There was an unexpected twist during the Baltimore City Board of Estimates meeting on Wednesday morning, two of the five voting members didn't show up in protest when it came time to vote on a controversial deal with Baltimore Gas and Electric.
The Board of Estimates is the city's spending board that approves all contracts.
City Council President, Nick Mosby and City Comptroller Bill Henry decided to miss the meeting to prevent a quorum on the scheduled vote for the city's conduit agreement with Baltimore Gas and Electric. But Baltimore City Mayor Brandon Scott asserts that quorum for such a board is only three members.
The BGE contract enables the private utility business to have access to the city-owned underground conduit system by paying for network repairs instead of paying city fees, according toThe Baltimore Banner.
The agreement means that BGE wouldn't directly pay the city access fees and instead will pay $134 million for 'system improvements' between 2023 and 2027. In addition, BGE would pay the city $1.5 million each year in maintenance fees. The city will collect $6.5 million more than what was collected under a previous agreement in 2016, according to the Scott administration.
The city's conduit is an underground network spanning more than 740 miles of wires that send power to devices from street lights to traffic signals and even the key to phone and internet service for residents.
Baltimore City voters already voted to prohibit the sale of its underground conduit system in November 2022 with nearly 77% of voters in favor of the charter amendment and 23% against the measure, according to the Maryland Board of Elections results.
The Baltimore City Board of Estimates consists of: Mayor Scott, president of the city council, the comptroller, the city solicitor, and the director of public works. The president of the city council serves as president of the Board of Estimates, and the city comptroller serves as secretary to the board.
The meeting began with the following statement from City Council President Mosby and Comptroller Henry:
"The proposed underground conduit system agreement with BGE, which we believe allows BGE to reduce its fee structure and receive complete control of capital improvements, warrants time for public discussion and a thorough explanation as to the full impact this will have on the people of Baltimore now and in the future," according to the statement.
"We asked that this item be deferred until March 15 to allow more questions to be answered for us, the public, and the other users of the Baltimore City conduit system. The law department informed us late yesterday that it is the intent of the administration to move forward regardless of our request, citing board rules preventing a deferral without a majority vote if the effect of the deferral in their opinion would be “to prevent any meaningful implementation of the item for its intended purpose, even if subsequently approved at a later meeting," the statement continued.
The pair warned that the city should not 'rush into this agreement' rather the public should be 'afford the opportunity to ask and have their questions answered', according to the statement.
"Given the position of the administration, we have no other recourse than to remove ourselves from today’s meeting, eliminating the required quorum of five members to vote on all board matters. We do not believe a decision of this magnitude should be driven by a single user – or even the largest user – and filing deadlines. And we continue to question not only the terms proposed but the non-inclusive, liability-only approach to reach those terms," the statement continued.
At first, Mayor Scott criticized the move by Mosby and Henry calling it political theater.
Scott defended the conduit deal saying it is the right decision for the city.
“The right thing to do, not the politically right thing to do,” Scott said. “is to move forward with this agreement.”
Scott doubled down on his decision on Wednesday afternoon.
"I am here today to reaffirm my intention of moving the agreement with BGE forward," he said in a statement.
The Scott administration asserts that "because the charter provisions establishing the BOE do not specify what constitutes a quorum, a majority of BOE members [three] legally constitutes a quorum, and any change to that number would need to be enacted in the BOE’s charter provisions," according to the statement. "As repeatedly stated, this agreement is NOT a sale or transfer of ANY control of the city’s conduit or any improvements made to it."
The Scott administration stressed that BGE is required to contract with minority and women-owned businesses with 25% as the set aside for contract work on the conduit, in the statement.
"By entering into this contract with BGE, the next in a long line of contracts outlining BGE’s terms for occupancy of the conduit, the city has guaranteed improvements to its aging conduit," the statement continued. "The city anticipates that this will result in better energy delivery to the citizens of Baltimore and the entire BGE service area than would have resulted from a continuation of the prior fee structure."
Previously, city council members have accused the mayor and his administration for governing without sufficient transparency.
Acting City Solicitor, Ebony Thompson, countered those claims saying the city has been in negotiations with BGE for a year, almost leading to litigation because of its efforts.
Baltimore Gas and Electric responded to WYPR's request for comment with the following statement:
"Under the terms of this amended agreement which dictates the terms of BGE’s responsibilities regarding the conduit, Baltimore City retains ownership and control of the conduit system. Baltimore City, contractors, and the other users of the system are still able to perform additional work on the system if necessary. As we have done in the past, we will continue to meet monthly to partner with the City to prioritize projects," according to the statement.
BGE claims that its 'obligation to benefit all conduit users and Baltimore City residents has increased to $138.5 million over four years.'
The company further claims that the capital improvement agreement will 'lessen customer bill impacts.'
"Previously costs were a maintenance fee, which by regulation were required to be directly passed onto our customers," the statement continued. "Under this new approved agreement, BGE will recover the capital contributions in our rates over time which reduces customer bill impact as opposed to the previous fee model which would have had a significant impact on customer rates."
Editor's Note: This is a developing news story and it will be updated. This story has been updated to accurately reflect the actions of board members.
