City of course. Over here, across the pond, cities make local noise regulation and have a local city municipal police (not state police) which is responsible for a minor complaints and general oversight. Of course the only reason why it works is that it's a city, so fewer officers can cover a lot more people-per-area than in the widespread suburbs. Same story like with mass transit, neither is economical in the suburbs, they are too expensive compared to cities.

But why obviously? Is city really the best level? Seems to me much easier for people to move between neighborhoods than between cities. When I was younger, I had no problem with loud neighbors in a louder neighborhood - older now with kids and very happy to pay for quiet despite other trade offs.

> why obviously?

In the U.S., ordinances tend to be local. If you have a problem with a noise ordinance, you go to your local authorities.

I live in a city where people are shot and killed every week (no exaggeration) and car jackings weren't even tracked until the last couple years. The city government can't manage things that are getting people killed or brutally beaten, so where should late-night noise rank on their priorities? I can still hear the gunshots when I'm going to bed, but in my HOA at least I don't have to worry about my immediate neighbors causing too much trouble. There's at least some level of local accountability, despite the tradeoffs.

> where should late-night noise rank on their priorities?

Below those things. Still doesn’t make it a state or federal legal issue, unless it becomes systemic to the point that it’s affecting folks outside your community.

I think they would manage just fine if you and everyone else gave them their monthly HOA fees.

There's still the question of how much power the group should have over the individual.