We must never forget that. In that effort, I want to acknowledge the strong part tremendous community organizations. Our VFW of this earth.
No true Just test. Why is it always You and I should be up here. No. What can I put on? Did you tell me? They should be here any any minute.
Yes or no? Hello. Hey, we need help with the microphones. The microphone software is not microphoneing. Hi, can you hear me? Yeah. Yeah, we need help with the microphones down at the council chamber.
It's none of when you hit your microphone. Okay, the council will come to order. I'll rise and salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Please remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of our veterans, service members, and those who have given the ultimate sacrifice. I'll now recognize Councelor Taylor for an additional moment of silence.
Councelor Taylor. Thank you, Council President. Um, this past week we lost a member of the Ward Five community. Um, Elizabeth Thonen, otherwise known as Beth Thonen. Uh, she was a volunteer at
the warming center. Uh, spent the last few years in Malden and really gave back to the community in the city. And I'd like to take a moment of silence for her. Thank you. Now, in recognition of Indigenous People's Day this week, I will now read
our land acknowledgement. We honor and acknowledge the Massachusett Penacook and Pucket peoples whose ancestral lands we now call home and on which we gather today. We express gratitude to the indigenous peoples who have cared for this land for generations, predating European
colonization and continuing to the present. Moving forward, we are committed to ensuring that the histories, voices, and contributions of indigenous peoples are recognized and respected in the life of our city. Thank you. Now, will the clerk please
call the role? Council Hayes, here. Council here. Council Crow, here. Council McDonald here. Council here. Council Sego here. Council Simmonelli. Council Sphora here. Council Taylor here. Council Winslow here.
Council President Lan here. Thank you to our clerk. Now, under the provisions of the open meeting law, for those of you in attendance, please be informed that UMA Urban Media Arts will be recording this evening's meeting. So, just be aware there will be audio and video recordings of this
meeting. First order of business. City assessor Nate Kramer will appear before the city council to give a presentation on the residential exemption option from going of going from 30 to 35%. And here we have him already at the podium for you. Welcome.
Thank you. Good evening everyone. Um so this this presentation or at least a lot of this presentation has actually been up on our website since 2021. Um, so I'm not sure how much of um, how many of you have have read it or how into the nuts
and bolts of it you want to get. Um, the first few pages are just what the residential exemption is and how it's calculated. Um, and if you want, I can read it or or we
can just move right through. Um uh there's about 17 communities in the state that have it all for different reasons. A lot of them are on the Cape. Um uh for second homes um in Malden. Uh it
was enacted to help home ownership be more affordable uh because we have a high number of absentee landlords. Uh, one thing the resident one thing a lot of people don't understand with the residential exemption that it stays in the residential class. So, we're not
we're not raising uh we're not we're not discounting our levy. We're still raising the same amount of money. Um, it's just that the values are shifted only within the residential class. So, this doesn't affect commercial or industrial real
estate at all or personal property. Um, it does raise the residential rate though. Um, and this is how it's calculated. I This is on the website and um, if you want me to go through it, I can, but I think you'll all glaze over pretty
quickly. Um, but this these next couple of slides will illustrate what these numbers mean. Um, so this slide just shows it's a comparison for owner occupied properties
if we were to go from 30% to 35% what it would look like. Um, and basically I guess the important numbers for us to be looking at are those green and red ones. Um, so right now with a 30% and these are these are using ballpark fiscal 25
numbers and also fiscal 25 tax rates. Um but the ballpark savings um right now so this includes so even though uh people might see like the the the
amount of the residential exemption they get is 26.90 but it doesn't include the fact that it also raised the tax rate. So that number you see, the 2003 is what what the actual savings are for. Um, so property one is a $500,000 house. Their
actual savings is $2,000 on their tax bill. Property two being a million dollar. Um, uh, as the value goes up, the benefit diminishes. Um, and then after a certain point, um, it just goes,
people are just paying more. So, property three being around the break even point, um, they're paying around 1,600 more and properties around 1 point 1.5 million are paying around 2,000 more. Um, I believe last year for the
fiscal 25 classification, there were only around eight single family homes um that that fell above that. Um, so there's a very minimal number of owner occupied dwellings that fall above that
threshold. Um, now if we were to increase it from 30 to 35, look at the lower part of that graph, those actual savings go from 2003 to 2442, 1353 to 1667.
Whereas um those higher value properties that are paying more um 1619 to 1837 2040 to 2325. So um then
for non-owner occupied properties this is how it I I do you have a clarifying question on this current point? Okay. I'm I'm going to let councelor O'N ask a clarifying question to on the last slide, I think. So that
so so the the actual taxes without the exemption would be the the bolded black number plus the green number. That's what the tax would be without the exemption because that's the savings, right? No.
Yeah. No. So, see the top towards the top of the graph, it says bill with no exemption. If we didn't have the residential exemption at all, yeah, the tax bill on a $500,000 house will be $5,40 with the 30% exemption.
It's $3,000. $3,73. Oh, okay. So, Okay. So, bill with no exemption. Okay. Thank you. This is similar to how if you look it up in the assessor's database now, it essentially shows you that, correct? Yep. Okay. But and then it just says is that that
that row is not included on the bottom graph. Correct. So the bottom part of the graph is what it looks like at 35%. So that so that bill with no exemption line would be the same on the 35% section. So anywhere from 30 to 35%.
So if we didn't have the exemption, it would still be $5,000 $5,40. He's just not reshowing you what your tax bill would be without it. Oh, because I thought you said that the the tax rate would increase, wouldn't it? Yep, it would. So, um,
no, it's close enough, I think. So, without a tax without it in this in this example, um, without any program at all, the residential rate would be $108. At 30%, it's $1144. And I believe at 35% it's $1.64.
Okay. Thank you. So, council, I think. Are you good to Yeah, the pointing out the row did help. Okay. Thanks. I think that is an important point though for the public. I think just to clar just to underscore that. So, I
think if there's no exemption, everybody's rate is the same. Everybody's rate per thousand is the same. Is that what you're saying? On the residential on the residential. So, not your literal bill. C. I just want to make that clear because councelor Omali was asking why
that row of your individual bill disappeared. But what you're saying is that without an exemption that rate per thousand goes the same for everybody on the residential on the residential. Okay, got it. Sorry to interrupt you. Please continue.
That also includes a shift. So So that residential rate with no exemption includes the shift. So, if we had a single tax rate across the board, residential, commercial, everything was one tax rate, we'd be, I think, sub$9.
Got it. Um, so the next slide just shows what happens to folks who don't qualify for properties that don't qualify for the exemption. Um,
and so again, the colored numbers for those same values, um, a $500,000 house that's non-owner occupied or for or for whatever reason doesn't qualify for the exemption is paying $680 more where if we were to go
up to 35%, it would be 775 more. Um, and so on down the line. Does everybody follow that? Um, so this slide just shows, you know, where what happens to that money. So everybody's everybody's tax bills are lower. Where does that where does that
money go or who who who picks it up? Um because we're still collecting the same amount of money. It shifts to the higher value properties. So this is what happens to their bills. Um so on a $25 million property, uh their bill on the residential side would be
$252,000. There's not none either. There's we have we have quite a few highv value apartment complexes. Um we have several that are over hund00 million in value. Yeah. Could I ask? Yeah, we're talking about residential.
