Empty storefronts bedevil business districts across Baltimore. Residents and business owners wonder why commercial corridors in beloved neighborhoods are filled with vacancies.
The Banner recently reported that in Waverly, community leaders say that deteriorating commercial buildings along Greenmount Avenue between 29th and 35th streets are holding back economic growth.
Property owners alone aren’t responsible. But in other cities, blighted and empty storefronts are documented and monitored, which can spur penalties for owners. Baltimore doesn’t take those steps — making the extent of the problem difficult to understand and solutions feel out of reach.
Dozens of readers asked us about vacancy in the city and offered ideas as to how the city could do more to support struggling commercial districts.
Here are a few reader comments we wanted to highlight, along with our responses to the questions they raised:
Why doesn’t Baltimore penalize landlords for empty storefronts?
Matti Gellman: City Council member Odette Ramos has pushed for a vacancy tax that would impose a higher property tax on vacant and abandoned properties. Historically, the council has shown little support for such measures, and the effort is complicated by the fact that the city does not track long-term empty commercial spaces.
In Philadelphia, commercial buildings that sit vacant for more than three months need special licenses or risk facing fines. In New York City, empty ground-floor commercial storefronts are reported to a registry under the threat of fines.
Without data, it’s hard to generate the urgency needed to pass legislation.
Sahana Jayaraman: Right now, the city’s method for finding and tracking vacant properties — both commercial and residential — relies on code inspectors deeming a building uninhabitable based on how it looks from the outside.
Those visible markers of vacancy, like broken windows, are often hidden by roll-down gates on commercial properties, hampering the city’s ability to find commercial vacants — and to hold their owners accountable.
Why do vacant buildings still get water bills?
Sahana: This is a great question! I should start by saying that we don’t know how long the vacant commercial properties tied to Matt Herman have been racking up water charges or, in some cases, when a payment was last made. The city’s billing portal doesn’t list a last payment date for two of the four properties.
That said, there are several reasons the city can charge a water bill on a vacant building: Someone could be using the water there, or a leak — which registers as consumption — could spring up unbeknownst to the owner, according to an email from Department of Public Works spokesperson Mary Stewart.
The city charges mandatory fees, like stormwater and account management dues, to every account, regardless of vacancy status, Stewart’s email said. The public works department encourages owners of vacant buildings to review their water bill as soon as it becomes available and to set up consumption alerts on their account.
Vacant properties that rack up water bills have been the subject of scrutiny in Baltimore before: In 2023, a City Council committee probed several government agencies for answers on why a law mandating water to be shut off in vacant buildings wasn’t being enforced. At the time, the housing department told council members that it referred structures it deemed vacant to the public works department — which is responsible for water shut-off — on a “case-by-case” basis.
Matti: It’s an interesting question. Some of these properties don’t have vacant building notices, so they’re not considered vacant by the city. That being said, they could have sat without a tenant for years. Herman used facade grants and other supports to put money into certain properties, but his portfolio’s too large for him to afford the upkeep, leaving him to pass off bills to small business tenants when he can find them.
Should Baltimore require monthly inspections of vacant buildings?
Sahana: So, parts of this solution are actually already codified in Baltimore: Once housing inspectors deem a property uninhabitable, the city can charge its owners a new $1,000 fee for each day the building remains vacant.
Housing department officials have previously told The Banner that staff ideally inspect and cite vacant properties once every 30 days — but in practice, we’ve found that citations are issued far less frequently.
Matti: We’ve heard from city meetings that code inspectors are already overwhelmed with the amount of work they do across Baltimore. But I think the smoke detector requirement and monthly inspections are really interesting ideas.
What would it take to revive Baltimore’s empty storefronts?
Matti: Many of the city’s measures to address vacancy have revolved around residential vacancies because the problem is so glaringly large. Theorizing on how to specifically tackle commercial vacancies, and by that I mean long-term unoccupied commercial property, is a great idea. It also brings us one step closer to a solution.
Could stronger Main Street programs help fill vacant storefronts?
Matti: Certain neighborhoods in Baltimore have developed really strong Main Street programs. Waverly is not one of them. Community leaders are trying to change that. But the group’s suffered some controversy over its financials. Main Street program leaders say there are major disparities in the data these groups are tracking, which makes identifying and addressing problems in these corridors difficult.
Comments
Welcome to The Banner's subscriber-only commenting community. Please review our community guidelines.