It’s called selective enforcement and it’s a common thing in HOAs, the board members and their allies get away with stuff and all the rest of the owners are targeted usually because of some personal vendetta.
I’ve been on the Board a couple of times, I was unpopular with the other Board members because my philosophy was, we needed fewer rules versus more so we could enforce a few rules that were black and white versus someone’s personal taste in things.
Where this really gets ugly is in neighborhoods that have an Architectural Review Board that has to approve color changes to homes that need painting or what trees can be taken down, etc.
The ARBs are nothing more than trouble waiting to happen, it comes down to friendships and someone’s personal taste on what gets improved versus what gets rejected.
It shouldn't be that way regarding paint colors. Usually the original developer has a selection of a dozen or fewer paint colors for doors, siding and shutters, and a formula for how often they repeat in, say, a townhome community. A single change to that formula (such as the original paint company discontinuing a color) should be reassigned to a similar color from another supplier. An overall change to the color scheme should have to go through a proposal to the entire community and a sizeable majority vote.