Amid ‘public feud,’ Baltimore mayor and state’s attorney discuss meeting to clear the air

About a week and a half after a simmering rift between Baltimore’s two top elected officials spilled into public view, State’s Attorney Ivan Bates wrote to Mayor Brandon Scott on Sunday night to propose a meeting.

Their recent “public feud” was not productive, Bates wrote. Perhaps an “open and honest dialogue” would help in “clearing the air and finding a path forward,” the Democratic prosecutor suggested, according to emails obtained by The Baltimore Sun through a public records request.

Scott replied the following day with his availability, writing that he looked forward to meeting.

The mayor had been “stunned” to learn Bates harbored “animosity or differences toward our public safety plans,” the Democratic mayor wrote, as those concerns had never been conveyed directly to him.

“It is my general practice,” Scott wrote, “to never communicate grievances in the public media before I have contacted the respective elected official.”

The proposed Wednesday meeting marks the latest development in the spat between two of the city’s top officials, amid a heated primary contest for mayor. Should the two Democrats meet, it remains to be seen how they put their political differences behind them — particularly given Bates’ recent endorsement of Scott’s challenger, former Mayor Sheila Dixon, also a Democrat.

Bates said in an emailed statement Tuesday that he was pleased Scott accepted his invitation and that he looked forward to a “productive discussion” on working together to advance public safety.

Scott’s office, too, said he was eager to have a “direct meeting” to discuss “all of Baltimore City’s public safety priorities, including any real or perceived differences around the citation docket.”

The details of a Wednesday meeting are still being ironed out, Scott’s team said.

The officials’ feud became public earlier this month when Bates told The Baltimore Sun that the two had “philosophical differences” around public safety strategies, pointing to his citation docket initiative and the mayor’s focus on his group violence reduction strategy. He said at the time he didn’t know if he’d endorse, then did so days later.

The mayor, meanwhile, responded that he’d always worked to be a partner with Bates, without any “political games.”

According to the state’s attorney, Scott has not been sufficiently supportive of the citation docket Bates established for low-level crimes like loitering, drug possession and other so-called “quality of life” issues. Under the program, a violator is required to come to court but often can complete community service hours in exchange for the dismissal of pending charges.

To Bates — and his political ally, Dixon — Baltimore Police haven’t written enough citations.

Department officials have explained to City Council members that they are working to better train officers on writing legally sufficient citations, and said that oftentimes initial warnings are proving sufficient in addressing the problematic behaviors. Deputy Police Commissioner Monique Brown said last week that quality of life calls are down 18%.

Unlike some other agencies, according to Brown, the Baltimore Police Department is required under its ongoing federal policing consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice to issue warnings before citing violations. Policy requires the “least intrusive” response, laying out that “problem-solving such as a verbal warning is generally preferable to a citation, and a citation is generally preferable to an arrest.”

“If the officer gets out and engages that group and it abates the issue, and those individuals no longer are out, at that moment, issue resolved. No harm, no foul,” Brown said at a Public Safety and Government Operations Committee meeting, using the example of a group loitering. “Most people don’t even realize that just standing outside is a crime.”

After Bates endorsed Dixon early last week, he and Scott continued to exchange charged public remarks. On Friday night, Bates told a TV station about a conversation he said he had with Scott about his citation docket at a Baltimore Ravens football game on New Year’s Eve. Scott responded he was not at that game, as his son was born days earlier.

“There’s disagreeing and then there’s lying,” Scott posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, referring to Bates’ account. “Unfortunately, this is an example of the latter. We have to stop with the silly, politically-motivated nonsense.”

Two days later, Bates wrote to propose meeting. The Baltimore Banner first reported the email exchange.

“I recognize that our recent public feud has not been productive for either of our offices or for the people of Baltimore whom we serve,” Bates wrote. “As leaders in our community, we must find common ground and work together to address the challenges facing our city.”

He went on to suggest discussing Scott’s support for the citation docket and to “resolving any misunderstandings,” in an effort to foster a “collaborative relationship that prioritizes the safety and well-being of our residents.”

Scott’s response agreed that they had a “fiduciary responsibility to put the safety of the citizens of Baltimore above any political differences.”

To that end, the mayor said, his office had been attempting to set up a meeting since March 4 — but had received notice Bates would not be attending public announcements or meetings because of the political primary season.

In that exchange in early Martch, Scott’s chief of staff, Marvin James, wrote to Bates’ office to set up a meeting and possibly a monthly check-in between Scott and Bates.

Bates’ chief of staff, Angela Galeano, responded nearly three weeks later saying it would be “disingenuous” to schedule regular meetings given the upcoming primary election on May 14 and the mayor’s “apparent lack of motivation” to do so over the previous 13 months.

“It would be best to begin a schedule of regular meetings, after the election,” Galeano wrote. “As we know, election season can encourage exercises that serve only to politicize engagement, when this is a time to be forthright for the residents that we all serve.”

James responded that the mayor’s office had “no desire to politicize any meetings between two duly elected individuals.” He added that it was the mayor’s office’s expectation that “all executive concerns” would be discussed at Criminal Justice Coordinating Council meetings, but that Bates had not attended, making it “apparent” that one-on-ones were needed.

Later that week, Bates aired his grievances in the interview with The Sun.