BUDGET BUSTERS - WRECK-A-RENTAL – Wrecked rentals cost city thousands during budget crisis

Thursday, 04 June 2009 10:15

By Stephen Janis

As Mayor Sheila Dixon looks for funds to fill a remaining $3 million budget gap in 2009, the police department’s propensity for wrecking rental cars is not making her job easy.

In a joint investigation of questionable city spending during the budget crises by Investigative Voice and Fox 45, we reviewed thousands of minutes of the city’s Board of Estimates, discovering a series of costly charges that were the result of damage to rental cars leased by the police department.

Since the beginning of 2008 through last week, city police have gone to the city’s Board of Estimates 13 separate times seeking approval for extra funds to pay for rental car damage incurred by plainclothes officers.

The total, nearly $400,000 of damages from wrecked cars on the city’s tab, is roughly 20 times the amount needed to operate a city pool for eight weeks, according to the Department of Recreation and Parks.

The wrecking of rental vehicles by Baltimore police has netted Enterprise Rent-a-Car $161,000 in damage payments and NextCar $230,000 -- an expense City Council Budget and Finance chair Bernard "Jack" Young said is excessive for a city facing budget shortfalls, pool closings, and possible lay-offs.

“I think the officer should be held accountable for the costs if it’s determined they were being reckless; we just can’t afford to keep paying for this.”

NextCar officials at their Howard Street office declined to comment.

But despite the tens of thousands of dollars in extra spending, police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi defended renting cars as a way to save the city money.

“The best way to provide our level of service to the city is having both city-owned vehicles and rental vehicles,” Guglielmi said

Yet Guglielmi acknowledged that the pattern of accidents and the associated costs had not gone unnoticed.

“We’ve noticed accidents have been an issue and we’re working to address that.”

Dixon said she too was concerned.

“I know that there have been disciplinary actions that have taken place,” Dixon said. “It is an issue that is constantly being addressed at comSTAT.”

Many of the rental cars are driven by members of the city’s VSET unit, a special enforcement squad that targets violent repeat offenders, Guglielmi said. Many of these officers, regardless of rank, are granted take-home rental cars. He said the department rented a variety of makes and models, but did not provide details.

But sources have told Investigative Voice that many of the rentals are used in high-risk car stops, a violation of state law that allows only registered emergency vehicles with emergency lights to pull over civilian vehicles.

Charging documents obtained by Investigative Voice recount several arrests made by plainclothes officers who report they made car stops in non-emergency vehicles. However, the documents do not specify if the officers were driving rented vehicles.

But sources said the use of rental cars in situations better suited for emergency vehicles is part of the reason the damage to the vehicles is costly.

Earlier this week, a review of city records showed that despite a hiring freeze, the city contracted 133 retirees, some of whom were already collecting retirement benefits.

The practice, known as “double-dipping” has been outlawed in Florida. However, Baltimore officials said the $4.1 million spent to re-hire retired workers actually saved money by retaining experienced employees who would otherwise leave.

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

RENTAL CAR DAMAGE EXPENDITURES*

1/23/2008
ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$1,234.80
$1,349.98
$1,810.01

6/4/2008
ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$41,131.18

7/2/2008
ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$19,161.23

7/30/2008
NEXTCAR
$11,139.49
$28,474.50

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$9,009.20

8/6/2008
NEXTCAR
$37,259.61

8/13/2008
NEXTCAR
$7,505.73

10/22/2008
NEXTCAR
$22,760.10

10/29/2008
ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$3,454.91

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$14,372.63

NEXTCAR
$39,256.67

11/5/2008
NEXTCAR
$13,729.80

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$10,361.71

11/9/2008
ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$31,265.65

5/27/2009
ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$19,428.15

7/30/2008
NEXTCAR
$11,139.49
$28,424.50

ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR
$9,009.20

6/3/2009
NEXTCAR
$31,034.66

TOTAL    $392,313.20

*Source: Baltimore City Board of Estimates Minutes 2008-2009

Comments (15)

That house cat received a rental and it was completely justified. Of course one would ask why an administrative house cat would even need a vehicle, the property officer had a vehicle, as did the administrative sergeant. Back on track, the OCD or VSET or what ever they are calling them these days didn't get take down vehicles or emergency vehicles they got rentals and when these men and women got detailed to patrol functions so did the rentals.cheap watches

jUST FOR LAUGHS, WOULDN'T IT BE SMARTER TO JUST TO USE THE CARS THAT GET IMPOUNDED OR SEIZED? INSTEAD OF TRYING TO AUCTION THE CARS OFF, USE THEM FOR POLICE SERVICES? WOULDN'T THAT MAKE MORE SENSE SEEING AS THOUGH THE CITY IS IN A....................BUDGET CRISIS!!!!!!!!!! BUDGET BEING THE MAIN WORD HERE!!! COME ON BALTIMORE OFFICIALS, USE THE BRAIN THAT GOD GAVE YOU!

Most, if not all , car rental companies are self insured. The city is self insured. it's the same as if you rented a car from Enterprise and wrecked it, and had not either purchased their coverage or had coverage of your own from Geico, Statefarm etc. You would have to pay Enterprise out of your pocket for the damage you caused to their car.
And even If the rental cars companies could purchase collision coverage policy for their fleets, it would probably be very, very , very expensive and they would have to pass the cost onto the consumer- think of your doctor and malpractice insurance.