Since we are talking about residential, I wanted to make sure you did mention this point that we were talking about as we were preparing the presentation because I think the public may not understand that the large apartment complexes are not businesses and that this if I'm understanding what you were
explaining to me, councelor Simonelli, I'll get to you in a moment that what you are explaining to me is that shifting this is a way of pushing that tax burden to the larger apartment complexes which currently essentially are taxed the same way as single family
homeowners now. Yep. So, Granada Highlands pays the same tax rate as a single family homeowner. It's a residential rate. Um their bill is a lot larger. Obviously, they have a 9 units. I think they're over 200 million
in value. Um but yeah, so they they pay that rate. So, one thing that the residential exemption does is it helps alleviate um some of that cost for the lower value properties and it puts it on the higher
value properties. Um, and since they are valued at the residential rate and not the commercial rate, which has done the same statewide, and that's been that way forever, um, I guess it's the closest thing we can get to actually saying, okay, we're taxing these large apartment
complexes more than regular uh, owner occupied dwellings because essentially we are. So, you can see, you know, for for a $25 million property, um, at a 30% exemption,
they're paying 35,000 more. And at 35%, uh, they're paying what? 40 50 40 something thousand more. Um, and all the way up to so if it's a $100 million property, their tax bill is a million dollars a
year with no with no exemption. 1.4 1.14 with 30 or 1.16 um at 35. Um, so they do those higher value properties really do quite a pay quite a
bit more um with the exemption. Thank you. Any other questions on that? I um if councilors would indulge in I'd actually like to give counselor spata a
chance to speak because he docketed Nate coming before us. Um and then I'll take other questions. I appreciate that. Thank you Nate. Thank you madam president. I appreciate it. Uh the first thing is I would say hopefully third time is a charm. We've tried to do this I think three years as I've been a counselor. I think so. The first
question I have is is is how many cities right now currently have 35? Is it three? It's one as far as some of them. I think just some of them. I thought Boston had it too, but that's Boston might um it's been a crazy couple weeks. Okay, fair enough. I just haven't had a chance to dig into it, but fair
I know some of Somerville definitely does. I know Ever's at 25, but Ever's also a little different residential. Yeah. I I would just say to my to my colleagues, uh, listen, at the end of the day, I I know I know we all realize that we're all going to pay more. Um,
that's I think one of the the challenges in the past was, you know, it does affect the renters. We all know what's coming down the pipeline, no matter what we do, is going to affect the renters and certainly the homeowners. Uh, I think the way Nate explained it was this is a good balance for us right now. We don't have a commercial tax base to kind
of pass on this levy. I look at this as a way to have like an artificial pass off to the commercial tax base, which are large apartment houses, which we can't change that, right? I've said it a thousand times up here. That's a state decision that they should have, you know, apartments over 25 or even 15
should be taxed at a commercial rate. We can't do that. This is a way we can do it. But I think it's also important that we're really going to help the the lower value of homeowners reap the benefits of this and where the where the houses that are assessed the most are actually going to pay more. I mean, this is literally
Rob and Peter to pay Paul. But it gives the people I think really need that additional savings uh in any year, but especially maybe this year, the next couple years, the ability to at least have some savings. And the one with those and the people that have those houses that are assessed at a higher value, they're going to pay more. And I
just think at this time it it would pro it would really be a misjustice I think to the residents especially the homeowners which we're trying to protect. Um and we've all talked about ways to incentivize that. And we've also talked about ways to charge more money to absentee landlords and more money to
to the the to the landlords that are running uh bad property owners. This is a way I think we can do that. It sends a message. Uh it's going to be more money to operate some of these properties. And if you do a good job, you'll be able to reap the benefits. if you don't sell to somebody who's going to come here and live here and get this benefit. So, I am
100% in support of this. I appreciate the council for indulging me. Um, as a reminder, we asked for this. Well, I asked for at the beginning of this year again, hoping that we wouldn't have to do a 11th hour uh uh road race like we always do. That's why, if you remember, Nate came in early this year. We said we're a little bit too early, not
knowing what was going to be before us. Uh Nate's here. I think he has to have a vote on the tax rate by the end of this month. Um, so I would hope that everybody would really take a serious look look at supporting this and raising more than 35%. Um, and really showing us what we're trying to do here is is give
a little savings, not to everybody, but I think to to the to the ones that actually could use it, need it. Um, and I think uh, it would be well welcomed to the by the community. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councelor Spataphor. Um, councelor Simonelli.
Thank you, Madam President. Um yeah, I have a couple of questions, but just going on what uh council spat said, you know, I mean um you know, passing this on to the uh to the high uh residential properties,
uh the apartment complexes, which entail they're going to end up raising the rents on rents that are are already not affordable here in the city of Malden. So, at the same time, we talk out of both sides of our necks sometimes because, you know, we'll sit up here and
we'll say affordable housing, affordable housing, affordable housing. But at the same time, we'll take votes to uh increase the rents that are out there now or have the potential to increase because they're going to pass those costs down to their renters just like a
store would pass down uh the their hike increases on rent and stuff like that to the people that shop in their stores. I mean, that's how you got to make up the money. And you're absolutely right, Council Spaphor. We're uh you know, take it from Peter to pay Paul or however you
say that. Um so I mean, I don't really know where I stand on this because um it's just making one problem worse and the other pro problem a little bit more alleviated. Um I mean, and we're looking for, you
know, two and a half override. Still talking about that, I guess, right? So, we're looking at doing that uh with the homeowners to the homeowners. Uh I haven't heard anybody talk about any cutting or any uh looking at where we can cut some fat if there is any fat. I
don't know. I'm saying look into I mean I know that's your committee and and we're not talking about the override right now and we actually don't have to vote on just looking at that down the road. I know that's not on Listen Listen, I know that's not on the topic, but I'm just saying my piece here. Right. So, what I'd like to say is
that, you know, I was talking to um somebody today at the grocery store and who has been a longtime employee who recently retired. I don't want to say the person's name, but you know, they brought up a good fact. It's kind of funny that you're here before us tonight. It must be like it must be a
coincidence. Um, so we're talking about the the the homeowners exemption. Now, I know that was developed during the uh Howard administration is when we first put that thing forward, and I even voted for it. So, I guess I want I wanted to ask come up uh like how do we continue to check on that? Let's say for instance
if if it's doubled since we've been given the homeowners exemption, right? And say that's doubled by about 500. Let's say it's increased by not doubled. Say it's increased by 500. Let's say 500 what? 500 uh homes. It's increased by getting
the exemption. You know what I'm saying? So my I guess my point is how and they continue to get it. So my thing is how do we know if those people haven't moved out of the city because it's homeowner. You got to be home owner occupied. So how do we know who checks
to see if those people have moved out of the city and we're still giving this exemption and meanwhile they're renting it out? You know, is there somebody that checks on that from the assessor's office from time to time or is that something we could look because I'm looking at like so we kind of did the figures a little bit. So say the average
is $2,000. Say it increased, say it increased, you know, or doubled since we put that into effect during the Holl administration. It's been like over 20 years, right? And let's say 500 of those are no longer home owner occupied.
That's potentially a million dollars uh that we would get back because we wouldn't have to give it out if it if it's been rented out and not sold. Do you know what I'm saying? So, we have somebody that checks on that. How do we how does that assessor's office? Huh? the assessor's office.
Well, how do they do that? Yeah. So, we do about 500 a year. We where we remove people and make them reapply and every anytime somebody puts their property into a trust, we remove it and they have to reapply so we can make sure they're still living there. Okay. It's not a perfect thing. There are
people that and it's it's more common with multif family homes. We don't know they moved if they moved, right? Um but also we work closely with other departments. the building department. Uh, so it would be it would it would behoove us to kind of the health department, they do inspections. Hey, the owner doesn't there and they let us know. We we work
with a lot of different departments on that. So, it's absolutely not perfect, but we think we do a pretty good job. No, and I'm sure you do. I'm just saying it would behoove us though to make sure that we're doing job if we're heading into some troubled waters financially down. There definitely aren't 500.
