Inside City Hall: BOE extends contracts at troubled agency

Thanks to missed deadlines, city keeps the old contracts at four municipal parking garages.

414 Water Street

The city extended a contract worth $1.4 million to Chesapeake Parking Associates to manage the municipal garage at 414 Water Street downtown.

Photo by:

The Board of Estimates has given another reprieve to the Parking Authority for Baltimore City, allowing the administratively-challenged agency more time to award contracts for city-owned garages.

At yesterday’s meeting, the board approved $2,663,978 in fresh funds to extend the life of four existing parking contracts because the agency had failed to get new agreements in place by a looming deadline.

By its own admission, the agency has some problems with its core mission of “creating and implementing parking solutions” for Baltimore City.

“The PABC has experienced significant disruption in the personnel charged with the oversight and administration of this and other management agreements, as well as the procurement of new management agreements,” the agency stated in a written note to the board.

As a result, Impark/Danas Parking LLC and Chesapeake Parking Associates will continue to operate four public garages, including the city’s largest facility at 414 Water Street, under existing agreements that were due to expire on November 30.

Not the First Time

The agency’s managerial shortcomings were not a topic at yesterday’s meeting.

Instead, all five board members, led by City Council President Bernard C. “Jack” Young and Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, approved the $2.66 million expenditure and contract extensions without comment.

This isn’t the first time the parking authority has missed a key date.

In fact, “blowing” deadlines has become something of a specialty at the agency, resulting in contracts that are frozen without undergoing competitive bidding.

Last June, the agency received permission from the spending board to extend seven other parking contracts for an additional 18 months. By failing to put out new contracts on a timely basis, the city misses the opportunity to save money through lower bids by competing operators.

ter Little (far right) with Mayor Rawlings-Blake last year. (Office of the Mayor)

Mayor Rawlings-Blake with Peter Little (far right) last year. (Office of the Mayor)

Peter E. Little, executive director of the PABC, told The Brew to email him questions about the contracts, “and I will do my best to respond.” He did not answer the questions by the deadline requested.

In the past, however, Little has said that parking contracts require a great deal of research and assessment of potential operators and their business plans.

In its note to the spending board, the agency said it has “made requisite personnel changes” and “is prepared to move forward with seeking the award of new agreements” for the garages. The first of these agreements would go into effect in late 2013.

Crisis Mode

Little has survived multiple crises since he was hired to run the agency in 2005. He came under attack in late 2009 in the City Council for approving defective software used for the city’s residential parking permit program.

Five subordinates in his office called upon Little’s ouster at the time, but he retained his job.

Last year, a subordinate was fingered by Inspector General David McClintock for allegedly “exerting influence” to secure a contract for a parking security company owned by her then-boyfriend.

The subordinate, who was suspended, claimed she was singled out for blame by Little because she was one of a group of employees who had written a letter to the City Council questioning his leadership.

Don’t Meet Minority Goals

The extension of yesterday’s contracts came despite the failure of Impark/Danas and Chesapeake Parking to achieve minority business hiring goals promised when the contracts were signed in 2011.

According to Board of Estimates documents, the contracts were supposed to include 17% minority participation (MBE) and 9% women’s participation (WBE), but fell short.

In the case of the biggest contract, operator Chesapeake Parking wound up allocating 4% to a minority carwasher and 7% to four women-owned companies. In another contract, there was 0% MBE participation in the reporting period.

However, the city’s Minority and Women’s Business Opportunity Office (MWBOO) gave Impark and Chesapeake Parking a pass.

According to MWBOO’s note to the Board of Estimates:

“Per the contracting agency, the contractor has shown good faith efforts. The MBE goal was not achieved due to constraints placed by budget cuts. MWBOO FOUND THE VENDOR IN COMPLIANCE.”

Breakdown of Management Fees

The PABC was established in 2000 as a quasi-public agency to run the city’s current 17 municipal garages and 23 surface lots. Its five-member board consists of four appointees by the mayor and one by the City Council president.

Here is a breakdown of the management fees approved yesterday for the city-owned garages:

• Baltimore St. Garage, 15 Guilford Ave., 510 spaces, operator Impark/Danas, management fee through Nov. 30, 2014: $977,582.

• Fayette St. Garage, 1001 E. Fayette St., 185 spaces, operator Impark/Danas, management fee through Nov. 30, 2013: $82,468.

• Lexington St. Garage, 510 E. Lexington St., 659 spaces, operator Chesapeake Parking Associates, management fee through Nov. 30, 2013: $219,514

• Water St. Garage, 414 Water St., 1,105 spaces, operator Chesapeake Parking Associates, management fee through Nov. 30, 2014: $1,384,414.

Be sure to check our full comment policy before leaving a comment.

  • Odette_Ramos

    Thanks for this article, and all your work to help us understand what is going on at the BOE. 

  • rogerclegg

    Why do race, ethnicity, and sex need to be considered at all
    in deciding who gets awarded a contract? 
    It’s good to make sure contracting programs are open to all, that
    bidding opportunities are widely publicized beforehand, and that no one gets
    discriminated against because of skin color, national origin, or sex.  But that means no preferences because of skin
    color, etc. either–whether it’s labeled a “set-aside,” a
    “quota,” or a “goal,” since they all end up amounting to
    the same thing.  Such discrimination is
    unfair and divisive; it breeds corruption and otherwise costs the taxpayers and
    businesses money to award a contract to someone other than the lowest bidder;
    and it’s almost always illegal—indeed, unconstitutional—to boot (see 42 U.S.C.
    section 1981 and this model brief:
    ).  Those who insist on engaging in such
    discrimination deserve to be sued, and they will lose–as the City has in the past.

  • feralhill

    Don’t forget that the Parking Authority is moving to get the price of the Residential Parking Program permits (Area 8, Area 42 etc) increased from the current flat charge of $20 per permit to a sliding scale where the fourth permit would cost around $150.  This is being labelled as a “parking management tool” to reduce the number of cars parked on the street, but will just so happen to bring in about the same amount of revenue as needed to cover the cost of paying for the new software system that they overpaid for…I mean that the City residents overpaid for.  Just your everyday farce in Baltimore City.

More of the Daily Drip »

Below the Fold

  • December 15, 2014

    •   “Ha ha, so not a surprise.” “Shocking…not!!” We get applause but also the occasional eye-roll these days for our accountability reporting – like last week’s piece about how tax cuts promised by the mayor as a selling point for Horseshoe Baltimore probably won’t happen, thanks to the casino’s lower-than-expected revenues. We get where the […]