Ave Maria: The town without a vote
You've probably heard of Ave Maria, the southwest Florida enclave developed by Tom Monaghan, and designed to be the perfect orthodox Catholic town. Did you know, though, that it's like Disneyland, in that the people who live there do not...
Well, first the RCC tells them what to do...then folks move into a town that has the right to run the place without any citizen input? Weird. Some folks must like to have a life where they make few decisions. Do the families have to be Catholic to move there? Probably helps. Obviously the sales literature didn't bother to mention that the corperation planned to not give up power.
Sounds like a Home Owners' Association on steroids...
At least with the homeowners association there's a chance that your folks will be elected, octopus. This is just Tom Monaghan running a town like a pizza company -- but this time without a pesky board of directors.
I cannot imagine that the state actually has the right to give Ave Maria a city charter that allowed it to disenfranchise everyone, so it should be interesting to see how things turn out.
That series is amazing. It shows us that Tom Monaghan and Barron Collier Cos. have just set new standards in showing how corrupt Tallahassee is. Carl Hiaasen would never have bothered to accuse a developer of something this outrageous.
I hope that Monaghan is forced to return all the money spent to anyone who isn't willing to let him deny them the vote in his totalitarian city.
As with Bernie Madoff, we are reminded that we shouldn't trust someone just because they claim to be religious.
I know many people whose academic careers have been ruined by trusting Tom Monaghan. He is not a trustworthy man, and from what I can tell he has some serious mental health issues. Anyone who would put their family's life (as a student in his university, as a homeowner in that town, etc) in his hands is taking a tremendous risk.
It's quite sad, as he has exploited and fooled some very good people, and done so by capitalizing on people's alienation from a culture that is not friendly to Catholicism. But give me an honest secular person over Tom Monaghan's wacky pseudo-religiosity any day of the year.
And run, do not walk, away from any of his projects.
Years ago, when I was in real estate, it was pounded into us that it was a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to even ask what the religion of the buyer was. Unless there has been some significant change in the intervening years, I can imagine the lawsuits that will come of such nonsense.
Charles Cosimano,
I doubt very much that anyone will ever ask what the religion of the buyer is, but just as in Kiryas Joel in New York State, there is no question what the purpose was, to build a religious community. A non-Catholic would be isolated there and have no benefits from such isolation. If the developers are even halfway smart, they won't have any problems on that front and Monaghan will get his Catholic community.
It's a town called malice!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3fDXsPE0Sc
Oh, I think the non-Catholic would stay isolated long. All his neighbors would find him so much more fun than their Catholic brethren that he would have more friends than he would know what to do with.
For one thing, he would have the only satellite television receiver in the town (they may be able to block cable but if they try to block sattelite the feds will have them for lunch) and his Sunday morning golf outings will be the social event of the week.
And, of course, all his protestant friends will buy homes in the area because they want to join in the fun of watching the developer have a stroke.
Why would Catholics expect a democratic vote in an exclusively Catholic enclave? We don't have one in our church, and papal encyclicals - even from Leo XIII - decried democratic government for centuries. Its ecclesiastical embrace is largely a post-V2 phenomenon, and had more to do with Cold War exigencies than any theological basis.
There are some big constitutional questions revolving around the tax-free municipal bonds used to develop the town. Other than that, though, I don't see the problem with what Monaghan is doing. He's been pretty upfront about what he wants to do there, and anyone who goes there still not knowing that it's going to be a restricted environment deserves all the grief they're going to get. If you don't' want to live in a tightly governed, pre-V2 recreation, don't effing move there. It's really that simple.
Derek,
The problem that the series of articles showed was that Monaghan was not upfront about the fact that people would not be allowed to vote in city elections until he decided to allow it and that he never has to allow it.
I agree that going to a city with deed restricted rules will get you whatever the rules are. I would never consider living there, but I don't object to the deed restrictions here any more than I do to any others. I do object to the idea that a government can pass a law that takes away the right to vote for government officials. Developers have already demonstrated that they should never control city councils. Why would anyone trust a developer to control it for however long they want?
Read the whole series and supplementary articles. It's Florida corruption at its worst and developer arrogance of a whole new standard.
Pagansister: "Well, first the RCC tells them what to do..." I'm not quite sure if that remark means that you think the Church told them to move to Ave Maria. It did not. I wouldn't pay Monaghan the compliment (whether one thinks it a compliment or not) of equating his person with the Church.
Since I learned very early on in life not to trust anyone who promises heaven on earth by creating a "community," my cult antennae were overloaded with sensory data when I first had the experience of dealing with this particular...uh... clique. "Controlling and cultish" is the phrase to keep handy, and to prevent oneself from following these pied pipers. I don't care how often they sputter the "orthodox," "faithful to the Magisterium," and "love for the Holy Father" buzz-phrases. "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord' will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of my Father." (Matthew 7:21). The "Wizard of Oz" scene, where the "wizard" bleats, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain" as he projects the "great and powerful" enlargement of his image also is pertinent here.
