A Golf Club You Can’t Quit: How Deed Restrictions Lock Some Anthem Homeowners Into Private Club Dues

In Anthem’s country club neighborhoods, some residents say they discovered a second set of “HOA-like” obligations—only the money doesn’t go to an HOA, and the usual homeowner checks and balances don’t apply.

ANTHEM, Ariz. — In many Arizona planned communities, monthly assessments are collected by a homeowners association (HOA): a nonprofit corporation with a board, elections, open-meeting rules, and statutory guardrails that—at least in theory—give residents a voice.

But in parts of Anthem’s country club community, homeowners can be bound by a separate, recorded set of covenants that function differently. The obligation looks and feels like an assessment, yet it is tied to a private country club operation. And unlike a typical HOA, the entity collecting the money is not designed to be controlled by the homeowners who fund it.

At the center of the arrangement is a recorded document often referred to as a “recreational covenant.” It attaches to the property itself, meaning it can follow the deed from one owner to the next—creating an obligation that is difficult to escape without selling the home.

“The obligation follows the deed.” That’s the core concept: it’s not a membership you sign up for; it’s a recorded restriction tied to ownership of the lot.

How the obligation works

The recreational covenant establishes a form of mandatory membership—frequently described as a “social membership”—that is automatically tied to ownership of a home within the affected area. The practical consequence is straightforward: if you own the home, you are treated as a member for purposes of dues and charges.

Key features of the covenant structure include:

• Automatic attachment at purchase. The membership obligation arises when someone takes title to the property, not when they choose to join.
• Limited exit options. The membership typically ends when the owner sells the home—at which point the next buyer steps into the same position.
• Payment not conditioned on “use.” The covenant language is drafted to prevent owners from avoiding dues by simply not using the facilities.

This is where many homeowners say the arrangement diverges from what they expected. In a normal consumer setting, customers can cancel a service they don’t use. Here, the obligation is built into the property’s recorded restrictions.

The discretion problem: dues and rules can change without homeowner control

Country club communities often advertise lifestyle: golf, fitness, dining, events. But the recorded documents in Anthem’s structure emphasize something else—operational control by the club side.

Across the governing language, the club owner/operator is positioned to set or revise dues, fees, and rules. Homeowners generally do not receive governance rights comparable to HOA elections and voting power.

That creates a basic tension:

• Homeowners carry an ongoing payment obligation tied to their property
• But do not control the entity setting the price or defining the benefits

For critics, the concern isn’t simply “dues exist.” It’s the combination of (1) permanence, (2) broad discretion on the club side, and (3) limited homeowner remedies when services change or access is restricted.

Enforcement: a private lien mechanism tied to the home

One reason this arrangement feels “HOA-like” is enforcement. The covenant framework provides for unpaid amounts to be secured against the property and collected through established legal processes.

In plain terms: if an owner falls behind, the covenants can allow collection methods that reach the title—up to and including lien enforcement through court procedures.

Even for homeowners who accept the concept of dues, that enforcement posture raises the stakes. It is one thing to argue over a membership bill; it is another when nonpayment is tied to real property remedies.

Why homeowners can’t simply “amend the CC&Rs” to fix it

In many HOAs, homeowners eventually gain the power to amend governing documents through elections and member votes. In this structure, amendment is typically written to require:

• A supermajority of homeowners (often a high threshold), and
• Consent from the club side (meaning a veto-like approval requirement)

In other words, even if homeowners could organize a large vote, they may still need the club operator to sign off on changes that affect the club’s rights or revenue model.

This is a crucial point for anyone thinking “why not just vote to change it?” In these documents, the amendment path can exist on paper while being difficult to execute in real life.

The lawsuit that highlighted the issue—without reaching the merits

The structure gained additional attention after a Maricopa County Superior Court case in which an Anthem homeowner challenged the enforceability of the arrangement and related lien activity. The case was dismissed on procedural grounds—primarily timing defenses—before the court decided whether the covenant system was fair or enforceable on its merits.

That procedural ending left a larger public question unresolved: Should a deed-based, mandatory membership regime tied to a private club be treated more like an HOA assessment—with consumer safeguards—or like an agreed-upon property bargain that buyers must accept at purchase?

Who runs the club?

Arizona Corporation Commission records list Anthem Golf, LLC as an Arizona entity formed in 2006, with a stated business purpose to own and/or operate a private country club. Corporate filings place its principal office address outside Arizona, reflecting a common ownership model in which a local club is operated through a specific LLC while management and oversight can reside elsewhere.

Separately, the original developer entity associated with the community’s early governing documents appears under Anthem Arizona, L.L.C.—a longtime Arizona LLC tied to the community’s development phase. Developer and club-operator roles can be distinct, even when the obligations created during development continue for decades.

What this means for homeowners and buyers

If you live in, or are considering buying into, a country club community, the most important takeaway is that not all “community fees” are the same.

Questions residents and buyers should ask up front

• Is there a recorded recreational covenant? Ask for it specifically—not just the HOA CC&Rs.
• Is membership mandatory or voluntary? “Country club nearby” is not the same as “country club attached to the deed.”
• Who sets dues and rules? HOA board? Club operator? A third-party entity?
• What enforcement tools exist? Late fees, liens, foreclosure rights, attorneys’ fees provisions.
• Can homeowners amend or terminate the covenant? Look for supermajority thresholds and any club/operator consent requirements.

For current homeowners searching for solutions, options often fall outside normal HOA playbooks. Traditional “vote them out” approaches may not apply when the pricing power sits with a private operator rather than a homeowner-controlled nonprofit association.

The bigger policy problem

Arizona’s growth has produced master-planned communities where amenities are part of the sales pitch and part of the identity. The Anthem situation illustrates a consumer blind spot: when lifestyle amenities are financed through deed-based obligations to private entities, homeowners can end up with HOA-level enforcement and none of the HOA-level control.

Whether that is a feature or a flaw depends on who you ask. For homeowners who feel trapped by a covenant they cannot renegotiate, it is a warning. For policymakers, it raises a larger question about transparency, fairness, and whether guardrails should apply when private amenity operators wield property-level enforcement power.

---

Sources (public records and filings)

• Recorded CC&Rs and the Recreational Covenant for the Anthem Country Club community (as submitted in court filings).
• Maricopa County Superior Court filings in Smith v. Anthem Golf, LLC (case documents regarding motion practice and dismissal).
• Arizona Corporation Commission business records for Anthem Golf, LLC and Anthem Arizona, L.L.C.

Note: This article is informational and based on publicly available documents. Homeowners seeking guidance about their specific situation should consult their own recorded documents and qualified legal counsel.