Baltimore city inspector general urged to investigate nonprofit audits and compliance

This board has repeatedly editorialized in favor of the Baltimore City Inspector General and her efforts to penetrate the wall of obstruction built by Mayor Brandon Scott and do her job as an independent government agency. Her job? This is what her website states:

The Office of the Inspector General’s mission is to make sure the City’s government works efficiently and honestly. We look for any wasteful spending, fraud, or wrongdoing. We help build trust between the public and the City government. Citizens deserve effective and transparent leadership, and the OIG helps hold the government accountable and improve its operations.

Well said. And if she is unlawfully blocked from doing her job, then trust suffers and the assumption can easily lodge in the minds of Baltimore City residents, taxpayers and the General Assembly that sends money to Baltimore City, and all Maryland taxpayers, that Baltimore City has something to hide.

Two recent developments cause us to suggest another avenue for investigation by the Inspector General once she clears away the detritus of the current litigation and establishes her undoubted rights to get into the guts of city government spending. First, a few months ago, Mayor Scott paid his second visit with nearly all the members of this board. We’ve given all visitors the option to go “off the record” with any or all of their statements. He did not ask that any of his comments be kept confidential. One of them, in response to a question by a board member, was whether Baltimore City audited non-governmental organizations with which it had contracts and sent money to. The mayor stated that the right to an audit was in every contract that the city enters into with an NGO.

Great. The question we have now is whether the right of an audit was ever exercised, with which NGOs, why, the results of any such audits, and whether any action was taken by the city in response. Was a breach found? Was it material? Was the breach cured? If it was not cured or couldn’t be cured, was the contract terminated? Did the city sue any of the NGOs to recover money improperly spent? Has the city ever pursued creditor rights in a bankruptcy by one of its defaulting NGOs, or against any miscreant officers, directors, or employees of the NGOs?

These questions became acute by the second development: The front-page story in The Baltimore Sun, dateline August 2, 2026, by Lorraine Mirrabella titled “723 Maryland nonprofits listed as ‘delinquent’: Negligence of finances rose overall since last October, according to data.” Mirabella writes:

According to Open the Books, a nonprofit watchdog group and newsroom that investigates waste, fraud and corruption, nearly a quarter of the 100 top nonprofits that received money from Baltimore were not registered with the state as of January 2025. They were listed as delinquent, outdated, closed down, pending or missing records, the group said. The 24 noncompliant charities receiving city money took in $61 million in taxpayer funding despite not having gone through the registration process.

Where is the city in all this: In supervising the NGOs, in making sure that every dollar of the $61 million is properly spent, and the entities themselves are in compliance with all provisions of federal, state, and local laws? Is the right to audit just words on a page or a real world protection for the taxpayers of this City and State who pay the bills?

When the inspector general gets back in business, we hope that she will include in her investigations the issues raised by Open the Books, The Sun and this board.

It is said that sunlight is the best disinfectant for government wase, fraud, and abuse. Instead of that cliché we suggest employing “glasnost,” a Russian word meaning maximum openness and freedom of information. That is a goal we can all enthusiastically embrace.

Editorial Advisory Board Members Jill P. Carter, Ericka N. King, Angela W. Russell 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.