Baltimore planning director outlines capital-budget reforms, boosts FY26 investments to tackle deferred maintenance

Planning Director Chris Ryer told the Baltimore City Council committee that his presentation of the capital budget was his “sixth and last” and stressed the need to address long‑term deferred maintenance across city assets.

Ryer said the city is beginning to close a large funding shortfall after the state restored highway-user revenue (HUR) for three fiscal years, a state commitment of $50 million a year for scattered-site vacancy and community development priorities, and a voter-approved increase in general‑obligation (G.O.) borrowing. “This is my sixth and last presentation to you of the capital budget,” Ryer said. “When I took this position, I had no idea how under resourced the city's capital budget had become.”

The city’s planning staff and sister agencies described a package of budget and reporting reforms intended to speed delivery and make project spending more transparent. Sarah Parnellum, division chief for policy and data analysis in the Planning Department, said the department changed how it starts the six‑year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), now beginning from the prior year’s CIP and budgeting by project phase so a given phase can be fully funded in a single fiscal year rather than piecemeal.

Why it matters: Planning staff said deferred maintenance totals are large — Ryer estimated “at least $2,000,000,000” — and that improving how projects are budgeted, sequenced and tracked will reduce long‑term costs and speed project delivery. The administration also has aimed to increase flexible local capital through G.O. borrowing that voters recently approved.

Key funding and program details presented for FY26

- Ryer and Parnellum said the administration supported a 64% increase in G.O. borrowing capacity, raising annual G.O. borrowing from $80,000,000 to $125,000,000, an increase voters approved last November. The director described G.O. borrowing as “one of the city's most flexible sources of funds for capital management.”

- FY26 recommended investments cited in the presentation (as presented by Planning staff): $27.5 million for schools (compared with $19 million in FY25); $30 million for recreation centers and parks (compared with $19 million in FY25); nearly doubling homeowner incentives from roughly $2.8 million in FY25 to $5 million in FY26; $18 million for acquisition and renovation of shelter space for people experiencing homelessness; and more than $40 million for street resurfacings in FY26 compared with $14 million in FY24 before the HUR restoration.

- Parnellum noted a separate FY24/FY26 commitment of $12 million tied to implementation of an ADA consent decree (12 million in FY24 and an additional 12 million in FY26 were presented).

Budget and reporting reforms

- Start point: Planning now begins the CIP process from the prior year’s program and asks agencies to explain changes in cost or priority.

- Phased budgeting: Agencies were asked to budget by project phase (design, construction, etc.) so phases can be funded in a single fiscal year when possible.

- Programs vs. projects: The department now distinguishes recurring programs (for example, annual resurfacing programs) from discrete projects (for example, a building renovation) and asks for different data for each, including estimates of optimal annual funding for programs.

- Grant policy: The Planning Department instituted a rule that federal and state grants must be secured before the grant revenue is included in the city’s capital budget to avoid misleading appropriations that cannot yet be spent.

- Reporting reforms: Parnellum said staff are correcting revenue categories, consolidating duplicate project accounts created during the transition to Workday (PRJ account consolidations), and deappropriating appropriations without revenue sources so reported balances better reflect spendable funds.

Project delivery and oversight

- The Planning Department said it is working with the Department of Finance, the Mayor’s Office of Infrastructure Development (MOID) and implementing agencies to improve delivery, tracking and project accounting.

- Andrew Aleshire, acting director of MOID, described an April executive order and a yearlong effort that produced 23 recommendations to streamline procurement, improve vendor access, reduce regulatory bottlenecks and pilot outcome‑based requests for proposals. MOID also identified a set of 53 projects for detailed monitoring.

Council questions and oversight

- Council members pressed on the council’s role, monitoring of spend and program balances. Councilwoman Ramos thanked Planning for more detailed information than in prior years and asked how Planning monitors unspent program funds; Parnellum said the department recently added analysts to perform ongoing monitoring and will work with MOID on detailed oversight of priority projects.

- On the council’s formal role in capital allocations, Planning staff said the City Charter gives the Planning Department responsibility to develop the six‑year capital program and that only the first year is enacted directly into the budget; the council’s authority is exercised in later budget actions and transfers limited to certain revenue categories under the charter amendment that created the council’s amendment authority.

Ending

Planning staff said the current combination of restored HUR funds, new state earmarks, and higher G.O. borrowing provides an unusually large local discretionary capital package for FY26 — the highest planning staff said they have seen in decades — but emphasized the work ahead to convert appropriations into timely projects and to continue state advocacy when temporary revenue sources expire.