Mosby legal-defense fund donor list to remain secret following circuit court ruling

BALTIMORE — A list of more than 130 donors to a legal-defense fund created to benefit Baltimore officials Nick and Marilyn Mosby will remain hidden from the public under a recent ruling by the Baltimore City Circuit Court.

The fund, which was the subject of an ethics investigation that ultimately found Council President Nick Mosby was in violation of city law, was disbanded nearly two years ago following an order from the Baltimore City Board of Ethics to cease operation.

Still, Baltimore officials have withheld the list of donors to the fund from media outlets including The Baltimore Sun and the Baltimore Brew, arguing they constitute financial information.

In September, Maryland’s Public Information Act Compliance Board sided with The Sun and the Brew in an appeal, ordering Baltimore to release the complete list of donors who contributed a collective $14,352 to the fund. The board argued the donations were akin to contributions to campaigns which are disclosable under Maryland law.

On Friday, however, Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Fletcher-Hill overturned the compliance board’s ruling, arguing the names of donors constitute financial information under a broad interpretation of an exemption to the state’s Public Information Act. The act requires public agencies to withhold records “about the finances of an individual, including assets, income, liabilities, net worth, bank balances, financial history or activities, or creditworthiness.”

Fletcher-Hill relied on a 2016 ruling that permitted the Maryland comptroller to withhold specific financial information related to unclaimed funds.

“It may be argued that these single transactions, some of them in very small amounts, show little about any person’s overall financial position,” he wrote. “But the same could be said of the minimal information concerning unclaimed funds held by the Comptroller.”

The Mosby legal defense fund was created in 2021 to benefit the Mosbys, who at the time were in the midst of a federal investigation into their financial dealings. Nick Mosby wasn’t charged. His now ex-wife Marilyn Mosby has been convicted since of two counts of perjury and one count of mortgage fraud.

The fund collected donations from at least 130 contributors, the majority of whom live in Maryland, according to a redacted list provided by the Board of Ethics.

In May 2022, the Board of Ethics found Nick Mosby violated the city’s ethics ordinance by indirectly soliciting for the fund and by failing to include it on his annual ethics disclosure form. The board found Mosby received at least two donations from controlled donors — those who seek to do business with the City Council, the council president’s office or the Board of Estimates.

In February 2023, Fletcher-Hill, in a separate court proceeding, upheld the Board of Ethics decision, although he disagreed with the board’s finding that Mosby actually received money from the controlled donors.

Last week, Fletcher-Hill found the compliance board erred when it relied on Maryland election law and Internal Revenue Service code to argue that donations to the legal-defense fund are akin to campaign contributions. Donations to candidates are disclosable under election law. Similarly, IRS code, which governs the Mosby legal-defense fund as a Section 527 political organization, requires disclosure of the names and addresses of donors who gave $200 or more.

There is no evidence that the fund, which was controlled by a trustee, ever submitted such a donor list to the IRS. An IRS spokeswoman told The Sun last week that she could not say “for certain” whether an organization has filed such a list, but the disclosure portal is updated weekly. No donors to the Mosby fund have been reported in the portal.

The exemption for financial information under the Maryland Public Information Act applies “unless otherwise provided by law.”

Fletcher-Hill said the compliance board failed to “harmonize” Maryland’s public information law with state election and federal tax laws.

“Where … the agency custodian is not an official charged with administration of the ‘other law,’ it is too much to expect the custodian to make fine determinations concerning disclosure under the ‘other law,'” Fletcher-Hill wrote.

Baltimore Sun Media Publisher and Editor-in-Chief Trif Alatzas said the organization is still considering its response to the ruling.

“We are disappointed by this decision and believe it is in the public’s interest to know who is providing financial contributions to elected officials,” he said. “We will assess this ruling and decide our next steps.”

_____