All right. I'm just using for examples, just numbers. But I'm just saying if we could come up with something to see what that average is so we'd know. So we get an idea of Well, we wouldn't know. That's why we don't that's why it's not perfect. No, but I mean how you Well, so again,
so maybe we need to try and get together on it to try and make it somewhat perfect. What do you think? Maybe. Well, we don't know. If somebody's living in a two family house and they buy a house in a different town, let's say cuz this lady says she's got four on her street alone. We don't know. We don't know because
their deed doesn't change. There's nothing I know. I know you can't check it that way, but can we check it like cross reference with the sensors? Can we cross reference it with inspectional services to see if you know uh because there's supposed to be an inspection done too if people rent out their apartments.
Correct. By the health department, that's why they inform us. Yes. So, I'm just saying with those entities, maybe, you know, we can find a hundred uh people that are getting the tax exemption of $2,000 a year that shouldn't be. Council Simmonelli, I'm going to
recognize our clerk to um add some context to answer your question. Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to offer a point of information that Cesar Kramer's um office does check in with the city clerk's office anytime somebody comes newly on board with this exemption. Okay.
They come over and uh we on their application through the census to make sure that they are listed as a resident at that address. So, you do do that. Okay. You do that. All right. Okay. That's fine. That's fine. But I'm just saying I think that, you know, since we had that conversation early today and you're here tonight, you
know, unfortunately, we're trying to save money. Yeah. Doing what you're doing, it would require another body. So, you don't have anybody in the office that does that now. So, we all work on it. We do exactly what I explained. Yeah. So, why would you need to hire somebody else? start driving around and
actually short of knocking on doors and asking if they're the owner. No, but I did I suggest that? Did I say that? No, but that's that's not what I said. But that's not what I said. Councelor Simelli, wait a minute. I asked if Simonelli, he has answered your question. He has answered your question. Answer my question with another
question. So, I'm just asking him if if there's a way that we can look at that with the current staff that you have now and try and make it a little bit better to see maybe people that shouldn't be getting it are getting it. Sure. That's all I'm asking. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you,
Councelor Cologne Hayes. Uh thank you very much. Uh thank you. I know we spoke earlier and I said I was going to ask the same questions out here so everybody else could hear them. Um I'm struggling with this because um a few things. Obviously I love to give
breaks, tax breaks to um homeowners and people who owner occupied. Uh but Malden is such a huge um city of renters and I'm really concerned about if we do shift right the tax and that this goes
to leaning on more um businesses. One concern is you know we already have a lot of vacant businesses here already. Would that um and these are just questions. It could be yes or no but um I'm sorry. Can you back up? Yeah. Yep. I the shift to apartments. Let me stick
with apartments first and then we'll go to the business. So the shift from the tax um exemption from um homeowners and then it goes to like larger apartments. This is a question because you just had talked about Yeah. Yeah. the apartments. So would that affect like um big landlords with big apartment buildings
here increase? And do you think that they would pass down that increase to the renters here who are already struggling? I think they could try, but it's a market-based business. They're not going to be able to just raise the rent dollar for dollar to try to recoup that loss. They're going to
end up losing tenants. Um I don't think I don't think that would be realized. Okay. So, you're thinking that um I get that and we talked about this earlier that I know that there are properties in here who have gone and raised rents extremely high um in our city and people
have gone out and marched and protested against it. So, I'm not completely sold on that, but I do understand what you're saying. Um, so anyone listening, I just wanted to be clear that that and that's a good answer. Like it's a possibility. We don't know what people are going to do, but based on what you just said,
we're hoping they're not going to do that. Um, and then the other is businesses. So if we're going to shift our taxes from us and then businesses will be taxed more. Do you think that that will um people might question coming to Malden because you know they're taxing businesses more? Again,
I'm just putting it out there for this doesn't have anything to do with commercial. Okay, it's just residential. Thank you so much. That actually is a very quick answer. Thank you. Okay. Just to repeat the question, can you clarify the shift the residential commercial shift?
Yeah. Yeah, it is. Yes. So, there's a there's so this what we're talking about tonight is the residential exemption. Um the other term that you're hearing shift that's where we shift the burden from residential to commercial and we do that
historically to the maximum allowable uh amount that we can uh right now we're currently I think for fiscal 20 five we are at 1.74 and the max is 1.75 okay
um so going back to one of the earlier slides Um, what that does is it's it's a split tax rate. So, it lowers the residential rate, raises the commercial rate. Um, if we were to have a single tax rate all across the board for
I don't think I need it much longer anyway. Oopsie. So, I think our our um our tax rate would be sub$9. Okay. Um, but because sub$9 Sorry, it mean below $9. Oh, geez. Okay.
Okay, got it. That just sounded so So right now it's 1753 commercial, 1132 residential um per thousand. It's a little bit tighter for us because we also have the residential exemption which raises the residential tax rate. So you'll see a lot of communities that
don't have the residential tax rate. It's a more um consistent difference among their residential and commercial rate. uh even if we had a single tax rate with the residential exemption, the residential rate would still be higher than the commercial rate.
Okay, that was extremely helpful because yes, we've been hearing all sorts of questions from residents and um and making that very clear. Actually helps me for tonight, too. So, thank you so much. No problem. Thank you, Councelor Cologne Hayes. Councelor Condan.
Thank you, uh Madame President. Um, Nate, first of all, thank you for the job you do because I know that you do do pay attention to uh people that are giving up the ownership
and going on to other cities and u people we have to pay attention as wide counselors. If you know a person owned a two family house and you know
you know you do know who in your wad sold it and moved over to up in uh Tukbury. All right. They're obviously not eligible anymore and we can give those names tonight.
I'm excited about this going from 30 to 35 just like 20 years ago when uh Richard Howard did bring it in at I think we started at 20. Oh wait. Oh yeah. It's like it started it was it was from what I could see. I obviously wasn't here then, but it
started at five and just went up incrementally to 20. And then this is an opportunity to help the people that their properties are not worth as much as the properties like some of the two families are worth over
a million. You know, some of the two families are worth only 700,000. And you're going to help those people that uh are low. you know, we just have to keep an eye on who's uh
the uh people that are acting as uh nonownupi, not non occupied by the owner. So I know all of us that run a wad, you know that
most of your problems are being caused by absentee landlords taking care of the property. We have to utilize our uh people that uh you know go out and check those properties because they just don't
keep it up like the people that are invested in the city. Those are the people that make this city go. So, I'm very excited about this and I intend on supporting it and try to get it up to 40.
