I totally agree with K7JQ. I don't have any scientific evidence, just anecdotal and circumstantial. We moved to the Phoenix area 12 years ago and every amateur radio operator I've encountered here has complained about the restrictions in the newer developments, and the newer developments make up most of the housing in the valley. I don't know the exact percentage but just take a look around if you live here, or look on any current aerial photo/Google Maps if you don't and you can easily see it. Of course hams have to balance their living needs with their hobbies so they bought where they did for various reasons, but that doesn't mean they're not interested in getting relief from the extensive antenna restrictions they're currently living under. Also you gotta ask yourself, how many kids living in the area that may be interested in amateur radio never even get a chance to experience it because their parents tell them they're not allowed to operate where they live. The hams I know living in unrestricted housing enjoy the hobby to the extent their property sizes allow, and the hams living in restricted housing fly under the radar but would prefer to have reasonable antenna's in the clear where they can. In my case we started out here living in a restricted community but moved to a much better location as soon as we could afford to do so. It took a lot of hard work over the years to find a place that was reasonably priced but we finally did it. So in my opinion, based on what I've seen and experienced personally, I believe there is a great need for relief for hams in restricted communities. Relief from antenna restrictions may not take priority over being close to schools, health care, etc. for some hams but that doesn't mean they don't care about getting relief.
As a general rule I'm in favor of limited federal government but there are exceptions, and I view antenna relief legislation the same as the laws that went into effect to allow OTARD/satellite dishes. I read many posts on this forum where where people argued that you shouldn't buy in a deed restricted community if you wanted to operate. But you could make that same argument against people that wanted to have satellite TV or a VHF/UHF antenna on their roof prior to the OTARD legislation. Why didn't they move to a farm outside of town somewhere if they wanted their OTARD antenna or satellite TV dish? Of course because they had to weigh priorities and TV wasn't at the top in most cases, unless they were like me and have to watch Gunsmoke reruns every day. But that doesn't mean they weren't interested in relief just because they weren't organizing protests, etc. Of course if a guy (or gal) paid umpteen thousands of dollars for a house and are raising their family in it they're not going to admit they made a mistake in most cases, or want to move over a single issue that's not their top priority whether they thought so or not, that's just human nature. For me it's just common sense that hams would be interested in relief. I'm pretty sure if you asked them they would be interested in relief, even if they're not willing to go through the extensive hassles and expense of moving out of their current restricted communities. Can you imagine a ham saying, "...no, I like the antenna restrictions the way they are now." I doubt you'll see any polls with high percentages of hams saying that. I don't need to see scientific evidence that hams would like to see antenna relief legislation because it's just common sense.