Mayor, state’s attorney need to make MONSE work again

Listen to this article

Several months back, we published an editorial recognizing that the murder rate in Baltimore had dropped precipitously from its prior years’ levels. It had been out of control until recently. We said that congratulations were in order.

There were many people and agencies responsible for this good result, including the Mayor’s office, the Office of the State’s Attorney and the Baltimore City Police Department. It was clear to us that this result came about because of the coordination among these people and agencies.

We also recognize that broader factors, such as community engagement, demographic shifts, a nationwide decline in homicides, and post-pandemic normalization, likely contributed to this decline.

But there were storm clouds brewing, and we feared that going forward they could adversely impact this reduction in violent crime that everyone had worked so hard to achieve.

Ivan Bates, the Baltimore State’s Attorney, announced prior to our editorial that he was cutting ties with the Mayor’s Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement, MONSE, the agency that oversees the City’s violence reduction strategy.

Bates had already sent a seven-page letter to Mayor Brandon Scott alleging that MONSE operates behind a cloak of secrecy that he wrote was unacceptable to his office. Specifically, he raised concerns that MONSE provides benefits to victims of crime who may later testify as witnesses in criminal cases.

This board met separately with Scott and Bates. Bates reiterated that his office has a constitutional obligation to disclose to defense lawyers any benefit that has been provided by a state agency to a potential witness. He said this information was not being disclosed to his office and he was unable to comply with his obligations.

Mayor Scott told us that if Bates had concerns that had not been expressed to him, and he said this one had not been expressed, he had an understanding that Bates would pick up the telephone and call him and discuss his concerns. This, he said, did not happen and he was quite surprised by the letter that found its way to the media. The Mayor also emphasized the importance of MONSE’s work in stabilizing communities and preventing retaliation.

There is much we do not know about the dispute over MONSE between these two offices. What remains unclear is whether MONSE has adequate systems in place to track and disclose benefits provided to potential witnesses, and whether the State’s Attorney’s Office sought sufficient internal resolution before resorting to public disengagement.

We do know, however, that there is a dispute, that these two institutions are extremely important to the future of Baltimore, that the State’s Attorney’s Office has withdrawn its participation in MONSE, and that MONSE is one of the important pieces in a puzzle that has made Baltimore a safer city. We are equally clear that unresolved legal deficiencies could jeopardize recent reductions in violent crime and risk undermining otherwise viable prosecutions.

We believe it is critical to preserve MONSE’s role where it can operate transparently within ethical and constitutional bounds in the work of the State’s Attorney and to recreate the spirit of cooperation between Scott and Bates that existed. That cooperation, however, cannot come at the expense of prosecutorial integrity.

We urged these two leaders during our meetings with them to find a mediator they both trust and respect. We would like to see them allow that mediator to help them devise a way forward that ensures both transparency and effectiveness, allowing the State’s Attorney to again participate in MONSE in a manner that is also agreeable to the Mayor.

Both leaders share responsibility for ensuring collaboration is restored on lawful and sustainable terms. If Baltimore is to sustain progress, it must be done now. This is not a contest of egos, it is a test of leadership and the stakes are too high to permit continued fragmentation.

Editorial Advisory Board Members Gary E. Bair, Arthur F. Fergenson, Steven I. Platt, Debra G. Schubert and H. Mark Stichel did not participate in this opinion.

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS

James B. Astrachan, Chair

Gary E. Bair

Jill P. Carter

Arthur F. Fergenson

Nancy Forster

Susan Francis

Julie C. Janofsky

Ericka N. King

George Liebmann

George Nilson

Steven I. Platt

Angela W. Russell

Debra G. Schubert

Jeff Sovern

H. Mark Stichel

The Daily Record Editorial Advisory Board is composed of members of the legal profession who serve voluntarily and are independent of The Daily Record. Through their ongoing exchange of views, members of the board attempt to develop consensus on issues of importance to the bench, bar and public. When their minds meet, unsigned opinions will result. When they differ, or if a conflict exists, majority views and the names of members who do not participate will appear. Members of the community are invited to contribute letters to the editor and/or columns about opinions expressed by the Editorial Advisory Board.