Total posts : 45366
HOAs here are not required by civil governments, at least not here. They exist because the original property developer established them before the property was developed and established design and usage rules. The deed covenants were then passed on to the subsequent owners (including the builders). There is no advantage to a taxing authority since the roads remain public and the city maintains them and provides all the usual city services. Your comments about saving money might apply to so called private communities with undedicated streets but they do not apply to a neighborhood simply because they have a HOA.
There is a big difference between HOAs and “communism” in that the HOAs are not state institutions and no one is forced to purchase property and reside in a HOA neighborhood against their will.
Many believe HOAs protect or add to property values. Right or wrong, it is up to the individual to make that determination and choice when purchasing the property. Why is it a surprise when a person agrees to the covenants and restrictions upon purchase and then finds something they don’t like in the restrictions? They complain about infringement of their property rights when they knew in advance about the restrictions and agreed to them. This complaining does not wash with me.
If a person doesn’t believe that their word is their bond and does not like the restrictions then they should purchase elsewhere.