Why is the city covering the cost? Isn't the insurance companies that would need to reimburse?

electronic cigarette

I work near the Next Car on Howard street and it is constantly crawling with cops. I have rented from them as well and anecdotely speaking, each time i have been there they are getting a returned car with damage.....now we know how much it costs

wouldn't "bitter reporter" be a more suitable pseudomyn for you?

let me add though, that it's great to read this stuff, quibbles aside. the way things are presented may have some flaws but its good for us taxpayers to have the info than not

It's real reporting, it's just, like others said, only half the story. It lacks context to show whether this is a big deal or not. Maybe they were smarting from the retirees "double dipping" story, where their context showed that other local governments were under fire for hiring something like 9,000 retirees, making Baltimore's 133 pale in comparison and essentially pointing out that the story wasn't really a big deal.

What i find most troubling about this site is the fact that they censor comments. I criticized their use of anonymous sources when it's likley only one source, and it got deleted. From the rant about free speech, no less.

Real Reporter: If digging was done it was on the QT. If you are a real reporter then you know that you are under the thumb of the editor and one call from City Hall of or one call from the Ivory Tower requesting a "reign in" in exchange for some fluff pieces or a leak about another story and the investigation is dead in the water. Best thing about IV, they are their own editors, the rules are a little different, and if a door gets slammed, I'm sure that there are sources waiting to come out.

"best reporters" hahahaha...in the words of Russell Crowe in the movie Gladiator, "the time for glorifying yourself will soon be at and end". The best reporters in the city DID find something. Oh you didn't get the memo, they write for this site.

This IV story, while intriguing, shows no proof whatsoever that the city is spending money unwisely or engaged in corrupt behavior as the story suggests. Trust me, if real reporters in this city sniffed there was anything legit there, they'd be all over it -- it'd be a huge story! Some of the best reporters in Baltimore did some digging and found nothing.

Maybe the author can expand on the misuses. Unofficial take home rentals involved in accidents in Baltimore County, rental vehicles used to pick up family and friends at the airport with an "official" BPD sign in the window, and using a rental van, sans seats, on moving day in Carroll County.

The 392K is over an 18 month period and is for damages, that is to say additional to the cost of renting the vehicles. The police department has been short vehicles for years. Post officers doubling up because vehicles are down for repairs or wrecked and there are no pool cars. The rental vehicles were initially obtained in place of police emergency and non-emergency vehicles that were being used by administrative officers or CID personnel that had no need for emergency responses. The practice was expanded, and rightfully so, to include vehicles used for covert practices. It's easier to watch a suspect or gain intelligence driving in an Accord or similar nondescript vehicle that is popular around town. The days of watching a dope shop in a mustard yellow Cavalier are long gone, and rightfully so. The problem that arose is that surveillance vehicles started getting used for stops and to respond hell bent for leather to different locations in the city and surrounding areas. It was easier for the city to issue a red/ blue dash light than to address the issue that (A) these are not patrol vehicles, (B) these are not emergency vehicles as defined by the State of MD, and (C) these vehicles were being used for purposes other than the initial reason for obtaining them.

Why should a paper pushing administrative LT have an unmarked car with grill lights and a siren was the initial question. That house cat received a rental and it was completely justified. Of course one would ask why an administrative house cat would even need a vehicle, the property officer had a vehicle, as did the administrative sergeant. Back on track, the OCD or VSET or what ever they are calling them these days didn't get take down vehicles or emergency vehicles they got rentals and when these men and women got detailed to patrol functions so did the rentals. Working a corner for a ball game, doing holiday deployment, or working city overtime, the detectives started throwing a dash light in and whammo, instant police car.

High crime area deployment, 4 detectives in a car, speeding through ally ways, dash light flashing, no siren, taking corners on 2 wheels, the cars are going to get banged up. Did the higher ups care, NO, arrests were up and if the car gets banged up the rental company will supply another one.

The number of rentals is out of this world too. There are number crunchers that sit in an office all day that have a rental that the drive home, even though they claim that they park it at a police district. They have a rental for a commute and for an ego. I often wondered why admin supervisors had 4 wheel drive luxury SUVs while the detectives were cramming in a lime green Hyundai, I suppose it's ego and who you know but that's a story for another day.

Bottom line, the rentals were obtained to supplement the fleet. Get more police vehicles for police functions and toss the run around cars and replace them with rentals. Seemed like a good idea I'm sure, cost cutting measure, proper use of materials, but it is the BPD and it was just another recipe for disaster with little oversight, rampant abuse, and overall mismanagement.

Veritas makes a good point, where is the frame of reference to decide if this is actually a problem? Other than to bridge the large gap between fact and innuendo, why the vestigial tail from the double-dipping article? How does the existence of that fact make anything in this article more likely?

Interesting article, seems inflammatory though. Where do you present the equivalent costs for damage to a city owned fleet? What is the average damage amount per vehicle the city rents, over what time period? I mean, the article really gives me no idea if 392 K is a large amount or small compared to a comparable fleet of vehicles owned by a comparably sized urban police department. How much would it cost Baltimore city to own and maintain and repair their own damaged vehicles, not to mention getting the credit to buy them? Perhaps that cost is equivalent to not only the cost of running 20 city pools, but of that plus 10 police or firefighters. The writer does not provide me with a basis to compare, but just wants me to believe that something nefarious is going on and the children won't be able to swim this summer because of these onerous misdeeds.