where's the Ebmaj7 coming from?
This might seem like a controversial or even wrong statement, but you should consider relative major and minor as being one bi-polar key. It's like a person standing, sometimes her weight is more on the major foot and sometimes on the minor foot. There's a lot of music where it's completely ambiguous which is more "home", the minor or the major. It would make things easier and more honest to a lot of pop/rock/jazz music if everyone standardized on "I" meaning the major key's tonic and "vi" as the relative minor key's tonic within the same key signature.
In my experience, insisting that relative minor and major keys are completely separate things causes more problems than it solves.
In your progression the Ebmaj7 is the IV relative to Bb, or if you insist on the tune being in G minor, then it's a VI relative to Gm. But if later in the song, the balance shifts more towards Bb major being the center, then you'll have to change all the numbers. Is it worth it? The problem goes away if you look at keys as having two centers simultaneously, the major center and the minor center.
Try replacing every Ebmaj7 with Cm9 - not a very big change IMO:
Cm9 D7#9 Gm9
Cm9 F#dim7 Gm9 Bb13
But how could we make Bb feel more like being the home note. How about this, how does the minor/major balance shift?
Ebmaj7 D7#9/A Bbmaj7
Ebmaj7 F#dim7 Gm9 Bb13
What if you swap the lines, is this more like "in Bb" if it ends on Bb?
Ebmaj7 F#dim7 Gm9 Bb13
Ebmaj7 D7#9/A Bbmaj7
Even if you think G or Bb would be the more likely tonic, is a full re-numbering of everything needed, and does it change the way you treat the chords?