Crime in Charles Village
Our community has been lulled into a misconception that the area north of 25^th Street is safer than the area below that mythological dividing point for some reason, perhaps because north of 25th St. is closer to Hopkins.  A former shop owner one block below 25th St. angrily reported to us that students told him that they were warned not be travel below 25th St. because of the high crime rate there. This simply is not true and a review of the statistics provided by the Baltimore City Police Dept. (BCPD) will clearly show that there is as much crime north of 25th Street as there is south of it.  One needs to consider the fact that in all of the areas within the Charles Village community there is crime, both by way of physical confrontations and by way of break-ins.  Now there is an opportunity to help reduce this crime and yet the CVCBDMA (the Charles Village Community Benefits District's Management Authority or Board of Directors) does not want to support the opportunity to provide considerable additional protection for this community.  Why?

When the CVCBD was initially established in 1994 they employed the services of an outside security company but later decided that they would rather provide the services in-house.  When community complaints were logged about the ineffectiveness of their security patrols and people from the community presented programs that would be run by a local professional security company whose costs would fall into the CVCBD's budget constraints, it was rejected by the CVCBDMA.  Thereafter the CVCBDMA judged its own in-house security patrols to be a failure in providing any real safety results to the community and they then decided to eliminate all security patrols and would not entertain another request from the community to utilize the local professional security company's services.  Their rejection of the use of outside services was not based on cost considerations since the service provider's fee was in line what the CVCBD was paying for their in-house own security patrol.  Contracting outside of their own offices was simply something they did not want to do.  The CVCBDMA then decided to spend most of its budget on sanitation and, in order to comply with the legislation that enacted the CVCBD, applied only a small portion of its budget to hire a person inside the office to provide the community with "safety/security".  Yet the same information and services provided by the new employee was simply a duplication of the same information and services that could be obtained freely by any resident.  You can call the BCPD, the Northern District, to provide a security review of your home, the BCPD provides statistics about crimes in neighborhoods on the City's website, and JHU will provide community associations with their crime reports.  So you really don’t need to pay (a 2013 projected) $41,200. to someone to duplicate these "services" for you. 
At last month's CVCBD Budget Hearing, Stephen Gewirtz, who individually is the “Court Watch” program (not part of the CVCBD's programs as listed in the CVCBD “Proposed FY 2013 CVCBD Program Services”), has recommended a budget that produces the originally promised 24/7 – 365 days a year off-duty police officers working in the community.  Police statistics prove that off-duty policing has produced dramatic results in Midtown and yet, for some unknown reason, the CVCBDMA is only willing to adopt a tiny portion of Mr. Gewirtz's suggestion.  The CVCBDMA is willing to offer a program of a mere 2 off-duty police officers for 6 hours each on Friday and 6 hours each on Saturday nights.  And, if the CVCBDMA does fit this into its budget, we were warned that it could kill the program at any time they deem it isn't worth keeping – as it was only a "pilot program" as the CVCBD's Administrator called it.  At that same budget hearing he said the CVCBDMA could end it in 3 months if the CVCBDMA so desired.  This would mean that any surtax increase the CVCBDMA wants in its new budget for this program and any grant funds they might obtain for the program (their track record in actually obtaining grant money they promise in their budgets is poor) will be used for some project other than off-duty police patrols.  But, if we save one life, if we keep one house from being broken into, if we keep our children safe on the streets north or south of 25^th Street, if we protect our vehicles from being stolen or vandalized isn't this program worth trying and worth giving it at least a few years to evaluate?  If this program has a chance of providing us with a safer community, as was the promise given to the community for establishing the CVCBD, why won’t the CVCBDMA accept the fact that Mr. Gewirtz's program has great merit?
What reason do they have to stop better protection for the community?  Isn’t it time for a change of how the Benefits District serves the communities of Charles Village?  Isn’t it time to demand that the CVCBD does what the community wants and not some plan that they create?