As someone who has seen the underside and backstage of these and similar phenomena, and who knows that if you get too close to these types of people (and put your ear on them) you'll hear the ocean, I would advise those who feel tempted to join others in "intentional community" to keep one hand on their rosaries (and pray them) and the other on their wallets. And don't let go of either.
It's not that genuine community is impossible; it does, however, need checks and balances, because right next door to it on the continuum of social organization lies the cult.
When you get down to about the 20th paragraph of this article, you find there isn't much there.
Developers routinely control the government of special development districts. Florida law ordinarily requires them to cede control to the residents after 10 years. In this case, as with half a dozen other developments aroudn Florida, the 10 year deadline has been lifted. However, there's no evidence that the developer actually desires or intends to maintain control any longer than that.
Seconding Appalachian Prof's comments about Monaghan.
Among orthodox/conservative Catholics, the perception of Tom Monaghan's projects is not unlike the perception of Marcial Maciel's Legionaries of Christ: There's a devoted minority who think they are the best thing on earth, while most others think they fall somewhere on the spectrum between "A Little Nuts" and "Absolutely Rotten."
Simon,
Why did the developer insist on a special law that allowed them to bypass the deadline forever? That is evidence that they will maintain control longer. Nothing at all requires them to ever turn it over. That is what the law says, that is why the law needs to be overturned.
You may have met an honest developer, but they weren't likely in Florida. The history of the state is rife with fraud, abuse, unmet promises, corruption, and other reasons not to allow a developer to have untrammeled control of the city for as long as it wants. Carl Hiaasen made his career, both as a journalist and a novelist, out of the total lack of integrity of Florida developers and their close, corrupting relationship to the legislature.
I'm shocked, shocked, that Florida law is crafted to allow developers to carve out whole territories from the regular applications of civic governance.
Anybody who thinks Ave Maria's set up is going to be repealed any time soon, dream on. You see, calling into question the legality, or efficacy, or even the constitutionality of the "Ave Maria Community District" would open up the same questions about the "Reedy Creek Development District". And that won't happen--the entity behind that not-so-small (think 'the size of Rhode Island') "enclave" has, shall we say, some measure of influence over federal politics, to say nothing of Florida's.
The problem that the series of articles showed was that Monaghan was not upfront...
What the hell does that mean? He didn't flash it on the contract in bright red letters. If people were concerned about voting, then they could have looked into it before sinking hundreds of thousands of dollars into moving there.
Again, I feel no sympathy for these residents. If they don't like their set up, sell, move. Vote with your feet and use your effing head next time you buy into some utopia.
I have a friend who not only lives in Ave Maria, but moved there and opened a business based simply on reading about this town when it was proposed and ground had yet to be broken. She is very happy there. I wrote her yesterday after this thread appeared and here is what she wrote:
"I am alive and well in Ave maria and very very happy. The news blows everything out of preportion, it is still growing, and I feel good so far about what they are doing and feel things will change as the town grows. Tom is a very humble man and very assesible to all of us, his intentions and Gable Blake with Collier. No complains from me. I'm in Catholic heaven on earth."
~~~~~~~~~~
As we were so profoundly reminded in 2000, Florida and Texas are political brothers. While they lip sync one-hit-wonder religious separatism hymns per Ave Maria, we Texans karaoke Yearning For Zion Ranch and Branch Dividian greatest hits. Onward Christian Soldiers.
Go to www.AveWatch.com Excellent, outside, objective watchdog group that has been investigating Monaghan and his shenanigans for years.
Some of this website provides information that is truly sad, psychotic, fundamentalist, and damaging to many naive folks based on their misuse of the terms - catholic, orthodox, conservative, tradiitonal.
Mr. Gibson:
You made a fatal flaw when posting this blog item: you presumed that the cub reporter who wrote the series for the Naples Daily News did not misrepresent facts in order to fit his negative story template (why anyone over the age of 12 would ever make such a presumption about a journalist is baffling).
You took great pains to cite in the article that were attributed to my friend Kathy Delaney, hightlighting them in bold as if to emphasize how important her views as a resident and homeowner are. Here is an e-mail note she just sent to everyone in town:
===============================
May 12, 2009 Dear Friends, Associates and Ave Maria Community Members -
My prayer is “ Dearest Mother Mary, please cover for us!”
I write to clarify my support of Ave Maria, Mr. Monaghan and the Barron Collier Co.’s. I have nothing but respect for Mr. Monaghan’s dream, his generosity and his business decisions. I have thanked him for his efforts on several occasions.
