CHANGE MY LOCATION
Agency’s spending scrutinized
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: BALTIMORE
BALTIMORE (Map, News) - A city-owned development agency without offices or employees has financed $390 million in purchases, including a hotel, an arena and sophisticated computer systems — and did so with almost no public scrutiny, critics say.
Baltimore City revealed projects financed by the Industrial Development Authority (IDA), run by the city’s finance department, in response to a Maryland Public Information Act request from The Examiner.
The list includes funding for school construction, improvements to Du Burns Arena and the purchase of the Paramount Inner Harbor Hotel.
In two decades, IDA has lent the city money for these projects and others, using proceeds from bonds issued by the company, but which the city is ultimately responsible for repaying.
Among 39 IDA projects financed by the city since 1982:
» $10.2 million for installation of an 800 MHz radio and dispatch system for the police, fire and public works departments.
» $10 million for the first phase of work on Cell No. 6 of the Quarantine Road landfill.
» $8.5 million for construction of an exhibit hall in the Columbus Center.
» $7.9 million for more work on Cell No. 6 of the Quarantine Road landfill.
» $7.9 million for renovations to Baltimore City Circuit Courthouse East.
» $7.3 million for upgrading citywide telephone equipment.
» $6.9 million for improving pedestrian bridges, lighting fixtures and purchasing outdoor furniture.
» $6.7 million for work on Clarence H. “Du” Burns Soccer Arena.
» $6 million for purchase of the Paramount.
City officials argue the IDA’s triple AAA bond rating — a grade higher than the city’s AA — saves the city money by allowing the company to borrow money at lower interest rates.
But the practice of borrowing money on behalf of taxpayers without oversight is coming under increased scrutiny from critics, including minority business advocates.
Arnold Jolivet, executive director of the Maryland Minority Contractors Association, said an association investigation showed that for the past eight years of IDA projects, none has gone through the Board of Estimates.
“That they have removed this from the purview of the Board of Estimates raises great concern,” Jolivet said. “It really is a question of transparency and public trust.”
sjanis@baltimoreexaminer.com
lbroadwater@baltimoreexaminer.com
Comments from Examiner Readers
8:28 PM MST on Fri., May. 30, 2008 re: "Little-known agency financed controversial hotel deal"
Report as inappropriate
11:07 AM MST on Fri., May. 30, 2008
re: "Little-known agency financed controversial hotel deal"
Report as inappropriate
8:30 AM MST on Fri., May. 30, 2008
re: "Little-known agency financed controversial hotel deal"
Report as inappropriate
8:26 AM MST on Fri., May. 30, 2008
re: "Little-known agency financed controversial hotel deal"
Report as inappropriate
6:29 AM MST on Fri., May. 30, 2008
re: "Little-known agency financed controversial hotel deal"
Report as inappropriate
10:01 PM MST on Tue., May. 13, 2008
re: "Agency’s spending scrutinized"
Report as inappropriate
10:58 PM MST on Sat., Apr. 12, 2008
re: "Little-known city-owned corporation at center of controversy"
Report as inappropriate
8:36 PM MST on Sat., Apr. 12, 2008
re: "Little-known city-owned corporation at center of controversy"
Report as inappropriate
8:04 PM MST on Sat., Apr. 12, 2008
re: "Little-known city-owned corporation at center of controversy"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
Not surprised Keiffer Mitchell was on the board of this corrupt quasi-gov't lending entity. Thank god the city doesn't have to put up with that thief anymore.
3 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
funny, the city is only concerned about lead problems in old bldgs when it comes to upscale hotels and residences. The city has never given a hoot about whether old bldgs that house poor people and school bldgs have lead--Balt City politicians are pathetic wonder how much $ developer "no name, no office" contributed to Dixon, Holton, et.al's campaigns
4 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
no offices, no staff, no oversight. no such agency? hmmmm
6 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
way to follow the money. stay on the trail.
8 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Can Baltimore taxpayers sue the IDA to recover the money it stole?
3 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
ah, just like the old days. can we say "shadow government" all together now?
8 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
johnn said:
more dixon corruption in progress,good move frank conaway,it was a insult for her not to use you,it shows where her loyality lies,and its not in the black community
4 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
{...useful for “things we don’t recognize the need to take to the voters.”} Like giving contracts to dummy corporations and taking a cut for ourselves. I think all business the gov't does should be able to be scrutinized by the people. Problems in Baltimore City need first to be address with its governement.
4 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Transparency in Baltimore City? Like the missing $58,000,000 stolen from the children? Or the 4 crooked city building superintendents? Since the O'Malley election was on the horizon, he had TWELVE superintendents fired -- penalizing the 8 fine employees while not addressing the four with the kickbacks.
There is no such thing as transparency in Baltimore City.
4 agree | 4 disagreeVote on this comment: I agree or I disagree