Who will pay to prevent Baltimore’s underground fires? Officials say that’s a utility problem.

Baltimore does not have the money to make many of the improvements recommended to reduce the chance of explosive fires in its underground utility system, city officials told the Baltimore City Council Tuesday.

To finance the improvements, the city will renegotiate deals with the utility companies that use the system — negotiations that will not be completed until the end of the year, Khalil Zaied, the city’s deputy mayor for operations, told the council.

The recommended improvements were made by RTI Group, a consultant hired by the city in the wake of several damaging underground fires and manhole explosions in 2024 and 2025. The Stevensville-based group issued a report in December faulting gases accumulating underground for starting a September 2024 fire that swallowed a Charles Street bookstore, closed several blocks and left thousands without power. The fire was the second in the Charles Street corridor in 2024.

The consultant discovered multiple risks in Baltimore’s conduit system, including pipes overcrowded with equipment and cables from multiple utilities. Fiber-optic cables and power cables were sharing the same ducts through the conduit, the report found.

The report made more than a dozen recommendations, including separating power cables from fiber-optic lines, improving monitoring and venting of manholes and developing a citywide map identifying vulnerable spots in the system.

Officials with the city Department of Transportation reported to the council Tuesday that they are making progress toward some of those recommendations, while others will be delayed until funds are available.

Patrick Fleming, the department’s chief of staff, said city crews have compiled a list of high-risk locations in the system and are working with lessees to reduce overcrowding in some of those spots.

Baltimore owns its 741-mile conduit system, a series of terra cotta pipes that carry utility wires beneath the city. Utility companies pay the city for space in the system, about 78% of which is occupied by Baltimore Gas and Electric. Since 2023, BGE has been responsible for capital improvements to the conduit, while the city remains on the hook for maintenance.

Fleming said the city needs sensors in manholes to monitor heat, gas, humidity and water to satisfy a recommendation for the underground system. The data tracked by the sensors must be monitored in real time to alert staff to hazardous conditions, he said.

“What’s the pathway to funding this?” asked Councilman Zac Blanchard, whose South Baltimore district includes the Charles Street corridor where the report was focused. “If we don’t have a strategy for the implementation, we’re liable to end up in the same situation.”

Zaied said the conduit operates as an enterprise fund, meaning revenues that are brought in by the conduit are used to cover expenses generated by it. City officials have not publicly shared estimates of costs for improvements.

“The time probably is good now to start having a conversation with all the occupants of the conduit system in order to identify funding for some of these issues that we’re talking about right now,” he said.

The city’s agreement with BGE, a controversial deal approved by the Board of Estimates without two of five members present, expires at the end of the year.

While Baltimore has remained responsible for maintenance of the conduit system under the agreement with BGE, it lack the capacity to do routine inspections, city officials said. In the past, inspections were done reactively when requests came in from lessees to run new cables through the system.

Zaied said the city has begun doing more frequent inspections of manholes identified as high-risk, manually checking the temperature inside. There are now sensors inside certain problem manholes that can monitor temperature.

“Now, is that enough? Probably not,” Zaied said. “We need to go forward with a more robust system.”

Councilman Mark Conway, the committee’s chair, asked city officials to supply a list of where improvements have been made to the conduit. Ty’lor Schnella, a representative for the mayor, said he would follow up with the councilman but would not commit to sharing the information.

“It’s critical infrastructure, sensitive infrastructure,” he said. “We want to be mindful about sharing certain things.”

Past requests from the council for maps of the system have been rebuffed by the administration. A Public Information Act request from The Baltimore Banner for a map was rejected over security concerns.

“While it’s important that we make these historic investments in our conduit, if we’re not making them in the areas that are exploding, does it matter?” Conway asked.

Eva Hodsdon, chair of the Charles Street Development Corporation board, pleaded with city officials to better support the businesses harmed by the fires.

“How are we supposed to ask large employers, local operators and first-time entrepreneurs to invest their dreams into Baltimore when we cannot guarantee the utilities under their storefront won’t literally blow those dreams up?” she asked.