I find myself here, invested in Ave Maria because I wanted a Catholic education for my children in a safe, predominantly Catholic environment. My boys are thriving in this respect and I could not think of a better place to raise them. Ave Maria is a beautiful environment with numerous opportunities for growth on many levels.
In a recent article of the Naples News, I was grossly misrepresented by journalist Mr. Liam Dillon. In his opening story, he used my name 7 times to portray an unhappy homeowner. He used my quotes out of context and attached his own thoughts or concerns to my name.
I did not seek him out to complain about the Ave Maria District and on the contrary, I completely trust that Mr. Monaghan will always make the right decisions for our community.
I feel used by Mr. Dillon and I have told him so. I think something wonderful is happening in Ave Maria despite the constant attacks and negative reporting. It’s all about community spirit and our relationships with each other and our Lord. We have a unique opportunity and support base here to spiritually bond together as a community and be that beacon of hope for others.
Sincerely,
Kathy Delaney, supportive resident
==============
PS: Your comments about the church design and the bishop are snide snipes that are not the marks of a man of faith.
"I completely trust that Mr. Monaghan will always make the right decisions for our community."
Well, that says lots about Mrs. Delaney right there. If trusting Tom Monaghan to "always make the right decisions for our community" is a requirement to live and work at Ave Maria, then everyone should be transparent about it.
They're not. That's the problem. The developers and the university administration want to give the appearance that they deal with people in a participatory way. In actuality, you need to have Mrs. Delaney's level of Utopian trust in Monaghan to live and work there. A central point of the Naples News article was that the developers intentionally went to lots of trouble to configure the law so that residents would have no other option BUT to trust, and do it indefinitely.
No thanks. Unwavering trust in, and docility toward, Tom Monaghan is not a requirement to be in good standing with the Holy Roman Catholic Church outside of Ave Maria Town.
"Did you know, though, that it's like Disneyland, in that the people who live there do not now and never will have a right to vote on the policies that govern them..."
And yet, people continue to pay thousands of dollars for the privilege of being in Disneyland while simultaneously fleeing the crime and taxes of the US urban cores where their "right" to vote may be freely exercised. Like Derek said, I'm supposed to be outraged?
Democracy is long overdue for reappraisal. As democratic government inevitably, I repeat, INEVITABLY, slides toward social democracy and thence to outright socialism and then collapse and chaos, people will gladly cede their voting rights in exchange for the physical security and relative prosperity associated with city-states governed (owned, actually) by a few key mercantile families. Neo-feudalism is coming, and it will be here whether conservatives or liberals want it or not.
It's very interesting to me that those who are praising this reporter to the skies - and then taking all these shots at Monaghan for setting up this "undemocratic" town - completely ignore what the SAME REPORTER in the SAME SERIES says about Monaghan's role in all this. He says that it is quite clear that Monaghan and his side of the development project knew nothing about how the town was being structured in such a way as to prevent citizen control permanently.
The reporter fingers Barron Collier.
SELECTIVE CORRECTNESS?
Regardless of the correctness of this reporter's premise, my question to the Monaghan critics is this: Which is it? Is the reporter brilliant, insightful, diligent, etc., EXCEPT for when he exculpates Monaghan?
TIME TO BRUSH UP ON READING SKILLS?
It's tiring to read snide comments to the effect that the residents must be stupid because they didn't read their documents. Those who make such comments are the ones who should have read the series more carefully. The reason why residents - or even Monaghan - would be unware of all this is that its not in some document, all neatly wrapped up. It took this reporter a LONG TIME to figure this all out - to see what percentage of the land was being developed, the benchmarks at which voting would kick in - it was different information in different places, very little of it available or findable by anyone. The legislature which approved all this didn't even catch the control implications of the arrangement they were approving.
Why do you think it took a year-and-a-half for a reporter to put all this together if it's was right there in the documents???
BUT, THE REPORTER MADE A HUGE MISTAKE
That said, the reporter figured it out wrong, as is coming out shortly. He overlooked some complexities, didn't have certain documents, and it all adds up to this: the residents WILL be getting control, that was the plan all along. Expect the Naples Daily News to be wiping egg from its face within the next week. The backpedaling will be couched with the predictable weasel words aimed at saving face, like "well, the structuring is POSSIBLY wrong," and "it MAY be unconstitutional," and it is "UNCLEAR whether," etc. I feel sorry for this reporter - they're going to have to take him off the beat at Ave Maria because he's made such a mistake, and the consequences for him and his editors may not end there.
Anyway, try re-reading the series and see what it says about Monaghan.
The following observation is also disturbing, in that it reveals the antagonistic animus of many who feel compelled to comment about Ave Maria (whether it is an anti-Catholic, anti-conservative, or anti-Monaghan animus):
If Ave Marians are the lock-step mindless conservative Catholics some critics claim they are, then the premise of the three part series (that residents are up in arms) can't be true. So which is it?
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.