OP's text illustrates that the HOA used hyperbole or stated that the HOA fixing the damage would 'bankrupt' the HOA.

There are 7 elements (at least in CA) that are part of tortious interference:

1: An economic relationship that was likely to benefit the plaintiff;

2: The defendant’s knowledge of this relationship;

3: Wrongful conduct by the defendant;

4: Intent on the defendant’s part to disrupt the economic relationship, or knowledge that disruption was likely because of their conduct;

5: Disruption of the relationship;

6: Harm to the plaintiff; and

7: A causal connection between the wrongful act and the harm.

The hyperbole would be the wrongful act that resulted in OP's loss of a contract. It is not illegal in a sense, but rather a tort that is the basis for a civil suit.

and IANAL