In 2015, five Baltimore City Council members proposed a bill that would have upended the mayor’s outsized power over spending by removing the mayor’s two appointees from the Board of Estimates.

Initially, more than three-quarters of the council thought it was a good idea. The measure passed with 12 votes — enough to overcome a mayoral veto, which indeed followed from then-Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake. But when the City Council attempted a veto override, the measure received only eight votes, with four members shifting from “yea” to “nay.”

Five council members who were serving at that time — including Rikki Spector, who changed her vote on the override — suggested the bill’s failure stemmed from politics getting in the way.

“I thought it would be a better way of running the city,” Spector said, speaking of the reform measure. “But the mayor wasn’t supporting it, so I didn’t want to have a political problem with the mayor to serve my constituents.”

Multiple former councilmembers described a type of quid pro quo in which they tried to stay in a mayor’s good graces so their constituents’ priorities would be funded. In exchange, the mayor could count on councilmembers for legislative support. They said some members who aspired to become mayor were also disinclined to pass a bill that would weaken mayoral control.

The Board of Estimates is composed of five members: three who are elected citywide (the mayor, City Council president, and comptroller) and two who are appointed by the mayor (the director of public works and city solicitor). The two appointed members traditionally vote with the mayor, outweighing the votes of the other two citywide-elected leaders.

Some current and former lawmakers and city residents have advocated for change, arguing that the current arrangement concentrates too much power in the mayor’s hands. At least nine similar reform measures have been proposed over the past 30 years but never passed.

Spector said there was nothing specific Rawlings-Blake offered in exchange for her vote. “You can be sure that did not happen …That’s not the way I operated,” she said.

Rawlings-Blake declined to comment for the story. In 2016, she said of the bill, “I don’t think it will enhance the ability for the city to conduct business at all,” and that it wouldn’t be a “wise decision.”

A ‘business decision’

Spector described her vote against the override in 2016 as a “business decision.” When it came to passing the budget, for example, she wanted “to make sure that the kinds of issues that were important to my constituency were funded … the schools, the trash, all the kinds of things that you depend on local government,” she said.

Another reason to stay on good terms with the mayor was Spector’s role on the board of directors for the Maryland Association of Counties, through which she sought assistance for the city from the state legislature.

Spector’s ties with Rawlings-Blake go back a long time. “Stephanie Rawlings-Blake graduated from law school. Her father was in the legislature, and he said, ‘I’m bringing my daughter to you. Make her a councilwoman.’ And that’s how she became a council person. I took her under my wing from day one,” Spector said.

Spector, now 88, served nearly 40 years on the City Council. To this day, Spector said she receives calls about city issues and works “harder today” than she did then, including through her involvement with The Food Project.

“There is no seat closer to the constituents than the local government, the council seat,” she said. “And to be effective — federally, nationally, locally, statewide — it’s a matter of having good working relationships. And for 40 years, I had that kind of relationship with everybody that helped me support the needs of my constituency.”

Three other council members also changed their votes from “yea” to “nay” when it came to the veto override: Eric Costello declined comment, Warren Branch passed away in 2024, and Robert Curran could not be reached, with a relative stating he’s in poor health.

Council members ‘easily influenced’

Former Council President Bernard “Jack” Young, one of the bill sponsors, said the mayor “can always offer things to councilmembers for their district in exchange for their vote” and that “it’s been going on for years.”

If a councilmember has a stalled project in their district, for example, “The mayor can call me and say, ‘Hey, you know that project that you have a problem with? I’ll get that moving for you right away. I just need your vote,’” he said.

Asked if that happened with the 2016 vote shift among other councilmembers, Young replied, “I can’t say for certain, but I know that things like that happen,” adding, “That’s politics.”

Former Councilmember Helen Holton, who also favored the 2016 measure, suggested some may have voted against it because they “ultimately” wanted to become mayor someday and didn’t want the board restructuring to occur before they could take the mayor’s seat.

“Who doesn’t want to sit in the seat of pretty much absolute power if they think they can get there — if that’s what they aspire to?” she asked.

Holton added, speaking of the mayor’s power on the board, “When you have that kind of power that’s in some ways unchecked, you can make decisions today that maybe you would not have made had you really had to sit and iron it out.”

Former Councilmember Carl Stokes, who also sponsored the bill, noted that since the mayor has “complete control of the purse strings,” they can suggest offering or withholding funding from their community.

“So that whole ability to fund or defund plays very strongly on council members’ votes at the end of the day,” Stokes said.

Stokes said he doesn’t remember the specifics of the 2016 vote but recalled that Curran, Spector and Costello were “political friends and allies” of the mayor, meaning the mayor “had sway over them, not in a bad way… just that they were politically close to the mayor.” Stokes added that he was “politically close” to Kurt Schmoke when he was mayor.

“It doesn’t have to come down to financial incentives or funding incentives, but just that they had a good political relationship,” he said, and that it’s possible to see them “being persuaded by that particular mayor to change their votes.”

Comptroller Bill Henry supported the bill while serving on the City Council in 2016, and today, he stands to benefit from such reform, given his current position on the Board of Estimates. He said of the vote shift during the veto override in 2016, “There used to be more council people who were easily influenced on legislative matters by the mayor, in return for the mayor’s assistance with constituent problems and other district-specific issues.”

Others who favored the measure included Former Council Members Jim Kraft and Pete Welch, both of whom declined requests for comment, the council’s current vice president, Sharon Green Middleton, who didn’t respond to a request for comment, and Mary Pat Clarke, who passed away in 2024.

Brandon Scott and Nick Mosby

Mayor Brandon Scott was serving as a member of the City Council at the time of the 2016 vote. He was marked as a “pass” — neither “yea” or “nay” — on the initial vote and veto override.

In 2020, while serving as council president, he introduced an identical reform measure, saying that removing the mayor’s two appointees would make the government “less prone to corruption, more efficient, and more supportive of our local communities.” After winning the Democratic primary for mayor a few months later, he postponed the vote, citing complications restructuring the board, and a vote never was taken.

Former Council President Nick Mosby has a voting record similar to Scott’s. In 2016, he voted against the reform measure on the initial vote and the veto override. Then, in 2024, while serving as council president and shortly after losing the Democratic primary for reelection, he introduced the same measure he’d opposed in 2016.

But the measure never came up for a vote, with Mosby saying in September that he wanted to leave the decision to the incoming council.

Mosby and Scott’s office did not respond to requests for comment for the story.

Reisinger: Baltimore needs a strong mayor ‘quarterback’

Former Council Member Ed Reisinger voted for the 2016 bill and the veto override, but today, he believes Baltimore’s strong mayor form of government is “working.” He added there are certain issues where “you can’t have 14 or 15” people — referring to the City Council — trying to make a decision.

“Somebody’s got to be the director of the play, you know, the quarterback,” he said.

Reisinger noted that the mayor is democratically elected and added that Baltimore’s strong mayor system is beneficial for the city at times and detrimental at others.

“It depends on what the issue is,” he said.

Getting on the ballot

Spector said she thinks the only way for BOE reform to pass is through a petition effort, which would require 10,000 signatures. If the measure ever did get to the ballot, she thinks voters would pass it. The vast majority of ballot measures that have gone before voters over the past two decades have passed.

“That’s what they need to do. They need to get it on the ballot,” she said, adding that she would sign the petition.

“It’s very difficult to get power away from people that are elected,” Spector said, adding, “The mayor, by having those two other seats on there, would never give it up.”

Have a news tip? Contact Brooke Conrad at bconrad@baltsun.com, 443-682-2356 or @conrad_brooke on X