We actually have very little violent crime here in Pigtown. Two murders in 2007, to be exact. I walk around the neighborhood during the day and night and feel quite safe. We’re a very tight-knit community and people look out for one another here.

If you have any concerns or questions about the neighborhood, feel free to email me or stop by my cafe (784 Washington Boulevard) — it’s a great place to meet some of the neighbors, especially on a weekend afternoon. As I said to someone on Sunday, there are no strangers here.

As far as the responses to poor people. I only worry about my safety since I’m a single woman living alone. It’s not the poor people that make me worry about my safety but the gangs and violence that happens compared to other areas in the city. I’m not concerned about the cash flow of my neighbor, only that I have good ones.

As an area improves, homeowners who rent can demand more. The poor renters move elsewhere to places where the rent is affordable, and unfortunately, the rent is affordable to some in some of the most undesirable places in the city. This is true for not just Baltimore, but lots of other places. Smart development would, of course, be sure to include affordable housing to attract all classes. Of course, this means that new housing is being built as opposed to existing stock being rented. The poor do not have much choice to live in less-than-safe neighborhoods, as these neighborhoods have rents that are easier for them to bear.

As to the statement as to how many original homeowners are left in Federal Hill, Locust Point, or Canton, there are three possible answers to that question. Like most neighborhoods in Baltimore, most families tended to live together in the same neighborhood. Thus, it was normal to see parents, their children, and their children’s children all lived in and around each other–sometimes in the same block. The desire for the newer generations of the family to stay in the neighborhood let alone in the city waned, especially as the contrast in educational quality between city and suburb became readily apparent. Thus, the children moved to the suburbs, selling their homes in these areas.

The other reason many of the original homeowners are no longer there is death. The parents tended to leave their homes in these neighborhoods in the city to their children. These children–living outside of the city–had no desire to be in it for one reason or another. Thus, they sold the houses their parents lived in. The linkage that I mentioned above is severed not just by the suburban exodus but also on account of the death of the elder members.

The third reason the homeowners are no longer there is on account of the rise in taxes that accompany the investments made in these neighborhoods. Those folks who have lived there a long time and paid off their homes are met with a large increase in the property tax. Living on a fixed income, with their homes paid off, paying that tax burden becomes even harder. Thus, another reason for this migration is the high property taxes in the city force those on fixed incomes to look for cheaper places to live.

As to the statement that

But this statement really bothers me for many reasons:

Poor people will take the money and run because they don’t mind living in less-than-safe neighborhoods unlike the middle and upper middle classes.

If you don’t believe me then answer this question: How many original homeowners are left in Fed Hill, Locust Point and Canton?