But can't do that yet. But looking around, I know there I remember at least four of you who have called at least once. Yeah. To report like that person doesn't live there. Yeah. Okay. That's all I have to say. I'm
excited about supporting this. Thank you, Councelor Condan. Yeah, just for clarity, this is just factf finding tonight. Nate is kind enough to come in and give a presentation at councelor Spataphor and I's request. If we wanted to formally take this up, we would need a paper to
do so. And um remind me Nate, what week are you coming back to talk about the revaluation and to set the tax rate? Uh I also just before we got on to that I wanted to add that uh the mayor's office is in full support of increasing it to 35% as well. Thank you for that. Met them earlier. Um I'm back here
October 28th. Okay. Fantastic. For the for the classification hearing, which is when we set the tax rate for fiscal 26. Thank you. And decide on whether or not to increase it from 30 to 35%. Okay. Very helpful. Thank you. Uh next
I'm going to go to Councelor Winsow. Yeah. I'm just trying to f Remember I I often think of this as a teeter totter that like we lower here but goes up but you and I think it's interest I know we've had some reluctance about going
about from 30 to 35% because the concern that fewer people would be eligible but it looks like the numbers you have are showing 8,400 eligible for 30% 8400 for 35%. Is that that's correct then? That's strange math. You would you would think
that, but um but yeah, the my computer died. But the the way you determine the break even point where the benefit of it diminishes is by the total residential value divided by the number of people that are eligible. Oh yeah. So the break even
point doesn't change unless the levy changes or the number of eligible people change. So, and then so let's say you are the 8,399th valued house. So, you would get the 35%
exemption for that. Is that how it works? Yes. But now if Okay. Yeah. Would it be less than 35% because you're so close to the break? Okay. So what when we say 30 or 35% um what we're doing is taking the average residential value not just
average single family to uh but including single two three all the way up to Granada Highlands which is not called Granada Highlands anymore but that's what I call it altitudes or whatever all of those properties divided by the number of
parcels it's the average residential value that's where that 30% comes from so it's not it's not 30% % discount. Um, so right now the average uh the the that 30% number is around
$237,000. So if you have a million dollar home, you're not and you're eligible and you get the residential exemption, you're not taxed on a million dollar, you're taxed at a million dollars minus 237,000, whatever it is.
So, uh, so, so that if, so that's you figure out what the minus is and then if your house is a lot more. So, that's how the heater works. I was trying to understand. It isn't like you just take that 35. So, it's if your house is worth 600,000, you get 273,000. If it's
500,000, you get 200. So, that's why, you know, so at some point, right? So, that's the teeter totter. That's what the 30% mean. It's the average value of all the residential, right? So, someone who has a higher valued home is paying more taxes than someone lowered.
And that's where some of these large apartment complexes really really build up that break even point because there's such high values and we have such a such a broad array of of values all around. If if we didn't have those big complexes, we wouldn't have that that high of a um
break even point. So we wouldn't have just eight houses that don't qualify. That number would be a lot lower. So um so then in terms of like sometimes we talk as we talking about maybe going forward with the override or something like that. We you know there are senior exemptions there can low income
exemptions, veterans exemptions. So this it's really just based on property value. We don't really know offhand how many seniors are benefited because if you are 25 years old and have a very inexpensive home you happen to purchase it that you just get the exemption. It's
not really age based, right? So there's no age not for this. No, just owner and there's no no income qualifications. It's just really the the assessed value and then it's that deduction of assessed value. So, um is
there uh in terms of uh an override does it does how does that affect I mean just that override would just increase the amount of taxes and the deduction would still be the same. Then I haven't calculated those numbers but I would say that for especially those
lower value properties that override at the amount they're currently asking for would probably be a wash or more. So increasing it by 35 would probably wipe out that extra cost of the override. So by by increasing the exemption by 35%
the lower valued homes would that they would not be impacted. So I'm I'm not sure we I we were running quick numbers this morning. Okay. And I know we're not talking about the override right now, but I figured I figured the question would come up. Would be a wash. Is that what I'm
saying? uh initially and I don't but it is it is pertinent because there is a point at which it will yeah and I want to say that in that you'll see that colored spreadsheet you have um so so it's I guess it's something that we
should you know as we have the finance discussions and talk about revenues and that type it's something there is going to be a number up to a certain value which I don't know yet and everybody below that if it goes to the 5% the cost of the override will be
a wash. They won't even see it committee. So, but I mean that helps people with low value properties who are owner occupied, but it that could or could may or may not be seniors. It may not could be anybody that's under that value. Under that value. So, that's just
could be that's 22y old that just bought a So, but you know, we may be able to figure out but we may be able to get some sense from some other way of looking at that. So, all right. No, we're not sending this anywhere. So this is just a presentation. So we're not gonna
No, there's nothing to vote on. We're not voting on anything tonight. So, but I think that's just something that we we will need. But so what I'm saying is always Yeah. So I I just still have the floor, Council Simmonelli. Um, so I just I just
want to say that I think what's held me back before was I think we had calculations where um you we at 30% we had more people who could take advantage of it. Um if if at 35% we're still having the same amount, I'm I'm supportive of that. So um so if
that's what the numbers come back in a couple weeks, um I mean it's sensible to try to to do that. And uh I'll show to when when I'm back on the 28th, what I'll be able to show you exactly what it is on the 28th because our values at that point will be approved. Okay.
So then I can I I still can't talk about the override at that point, but yeah, maybe I can build a little spreadsheet and show you guys before I come. Yeah, that would be helpful. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That's all. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Wow.
No, no, you cannot. I Councelor Simonelli, I have a long queue of folks who haven't who haven't spoken one time yet. I want to get through everybody who's spoken once. No, don't yell over everybody. I'm Councelor
McDonald has been waiting patiently. I'm going to take him next. I'm not I'm not kidding around with you. So, yeah, I thank you so much for this, Nate. And um I think this does very clearly interact with two of the things we're talking about. And one is the
override um which we've been talking about roughly you know the average tax bill uh but we haven't been looking at detail at this kind of like different level and how that would match you know whether it's kind of on the same plane um at these different property value levels but at the at the average level
it does look like to just about net out what we're what we've been what's been proposed by the mayor. Um I wanted to ask two questions. One is we had also asked you for a list of all of the possible state level exemptions that uh residents can apply for or qualify for
and those include tax deferments which can I think can we can you know change the eligibility the income eligibility there to a certain degree. Um, and so if part of our goal were to mitigate the part the the impact of a tax override,
should it pass? We're talking a couple hypotheticals at this point. Do you think that there are um what like is is this the most direct uh or focused way to do that or some of these other programs would they allow us to be more
focused in how we would try to go about doing that? I I think the residential exemption is the absolute best and biggest thing we have going right now. Um there are other things we could be doing. Um so like for instance the a lot of the statutory exemptions
especially seniors and deferments uh deferments are are one thing but uh like our senior exemption at $175. The hoops that people have to jump through to get that is to in my mind ridiculous. They have to show bank information. and we have to see all their assets, their
income, and it it's just the amount of work they have to go through for $175 off. A lot of times we show them what the residential exemption is that they're already getting, and they're like, "Oh, forget it. We're not doing all this paperwork." Which not to discourage them, but just trying to save them a couple hours of work. Yeah.
Um I think the second biggest one I that that one, the residential exemption, I think, is the single biggest one that anybody in the state can offer. and and I think Malden is a perfect place for it. Uh second to that would be the s
senior circuit breaker which only one community has both the residential exemption and the senior circuit breaker. It's in conquered uh and I think that was a oneanddone thing. It's it's I think they voted it in last year and they got rid of it right away because it's just too much too much
work, too complicated. Um but um but yeah, there's there's tons I sent you the spreadsheet with all of the statutory exemptions that are available. Um it's unclear to me on some of them. As far as I know, we offer everything on
there. Um but we don't know. Me coming from starting here in 2020, there's a lot of history that I don't know when these things were voted on. I think we found the 17D was voted on in ' 86 and the 41 was voted on in 91. So, we
know we have that deferment. Um uh and then we have other ones that don't need to be voted on. Um so, fire and police um widows that you know they get full indemnity. I think we have about five of those. But um right right now I think
the number was around 263 people that are getting some sort of statutory exemption on top of the residential exemption. Okay. Um and that doesn't include excise. So there's a lot of Got it. With the Heroes Act, there's a lot more people eligible for excise exemptions too.
