How else do you expect the HOA to collect on legitimate debts? I have zero sympathy for freeloaders who fail to pay their share for association facilities.
People don't always buy a home with an HOA because they want "facilities"; sometimes they buy a home with an HOA because they have little to no choice.
Furthermore your claim that there are no alternatives in some general areas is simply false. I defy you to identify a single residential area in the US where there are no non-HOA properties within 50 miles. Sure you might have to pay more or drive further but there are always alternatives.
https://bostonfairhousing.org/timeline/1920s1948-Restrictive...
The principle of BATNA can define the more privileged party in a contract:
https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/batna/translate-your-batna...
The principle remains.
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/unenforceable-contra...
You're also simply raising objections to elements I've introduced which you claim prior knowledge of (a fact of which, if I do have privileged access, I'd be well advised to conceal, and more probably, I don't). Which begins to seem tendentious and argument for the sake of arguing.
You could have introduced BATNA to the discussion. You didn't. I did. It is a valid concern and consideration: the HOA need only find another mark^Wbuyer. The buyer needs to find a property not covered by onerous HOA terms.
It's also notable that the Oakland County case doesn't concern HOAs. Though complaints against HOA are certainly justified in many cases.
I think a lot of the regulations they tend to want to impose are crap and busy body meddling but gathering funds to maintain community facilities is one of the legitimate reasons for an HOA.
I have seen far too many petits Napoleons terrorizing their neighbors under an HOA aegis to defend even the HOAs that act honorably to fulfill their original intents. They should all be voided. If you can't "preserve neighborhood character" on voluntary contributions and conduct alone, your HOA doesn't deserve to exist.
HOAs are all about making little insular villages with none of the actual infrastructure necessary to support one, such as schools and parks and fire trucks and businesses that generate noise and traffic (and money). That is itself cutting corners to make everything as cheap as possible, and leaving the buyers holding the bag. Do you want to be part of the city that actually provides those things, or do you want to be continually subject to nasty letters for having a dandelion in your yard, just because the home building company stuck that clause in there as a marketing gimmick for the bermudagrass-monoculture lawn snobs?