Resident petition to regulate short‑term rentals in Malden tabled after council debate over petition fee

A citizen‑sponsored zoning petition asking the Malden City Council to create a short‑term rental registration and regulatory framework was presented May 20, 2025, and then tabled after a contentious council debate about whether the petition had been properly submitted without a $1,500 fee for zoning petitions.

The petition, introduced by Sean Malloy, a Malden registered voter and homeowner, would have amended the city zoning code to add a certificate of registration and other requirements for short‑term rentals. Malloy told the council the proposal aims to balance homeowner financial flexibility with neighborhood protections and to create local revenue and enforcement tools.

Why it mattered: the petition raised two distinct issues — the substance of short‑term‑rental regulation and the municipal process for citizen‑filed zoning petitions. Several councilors said they supported discussing the policy; others argued procedural rules required a petition fee and that accepting the paper without the fee would set a harmful precedent.

Key points from the meeting

Petitioner Sean Malloy told the council he and other residents drafted the ordinance to provide “opportunities for affordability, financial flexibility for other young families,” and to generate revenue and stronger enforcement tools for problem properties.

Councilor Colón Hayes said she met petitioners, praised their work and said she would sponsor the petition — but later withdrew the paper after the fee issue surfaced. Councilor Cica, citing a February council action that set a $1,500 fee for zoning petitions, said the paper was “improperly before us” without the fee and worried about precedent.

Councilor Winslow suggested the council should hold community forums before a joint planning‑and‑ordinance hearing and noted the city considered short‑term rentals a possible revenue source when state law changed in 2018.

Outcome and next steps

Councilor McDonald moved to allow the petitioners to speak and the council approved that motion. After extensive discussion, Councilor McDonald moved to table the petition to allow petitioners and sponsors to resolve the filing issue and for further committee review; the motion to table was seconded by Councilor Simonelli and passed on the floor. Councilors indicated the petitioners may refile with a sponsoring councilor or the council president planned to propose eliminating the fee, which would moot the procedural issue.

Process versus policy

Several councilors said they were open to a substantive hearing on short‑term rentals but wanted to handle filing and fee questions before moving the petition to a joint Planning and Ordinance committee hearing. Councilors emphasized the importance of community engagement for a potentially controversial policy affecting housing availability and neighborhood character.

Ending note

Petitioners were allowed to present their text and answer questions; the petition was tabled so the group could return with the fee or an official council sponsor or after the council considers eliminating the zoning petition fee. The council did not take any policy vote on short‑term rentals on May 20.