Oh, so like their car. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Got it. I do remember that from that conversation. Um, and then I, you know, I I know that we're concerned about these large properties, but am I reading this correctly that like the impact of the total tax bill for the
hundred million dollar property in Malden is not even $20,000 between what the 30% and 35th and 35% tax would bill would be just because proportionally it's so little. Yeah, that seems
it's not a big from going 0 to 30 would be huge. Obviously from 30 to 35 is not they're not crazy numbers, right? Yeah. For and so for even a kind of $ 1.5 million property, we're talking about not even $300 difference over year over year, right?
Um okay, my other question was about so we've been working on a rental registry uh which just got out of committee. I expected to be on the floor soon. That's kind of the counterpoint to this. And in fact, because we don't require landlords to tell us who they are, the proxy we've
been using is the residential exemption. And so I I think between these two things, you folks were asking about whether um we're being aggressive enough at making sure people are not abusing the uh the residential exemption. And I know because you've told us before that you've you've really tightened that up
and we've we've gotten hundreds of people to not get the exemption. I do just want to know from my perspective, that's not the only measure of success. That is good. that helps us, you know, balance our books. But I have I have talked to multiple people in our city who didn't know about the residential exemption, didn't apply
on time, and it's a it, you know, it's a $2,000 problem if you miss that deadline. Yeah. I don't know how I mean, we we every year we'll get a couple people that have lived here since 2000 and they've never knew about it. Yeah. So, this is heartbreaking to me.
And what I want to say is especially if we're moving in this direction to actually make it more consequential, I really think we need to find a way to more systematically help people who might be eligible like look for other proxies, find some way to get, you know, better connection through real estate
deals. Uh I I don't know what the answers are, but I do think we really need this. And between a rental registry and a home and a and a residential exemption, that should cover every residential property in the in the city. you either live there because you own it or someone else lives there who doesn't
own it. Right? So that should be everybody. And I'm hopeful that actually these two things could work together so that we can make sure that we've got everybody properly categorized so that folks who do deserve to take advantage of this can say because that's those they're just the most heartbreaking stories, you know, and people are breaking their budgets
trying to pay this when when we actually have a solution for them and they're not qualifying. So uh I guess my question is would you be able to help us do that if we end up in that situation? So I've already been working with the Steve FMA and GIS and Alex Alex over there
was here. We've been building some maps and that's something that we can easily do. Yeah, it's way easier than the stuff we're working on. So we can absolutely do that. Okay, great. Thank you so much. I really I look forward to considering this. I think it's the I just want to say the timing is complicated, but I'm sure we
will talk about that when there's an actual paper. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor McDonald. Councelor Ali, um I do want to mention um to my colleagues concern about the auditing of the exemption. Um I I know that was
something that I think councelor Di Maria, Deputy Maria took up a couple years ago and I know that your office kind of went on a on a a full-on audit and I think that's one of the reasons why we are so tight now is that we are we have developed this process to make sure. Um and so I do appreciate that.
Um, and so obviously enforcement is important, but I also want to make sure people who qualify don't lose their exemption. So you had mentioned when people transfer things into trusts, even though it would still be owner occupied, they can lose their exemption. Um, is
there a way that they can avoid that? So when that happens, we automatically we remove them and we simultaneously mail them an application. We get so many calls where people say, "Oh, we saw that thing from the city. we just ignored it and that's not we we
send that application as a courtesy um it's pretty clear uh that if you have a change on your deed that's it's a change of ownership so you're you're it's going to trigger your residential exemption being removed so um like I said we do when that happens we do send an
application out anytime we remove somebody we send them an application um and and it happens people ignore it or Maybe uh it's an elderly person still living there, but uh one of the children who's
taking care of the finances lives in southern New Hampshire and is only maybe down here once a month and sees the mail and missed the deadline. Um stuff like that happens, but um so after a change of ownership, how how long does someone have to re-qualify or
is the rest of the year lost? Nope. So they have so within the fiscal year. So, so for instance, right now we're in fiscal 26. So, anybody whose property changed in calendar 24 got removed. So, this year there's 391 people who got removed and we re when we
sent them applications. Um, it's something that we're working on right now. I think we have I think there were about 116 that didn't get back to us. So, we're rescending them. Okay. which is not like again we do it as a courtesy and cost the city money
too. So it's one of those it's one of those double-edged swords like we don't we don't want to see people lose this but we have a feeling we're they're still there. Let's try it again. So people don't have the time when they're making these decisions. They just need to reapply immediately. Yeah. And I think that's something that
just a lot of people don't know about because it's so rare having only 17 communities. So, if they're having an attorney do the trust, they might not even know the residential. They that Malden has the residential exemption, so they don't know to explain to them that they need to
reapply. So, it's really on on us or, you know, we get it out there in social media every once in a while, too. Um, just reminding people to apply. Uh, they're due people can apply from July 1st to uh April 1 of the following year. We like to get them in earlier. The
earlier the better. um before setting the tax rate is best um because anything after that comes that money comes right out of our overlay. Okay. Um but uh but yeah, I I mean if anybody has any ideas on how to better get that out
there, I'm I'm all for it. And then um in the same vein, you had a brief conversation with councelor McDonald. the other the other deductions or or benefits. You said there's you said there's a senior circuit breaker that we don't participate but is there is there you said something about
elderly with a lot of paperwork where you said something about a lot of paperwork. Yes. So there's senior exemptions. Um there's uh I believe the senior exemption that has asset um age and asset limitations and that's set by the state or by the
city. the agent the assets state with local options to adjust both the amount of the exemption and the amount of the assets by local option which um as far as I can see I haven't found anything where the city elected to
do that. So we can change the the the benefit for the senior exemption. You can increase it based on the CPI. So, uh, the do puts out the CPI numbers every year, and you can change both the exemption amount and the asset limits by
that number, but we can't change the ownerous paperwork requirement. They would still have to go through all the ownerous paperwork every year. It's a pain. Even if we got rid of the the asset requirement, I don't think you can get rid of it. You can only increase it by the CPI. Okay.
Consumer price index put out by the DO. I'm just trying to figure out how to It doesn't really resolve the problem of the paperwork. I was I was trying to figure out how to resolve the paperwork problem. It's a pain. Okay. Just Just so you know, blind people have to reapply every year. It makes no sense.
Understood. Case there was a miracle worker. Yeah. Um Okay. So, can you talk about the biggest benefit and who what kind of asset class it goes to? I know in the past like you have it here and broken down in in the value but oftentimes what
I've learned is doesn't it go to a particular type of residential property? So for instance the lower valued properties get the biggest benefit. So if your property was worth less than $262,000 would you pay no taxes? No. You have to pay at least 10% of your
bill. And I think there are six condo units or last year there were six condo units where the bill actually had to be adjusted because their bill fell below their that 10% threshold because I know that some of the so so
and I think you kind of hit the nail on the head. So the biggest benefit does go to condos because they have the lowest value percentage percentage wise I would say percentage wise here. Yeah. the the lowest the largest amount of low value properties would probably be
condos. Yeah. And all you have to and all you have to do is look at like if you go on to the 30 verse 35 page, there's this, you know, um if you compare the tax bill with 30% exemption to the savings, you
know, that that's that's a significant amount. It's 2/3. you know, you're we're not twothirds, but it's it's a significant. It's two- fifths. What's a lot? Yeah, it's a significant. Um, okay. And then and I think the the
the challenge is that the the the benefit, you have a lot of seniors who are living in singles, owner occupied singles, twos, etc. And and they don't get as significant of a benefit from a percentage basis. Um but I and the reason why I mention it is it's
interesting what you said about large apartment buildings and I don't think I ever fully made that that grasp because oftentimes you know we have seen you know vilification of large um apartment buildings but what I heard tonight and I mean this is probably the 10th time I've
heard this so it's it's it's stuck or maybe the first time that I've made this realization that um the large value apartment buildings increase the average residential value which increases the the the the benefit. Yes. Here.
