Baltimore councilman introduces bill to ensure inspector general's access to records

A Baltimore City councilmember is introducing a bill that would ensure the inspector general's access to records.

This comes as the city's inspector general, Isabel Mercedes Cumming, accused the mayor's office of not providing her with the information she needs to fight fraud.

 State lawmakers recently proposed a bipartisan bill to protect watchdog investigations in Maryland. The proposed bill clarifies that inspector generals are not subject to standard Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) request restrictions when conducting official investigations.

The proposed bill would guarantee access to records

Baltimore Councilman Mark Conway's bill would make the inspector general a co-custodian of records, which would guarantee independent access to city records when investigating fraud, financial waste, and abuse.

"Considering the City's history, it is profoundly unwise for any administration to resist scrutiny into how the people's money is being spent," Conway said. "Every public dollar requires public accountability."

If the bill passes in the council, a charter amendment would be on the ballot for a vote. If the measure passes at the ballot box, it would reduce the mayor's ability to deny the inspector general access to records, according to Conway.

Watchdog report into fraud with juvenile program

Baltimore's inspector general recently found that SideStep, the city's program aimed at helping juvenile offenders, improperly released confidential records. 

The report alleges that several contractors affiliated with the program submitted fraudulent bills to the city and it cost taxpayers thousands of dollars.

For months, Cumming has been investigating claims of fraud within SideStep, a crime-fighting initiative to help first-time juvenile offenders. The city said SideStep ended in 2024.

In January, Cumming told WJZ Investigator Mike Hellgren that the city abruptly stopped her access to records during that investigation.

In her report, Cumming found that taxpayers spent more than $694,000 on 15 contractors to help troubled youth, and at least two of those contractors committed fraud, overbilling Baltimore by thousands of dollars and faking invoices. 

The report revealed that her office "obtained the original invoices from the company shown on the receipt. The original invoices showed the actual cost was thousands less than the invoices that CBO 1 had submitted and received payment from MONSE."

Cumming said she found that the contractor had altered original invoices and submitted them to receive a larger payment. In her review of invoices by another contractor, the Cumming's investigators could only verify one of several invoices.

"The company stated they had no records to support the other invoices," the report stated. "Further, the company provided information that supports that several of the invoices submitted are fraudulent, which amount to thousands of dollars."

The inspector general believes there could be more fraud, but said she cannot know for sure because the city redacted more than 200 documents she requested.

Alleged breached juvenile records

The inspector general's report also alleges that an employee from the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement (MONSE) improperly emailed a relative confidential information through a personal account, which included 701 names, most of them juveniles.

"In addition to juvenile names, the diversion table sent contained cases from 2018 to September 2022 with individuals' date of births and charges," the inspector general's report said. 

Cumming said that under state law, the city is liable for the unauthorized release of protected data.

"This data breach is being referred to law enforcement entities for further investigation," the report stated. "Diverted youth participating in City programs should receive the maximum protection of their information and assurances that there is oversight of the services being provided to them."

MONSE responded to the inspector general's report, saying the report didn't provide more specifics about the thousands of dollars in fraud that was discovered.

"Unfortunately, the OIG's report provides virtually no detail about the alleged instances of overbilling that MONSE could use to review or address the concern. The report does not include the organization's name, the specific amount, the specific date, or any corresponding information, which is surprising given the OIG has referred this matter for criminal investigation," MONSE Director Stefanie Mavronis wrote. 

Mavronis' response said an audit was started, and they were working to recoup the funds.

MONSE said the employee who allegedly provided the confidential juvenile records no longer works for the city and called the breach "completely unacceptable." 

The response stated, "We are confident that, given the isolated nature of the data-related incident outlined in this report and the improved case management protocols outlined in this and previous responses, there will be no outstanding concerns regarding MONSE's future ability to access the information necessary to facilitate our work."

Mavronis claimed the report's "findings appear to be isolated incidents driven by individual actions that do not reflect broader systemic concerns with the agency's work."

Inspector general sues Baltimore City

In February, the Baltimore Inspector General's Office (OIG) filed a lawsuit against the city access to information and the power to issue and enforce subpoenas.

The inspector general said the lawsuit is to stop the city from interfering with her investigations and confidential systems. 

Cumming said the city refused to comply with a subpoena by trying to recategorize it as a request under the Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA), per advice from an attorney with the Maryland Office of the Attorney General (OAG).

The lawsuit alleges that the city presented the OIG with heavily redacted documents, and that the Baltimore City Charter authorizes the OIG to issue and enforce subpoenas "in any court of competent jurisdiction."

The lawsuit says that the city's actions "hampered the OIG's ability to monitor its confidential investigative database."