HB24-1173 decided that requiring formal utility notification for every small plug-in system created more administrative friction than it was worth at this scale. Virginia's SCC reached the same conclusion: utilities can request voluntary notification, but it's not a legal prerequisite to installation.

Where Virginia diverged from earlier laws

The 4-unit landlord threshold — Virginia's most distinctive choice

This is the clearest departure from other states. Utah and Maine have no threshold: every landlord, including someone who rents out a single house, must allow compliant systems. Colorado's threshold is 5+ units; Maryland's is 3+; Virginia landed at 4.

The 4-unit number was an explicit compromise reached in the 2024 stakeholder work group. Small-landlord advocacy groups — representing people who own one or two rental properties as retirement income — argued that the overhead of managing tenant solar installs was disproportionate for small operators. Tenant coalitions pushed back, arguing that any threshold left renters in smaller buildings without protection.

Four emerged as the number that captured most of Virginia's rental housing stock (the majority of rental units in Virginia are in buildings of 4+ units) while giving small landlords an exemption.

What this means if you're renting in a smaller building: If you rent a duplex, a triplex, or a converted single-family home with 3 or fewer units, HB 395's landlord protections don't apply to you. Your lease terms control. You can still ask your landlord — many will say yes voluntarily — but you don't have a legal right to demand it.

No required utility notification — and what utilities did instead

Utah, Maine, and Maryland all require tenants to notify their utility before installing. Virginia specifically decided not to make this mandatory, deferring to utility-specific voluntary programs.

In practice, Dominion Energy and APCo have both set up their own optional notification channels. They strongly prefer to receive a heads-up — it helps with meter monitoring and lets them flag any technical issues before they become problems. But if you install a compliant system without notifying your utility, you're not violating HB 395.

The practical recommendation: notify your utility voluntarily. It costs you nothing, takes five minutes on the utility's website, and avoids any future questions about whether your meter readings are anomalous.

"

We looked at every state that had done this before us, and we picked the parts that worked without the parts that added friction.

"

Historic district carve-out — something Maine shares, Utah and Colorado don't

Virginia and Maine both include narrow carve-outs for formally designated historic districts. Where a property is subject to a local historic preservation ordinance with architectural review authority, that authority retains some power over visible installations.

In Virginia, the carve-out is narrow: it applies only to installations visible from a public way in a formally designated historic district. The vast majority of Virginia renters and condo owners are not in such districts. But if you live in Old Town Alexandria, parts of Richmond's Fan district, or other historically designated areas, check with local preservation authorities before sending your installation notice.

What Utah's enforcement history tells Virginia

Utah has three years of HB 340 enforcement data now — more than any other plug-in solar state. Two patterns are emerging that Virginia should expect after January 2027:

HOA disputes cluster in the first 18 months, then decline sharply. In Utah, the first wave of HOA conflicts was concentrated in 2024 and early 2025, as boards worked out what the law actually permitted them to do. By mid-2025, most Utah HOAs had updated their guidelines and disputes dropped significantly. Virginia HOAs are already ahead of this curve — many are working through their guidelines now in anticipation of January 2027.

Landlord disputes are rare in absolute numbers but concentrated in the 4–10 unit range. In Utah, where there's no unit threshold, the disputes cluster in small to mid-size buildings — not in large apartment complexes (which typically have management companies that adapt quickly) or single-family rentals (where landlords often just agree to let tenants install). Virginia's 4-unit threshold already excludes the smallest landlords; the disputes will likely concentrate in the 4–20 unit range.

The reasonable-restriction disputes take longer to resolve. The hardest cases in Utah aren't outright refusals — it's arguments about whether a specific placement or mount requirement is "reasonable." These cases take months to work through and often involve legal aid attorneys. Virginia should expect the same pattern starting in 2027.

What this comparison means for Virginia residents

If you're a Virginia renter or condo owner looking at the law, the comparison to other states is mostly reassuring: Virginia's protections are among the strongest of the five states. The broad HOA preemption matches Utah (the most protective state on HOA issues), and the landlord anti-restriction rules are robust.

The two areas where Virginia is more limited than some peers:

1. The 4-unit landlord threshold — if you rent in a smaller building, you're not covered. Maine and Utah would cover you; Virginia doesn't.
2. No utility notification requirement — this one actually works in your favor. Virginia doesn't require you to go through a formal utility approval process before installing.

For everyone else — renters in larger buildings, condo owners, HOA members — Virginia's framework gives you comparable or better protection than the early-mover states.

---

Sources: Virginia HB 395 (2025 Session); Utah HB 340 (2024 Session); Maine LD 1777 (2024 Session); Colorado HB24-1173 (2024 Session); Maryland SB 583 (2024 Session); SCC Docket PUR-2025-00147; Utah Public Service Commission enforcement data (2024–2025).

This article is for general information and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on a specific situation, consult a Virginia-licensed attorney or your local legal aid office.

Last updated: July 31, 2026

Related Reading

• Read our deep dive news analysis on comparative analysis of Virginia and Utah plug-in laws.
• Understand the technical reasoning behind state size limits in our explanation of the 1,200 W AC system ceiling.
• Check the legal milestone dates in Virginia's phased implementation schedule.