So, this is an example of having large residential properties actually has a financial benefit for owner occupi occupied properties. I I never made that realization tonight. Obviously, there's going to be, you know, impact on our services when it comes to schools, etc. But this is this
is a benefit that I wasn't aware of. Um, and I'll just give an example. Across the street, 14 Summer Street, the the large tower that just sold, I think last month, for 97 million. It's assessed at 72. Can you talk a little
bit about the timeline because that's not going to happen this year, but there's a certain Yep. So, that was 10 10 to 20 summer, I believe, is what it that's what it is in our database. Yep. Um, yeah, 10 to 20 would be 14. Agreed. I'm
so happy I declined their abatement application last year because they were saying what a crappy building it is. It's not worth anywhere near the 70,000 70 million we have it at or and what are you talking about? Then it sells for 90 million plus. Uh we
had a few big sales. Um so our 2026 values are based primarily on sales that occurred in calendar 24. So any sale that happened in 25 we will be analyzing and adjusting values for fiscal 27. So
so the assessed values are can be 12 to 18 months behind what the actual market is doing. And just to tie the knot in full circle and I apologize for the length. Um you know our commercial real estate values are maybe not doing great. I'm not 100%
sure about Malden but generally commercial is is head in a tough time right now. Um, so our our residential values are are are carrying us the these next years through through what we're dealing with. So something to think about, you know, uh, there's always a time and a place. Um, but we really
should be building everything. Um, so because it's going to carry us, residential's carrying us through this lull, commercial is going to carry us through the other one. Um, a well, as councelor Spedaphora has stated, a well balanced, you know, tax base is is key. Thank you.
Can I ask a follow-up question to council Mali's point on that building? So, that has businesses and parking that charges in it. So, that's still taxed as a residential even though it has other uses that it makes money on. It's considered a mixeduse building. Okay.
Um I almost said much like across the street, but that's a condo. Okay. Um but yeah, it's a mixeduse building. So, that's called it's considered it's an 013 class, which means it's it's mixeduse primarily residential with some commercial. That's what So the one being
residential, three commercial. Yeah. Okay. I just I I feel like that's the kind of thing. It's a great example, but I've just I'm I'm hearing like maybe follow-up questions if folks are watching and I want to understand like that seems like if we're talking about taxes and why isn't that why isn't
something like that bringing us in a lot more revenue is a question I could see us getting after a very otherwise apt example like that. There is some commercial money coming from there. Okay. Thank you. Um, councelor Ali, you're all set. Okay, councelor Crow. Thank you. I'll be brief. Um, I know
next week we have a finance committee meeting and we're not talking about um the override, but when you said that you have some um do you have some numbers that you can send to the finance committee just about um if we go to 35 and how it washes it out because I do concern myself about the renters because
if it goes bigger and more does get shipped to the apartment builds. I understand mark and right but it it's still if they get this just the 5% plus an override sort of what that impact might be. So we just finished our public disclosure for to to to finalize our
fiscal 26 values. Um right now we're working on new growth and I would think next week I'm going to be plugging those numbers into the gateway system to do and at that point I'll really be able to tell all right here's what right here's what the new average value is. here's what the new break even here's what the new tax rates are going to be
and what the new residential tax exemption amount's going to be. Uh and from hopefully I'll have time to throw together a spread it when's that meeting Tuesday. This could Yeah, it can be just kind of rough, but I'll try to get you I can't get you actual numbers, but I can
I mean that spreadsheet that you have might be helpful. Um, but I can see also if I can maybe add in what it would look like with the with the proposed override, right? Just
again hypotheticals, but just to kind of have a better sense of with exact. Thank you. I'm going to write that then. You're all set. Councelor Crow. Okay. Yes. Councelor Simmonelli. Thank you, Madam. Yes. Yeah, I know. Listen, that's all I was trying to say
before councelor spatterfor made his wise crack that I think if we're talking about doing 30 to 35 like councelor Crow has said and we're also talking about the two and a half that we don't want to talk about tonight. We should probably have all that in committee so we can see
what these numbers look like. It's almost like putting the c before the horse. That way it'll give us all a general senses of what we're going to be looking at uh for our constituency down the road. uh if in fact this override does happen, what happens to this 35 to
30 to 35% which you kind of said tonight a little bit was like a wash. So that's all I was trying to say. Not that there was a vote on this tonight, but saying that maybe we should take something. I don't know if we have to have a paper on it or if we can just do it. Maybe this
is a question for the um uh clerk. uh if do we need a paper audit or can we send this to committee to go along with councelor uh McDonald's uh finance committee that he's working on so diligently on the 2 and a half%
council smell I believe there's going to be a hearing on setting the tax rate and whether or not we're going to increase this from 30 to 35% on the night of the 28th am I correct yep so in two weeks from tonight this will be coming back to us again in the
form of a favor from the from his Yes. It's when we set our tax rate. It's when we set our tax rate exemption. You think it's important enough for us to send it in so we can start taking action on it right away with councelor McDonald's committee. As of right now, there's no paper to send anywhere.
So, we do need a paper to send that into committee, right? We can't do it on the floor tonight. Between councelor Crow's request what she just asked Kramer, um I think that that what you're asking for will find its way into finding. Okay. Okay, fair enough.
Um, and then we won't be voting on Fair. So, that's what I was trying to say there, Council Spat. Okay, I'm gonna let Councelor McDonald respond as well. Yeah, just very quickly, I am sure we will need to meet on the 28th in finance regardless. Um, I encourage you to join us, Councelor Simmonelli. We had a great
conversation about potential areas to cut just before this meeting. Yep. So, I think Nate, if you if if we can't get it by next Tuesday, then I'm sure we will meet on the 28th and be able to review that and its interaction with the potential um with a potential
override consideration prior to the council then voting on that in the in the full council meeting. Okay. All right. Yeah, I'll do I'll do if that works for you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor McDonald. Councelor Spataphora. Yeah, I would be quick. So, I will be I think we have to put So, this is the
first thing I think I will put a a formal paper in. referative finance to increase the tax rate to look at possibility of increasing the tax rate to 35. No. And that it's going to come back, right? There's no paper that that we're going to talk on the floor in two weeks. There's no paper
that you can't time to do that. Isn't that the paper that you're bringing forward on the classification hearing is October 28th, but that's that's going to happen anyways. That's not a paper. He has to we have to do that regardless. That's when we decide though on whether or not to increase the resial exemption. usually always a part of that same paper
that sets the tax rate. The paper says that we will set the tax rate at X and if we will increase the residential 235. That's part of the same paper, is it not? Same thing. Should we discuss it first? Well, that's what we're doing now. That's where you're all right. If we don't have to committee
if No, I don't want to send it to committee. I just want to formally make sure that we can vote on that at that tax area because that's our last that's our last chance. That's the first thing I say. The second thing I would just say is to my counselors, I understand we we always concerned about renters. We should also be concerned about all
property owners residential. You can't have it both ways everybody. We can't say we're going to in we're going to do an override and not worry about the renters. But now you want to give the homeowner something and you want about the renters. This is what I would just say. It is supply and demand, right? I own some investment property.
You can't charge $3,300 in Maldin. You can do it in Cambridge. You can do it in Stumble. You can do it You can do it in Medford. That's why Marlin's always been this place that we have these rents because the other cities are much more expensive than us. And we've been able to capture that. You look for an apartment right now,
three bedrooms, like 3500. It's more That's my point. But my other my other issue here is using that economics is if you pay off your house and you have a two family, do you not charge that that tenant uh market rate? Of course you do. I think this is this
this is this is a small savings for those homeowners that need it. At the end of the day, we all know our property taxes are going up, our water bills are going up, our insurance is going up, and our food's going up. This is a way I think that in some cases we can offset, which is good to to hear,
right? Those people paying this. Now again, not everybody gets to not everybody gets to participate, but I think this council would appreciate we're participating with the lower homeowners and then and then the the more highly valued houses are paying more. I mean, that is literally that that's that's how it's going to work,
right? I I but I think it's important to send that that that message. We are we have we are we want to join the ranks here. I'm happy the mayor's office came out and supported this. I'm I'm glad to see that Mayor Christian did. But I I would I would find it really disheartening as
a council the third time we've asked to go up to 5%. Understanding economics and understanding yes not every participates and then and then go on to say we're probably going to have to do an override. That would just be unfair. It would be unfair. Uh and if we can give a little bit of savings we should. And
then you know all the other stuff about increasing the commercial tax base that's for another day. Thank you madam president. Thank you councelor spat. So I I Nate, I guess my question would be we and maybe um Madame Clerk, this is an additional question for you as well. So we do have
standard language that we dock at this item. Does it have to state the existing exemption only and can we amend that if we want to or can we invite Nate to put this proposal to the standard language? Can we put 35% instead of 30 or do we
have to state what they You can change it to zero. I don't think you need to change the language. You can you can say we don't want it anymore and get rid of it completely if you want. I don't think that changes any paper. Change the language. You just plug the number into. Okay. It's like literally a one sentence paper. Yeah. Okay. So, we we have a solution.
We don't need a paper. It is a public hearing and we will have a paper on the night of the 28th. No, you don't. Okay. I just want to make sure zero to be clear on that if you want. or the other way around. Okay. I appreciate all the time you've
put into this. I know it's a lot to come twice in a row and then I know there's a ton of work behind the scenes that we're asking of you to get ready for all the other implications of what we're considering. So, thank you so much. It's what I'm here for. Thank you. Nate, would you would you mind passing that piece of paper up to
us for our next order of business, which is public comment? Much appreciated. Thank you so much. Nobody signed up. Nobody signed up. Okay. So, our our next order of business is public comment. Public comment is allowed under council rules. Each speaker is limited to
subject matter relevant to the evening's agenda. And commenters must keep their comments to two minutes or less. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up for public comment? We do not. Neither in person nor by email. That is correct. Okay. Next order of business. Consent agenda. Okay. Okay, this evening's consent
agenda consists of meeting minutes to be approved, one appointment to be referred to personnel and appointments, and four petitions to be referred to the license committee. Does any counselor have a desire to remove any of these items from the consent agenda for the purpose of further discussion? Motion to
Oh, councelor Ali, let me put your light on. I'd like to remove the minutes. You'd like to remove the minutes? Do I have a second? You don't need a second. Oh, it can be done. request. It doesn't require a vote.
Understood. Okay. So, we'll remove the minutes from the consent agenda. Any further motions related to the consent agenda? A motion to approve the consent agenda. Okay. Okay. On councelor Seik's motion to
approve the consent agenda, seconded by councelor Taylor. All in favor? I. Okay. The agenda is approved. Next order of business. paper 368-25 minutes from the meeting of September 30th, 2025.
Okay. Do we have a motion related to those minutes? Councelor Ali. Sorry. Go ahead. I just had a question for the clerk. Um I was wondering and and I don't have any I'm not I'm not opposed to this, but was AI used to generate the summary of of
for these minutes or I don't believe so. Let me just run through them and double check. I usually go back and hand type them um after listening to the meeting again. The only is there specific the only question I had was on the
discussion for the um it was paper 36325. Um I just the there was a lot of robust discussion about that that was related to the override and um you know some of
the it it it kind of summarizes as various counselors spoke on the topic but it doesn't really get into like what did counselor spat say what did counselor McDonald say what did I say and I do feel like that's valuable context for you know the public to have
um and so I I just had a chance to review it tonight and I wasn't sure if that was a decision that was made by the clerk or if that was something that AI did. No, those weren't done by AI. Those were typed by me. Um, it's not appropriate to type meeting minutes that look like transcripts. They're not meant to be
transcripts. They're meant to be summaries of what happened, not necessarily what was said word for word. But that's why we do have the replay on UMA YouTube and via the team's meeting, okay, that people can go back and um watch again if they want to see the word
for word transcripts of how the discussion unfolded. I would just if possible I'd make an amendment that you know councelor Spataphora and I you know really made a a strong and I think even councelor Winslow made a strong um you
know appeal to the public and to the state delegation particularly Senator Lewis to fix the chapter 70 formula. I think it's important that that be documented in in the record. um you know, even though they could go and watch it on the video, um the video is
actually not the legal record, it's the meeting minutes. Um so I appreciate that that you could get the context if you wanted to sit through all of the video, but um oftentimes people don't. They just look at the minutes. Um but that would be my motion. Um so just to make a motion that it is
noted in the record that the three members made an appeal to the public to speak to their delegation. I I don't want to speak to others, but I I just I remember specifically the three of us talking about about that, but maybe councelor Winsaw it.
Okay. So, we have a sec a motion by councelor Ali, seconded by councelor Cologne Hayes. I'm seeing nods from the named counselors that were in agreement. Okay. All in favor of that amendment? I I that carries. And with that, I'd move to approve the minutes as amended.
Yes. One second. Let me get your light on. Sorry, my mouse is really sticky tonight. Councelor Spataphora, I would just say maybe as a future reference if we want something to be put in the record, we could say, "Please let the record reflect exactly what I'm saying." Council McDonald is excellent for doing that. I do appreciate that.
Yeah. Well, I know that's what I'm saying. Say that. That true. No, that's what I think we should do. Maybe as a collective whole, if we want something to be quoted, please let the record reflect this and then that way it helps you and get rid of some of the noise. Yep. That's a great point. Okay. So, we had a motion on the minutes
by councelor Ali, seconded by councelor Winslow. All in favor? I. Okay. That motion carries. Okay. Next order. So, next order of business, paper 374-25. Before we do that, I do I know we have a
counselor that had made a motion to uh take a paper off the table. Okay. Councelor Winslow. Yeah. I want to make a motion to pay take paper 29425 about weights and measures fees um off the table. Um and then I can so I make
that. Okay. Do we have a second to that? Okay. Councelor Ali. All in favor? I I um so Okay. Go. Okay. Okay. Sure. 294-2 be ordained by the Malden city council that the code of the city of Malden
16.12.0602 0602 sale of goods by weight measure or volume is hereby amended by striking the table in its entirety and inserting instead the following. All right, councelor Winsow for the paper. So I I think you a few weeks back this
paper was referred out of committee um rules and ordinance favorably. Um I think there was some discussion about um whether we should enroll it. Um and just there was some questions about um the I think councilor Mali in particular asked
about um the documentation related to the um you know the the the new rates that are proposed in this measure. So, I did check with Nelson Miller and um you know, he did share some things about comparing the rates to other
communities, but he has now um he does have manhour cost per inspection um rates that exceed the proposed fees. So, I think that was a question that came up. So, I think that we should go ahead and enroll it tonight um and then plan
to ordain it in the next full council meeting. And if people have questions, they can follow up with Inspector Miller. But um I think the question that um came up when we were going to enroll it, we decided to pause enrolling it so that he could just have the building
inspector check that. But I think we can go ahead and enroll it and then uh you know, I think he has confidence that we have the documentation necessary um to go ahead with the fees and then if people want to look at something before we ordain it, we can do that. But I
think that he's confident that uh the documentation exists and the the fees have a valid basis. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Wzo. Councelor Ali, I was just wondering, could that be shared with us? Like you're saying, could it be just sent to the entire council?
Um I I can have them have them do that. So before Yeah. So yeah, but yeah, whatever that is. But if people want if want that done, but yeah, but I I think I'd still like to make a motion to enroll it then we can have that. But yeah. Okay. Would you be comfortable with
I'm not opposed as long as there's a commitment that that that documentation gets sent to us. Thank you. Okay. Councelor McDonald. Thanks for councelor Wizzell for that followup. And my question is then if the staff hours per inspection exceed the
proposed fees, should the proposed fees be higher to capture the cost of the staff hours? Did you discuss that with I I did not discuss that. I just don't know how much the differences are. I mean, we could look at that again, but uh you know, I think it is some of some of these fees have not been set for
almost decades. So it might be good to go forward get get them increased and then we can re-evaluate that as we're you know for you know in future months but I think it'd be good to get these out there get this ordained as quickly as possible and then start collecting
that revenue right away and then we can evaluate that more if you want. So um I would be um I would be happy to second the the motion to enroll if we can also add
amend that or or let the record reflect that in I would like to revisit these in a year and see have they actually captured the staff time that we put into um that we put into these inspections uh that we're charging the fees for.
Yeah, sounds good. Okay, let's let's let the record reflect rather than make an amend amend. I that's my personal opinion. Um, okay. So, on a motion by councelor Winslow, seconded by councelor McDonald to enroll. Do we need a roll call? No. Okay. All in favor?
I. I. That carries. Uh, next order of business, do we want to do personal privilege before taking up? Does anybody have personal privilege? We do. Councelor Crow, thank you. Um, I just want to let since we won't be on camera next week, um,
remind people that the annual trunk or treat um, will take place on Saturday, October 25th, 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. on the bike path on Canal Street closest to Medford Street. I have a number of councils that I'm putting in trunks as
well. So, um, I welcome everybody to if you want. It's a great event. Um, we have a lot of trunks this year and so, um, I hope to see everybody um, there. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Crow. Counselor Taylor, thank you. Um, so this coming Saturday,
the 18th at 5:30, we will be um doing the haunted forest at Pine Banks. So, I hope everyone will will join us. Um, it is geared towards older kids and adults or young kids that can handle
Is that a disable? No, but but people sometimes bring younger kids and younger kids are welcome if they like to be scared, but we do kind of gear this a little bit more towards the older kids. Tax bills.
We're talking about the override. It'll horrify you. Um there also uh will be an option snacks um for sale from the coffee truck that we all adore and the canoli truck will
be back for this. Um and then the following weekend on Sunday the 26th we'll be doing a a younger event at Forestdale School um that we we generally do every
year from 3 to 5. Um, and that is also the Maplewood Association will be at Salemwood that day as well from 12 to 3. So, there's so many fun Halloween things to take advantage of in the next couple weekends, but hopefully we'll see you uh
Saturday at Pine Banks. Thank you, Councelor Taylor. Counselor Winsow. Yes. So, thank you for uh talking about the Salem Wood um Halloween event put on by the Maplewood Association. It is 12 to 3 is the time. I think I mentioned it
11:00 before, but it is 12 to 3 on Sunday the 26th. So, that's a fun time. Uh, a lot of games for the kids that they uh they play some games, win some candy, um, entertainment and stuff like that. So, it's a fun fun time um there. And then I also wanted to mention um and
congratulate um and I thank all my counselors for signing the um com the accommodations for uh three Eagle Scouts, Scott and James Gage and Steven Lawrence who were going to be um commended um at their Eagle ceremony uh
this coming uh Saturday at the Moose Lodge. So just congratulations to all you and uh I will pass these accommodations on on your behalf. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Councelor Wzo. Councelor McDonald, thank you. I just wanted to let folks
know who did not turn in tune in to the finance committee meeting just before this meeting that we are continuing discussion of not only a potential override to put on the ballot, but also our overall financial situation and different ways to close our budget gap. And we tal we talked today about ways
we've already uh the city has already excuse me saved money uh and reduced our budget obligations by switching our health insurance or seeking to do so by restructuring our pension payments and by reducing our debt service overtime. Um and now we're just moving to raise
some fees as well uh as appropriately done and we're justified by documentation. And so we're going to be continuing that discussion next week. Next week, we're going to have staff from our uh building department and strategic planning and community development talk about economic development strategies and what might be
possible for building up our tax base in the future. So, that's on the docket for next week and I just encourage folks to continue to tune into that. Um, if you are interested in that, we'll keep trying to make information available, ask all the questions we need to ask, leave no stone unturned, and push out
that information. Um, I do just want to note earlier today, I think this is okay to say. I went to the I went to Urban Media Arts who was reaching out to candidates to invite us to record statements um that they can then use. And they're still waiting on all the counselors who want to do that to be able to record your statement or you
don't have to. It's optional. You can just let them know you don't want to do it. But I just said I would remind folks to do that if you would like to do that in their TV studio so we can get that information to um to our voters. And then I'm going go for it. Okay. There's also a second candidate
forum this Thursday if you want to hear more from the candidates. Again, sponsored by Urban Media Arts. Uh that is a youthrun forum and that's at 700 pm and it will be livereamed um on UMA. So if you want to hear more from the candidates, you can also tune in to that. Thank you.
Thank you, Council McDonald. Councelor Ali, I was just checking on what time that forum was. Is it 7 o'clock? Oh, that's why. Okay, thank you. Okay, you all set?
Oh, oh, okay. Um, councelor Spataphora. Yeah, I just want to uh thank uh the Malden Public Safety, the fire department, the police department, uh the DPW that came out, uh a lot of organizations for the public safety day.
I know councelor SEA was not able to make it, but her impact was felt. She loves to throw a party, so a lot of that stuff was already set up before she went away. I She asked me how it went. I told her I think it was the largest public safety day we've ever had. So, I don't know. It was a combination of it was a
they they cut down the number of hours and it was perfect weather, but uh a big shout out that that is a it was a great event. Um I don't want to guess number of people, but it was clearly a well attended uh meeting. It's good to get the uh you know the kids and the families involved in that and uh get to
touch a lot of the equipment, see a lot of things, have food, get pumpkins. So great shout out to that. Certainly want to recognize council see uh and looking forward till next year. Thank you. Great. Thank you, Councelor Spataphora. Uh next order of business. Paper 374-25.
Order that the city council will vote whether to go into executive session with legal counsel for the city for the purpose of exemption 3 Massachusetts general law chapter 38 section 21A3 for the purpose of discussing strategy as to possible future litigation related
to grants. where such discussion in open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the litigation position of the city if so declared by the chair and if so allowed by the body to admit Marie Louise special assistant to the mayor and Alex Pratt director of the office of strategic planning and community
development. Roll call is required. Okay. So citing exemption three of Mass General Law section 30A section 21A wherein discussing paper 374-25 in open meeting would have a detrimental effect on the city's litigating
position. I'd be looking for a motion to enter executive session. Okay. On a motion by councelor Spataphora, seconded by councelor McDonald. Clerk, will you please call the role? Council Cologne Hayes. Council Condan,
yes. Council Crow, yes. Council McDonald, yes. Council Ali, no. Council Ali said, "No." Council Sega, yes. Council Simmonelli. Council Spataphora, yes. Council Taylor, yes. Council Winslow, yes. Council President Lahan, yes.
So that order has been adopted. We will be entering into executive session. Okay. So the council will now enter executive session and the body will not reconvene for any further business this evening and we will adjourn directly from the executive session. Okay,
that's why it's important.