Malden City Council orders city solicitor to withdraw lawsuit against library trustees after heated session

Council President Ryan O’Malley filed a Superior Court suit in his capacity as council president against the trustees of the Malden Public Library, prompting a week of confrontational discussion at the Malden City Council meeting and a unanimous council vote to have the city solicitor withdraw the litigation.

The council debated whether to discuss the matter in executive session before hearing public and council comment. On a motion by Council President O’Malley to enter executive session, the roll call showed two members voting yes and nine voting no; the motion therefore failed. The council then considered a series of orders directing the city solicitor’s office to withdraw and to refrain from representing the council president in that case. The council voted 10–0 to order the city solicitor to withdraw the suit filed May 22, 2025, and to bar city funds or city resources from being used to support or reimburse legal fees for that litigation.

Why it matters: the dispute involved claims about the library board’s compliance with access to records, disagreements about the role of the council president as an ex‑officio trustee member, and the use of city legal resources. The episode drew sharp criticism from several councilors who said a single council member should not initiate litigation on behalf of the council without a council vote, and it raised questions about resource use and inter‑governmental civility.

Council debate and votes

Councilor Cica introduced a resolution expressing the council’s support for the library staff and trustees, saying the council should “let the Malden Public Library director, [and] board of trustees know that not all of us were supporting what was happening.” That resolution passed unanimously on a roll call.

Council President O’Malley defended filing the action in his role as council president, saying he had been advised that the statute names the council president as an ex‑officio member of the trustees and that he sought court review of access to certain records and the president’s ability to participate. He told colleagues he would prefer to explain details in executive session but acknowledged the litigation was filed in his name and said, “I stand by that.”

City Solicitor Alicia McNeil told the council the legal department filed the case under the capacity stated by the person bringing the claim (the council president). McNeil said the filing came quickly after issues surfaced at a trustees meeting and that the department had handled the process according to the request made to it.

After extended discussion, the council adopted an amended order directing the city solicitor to withdraw the case in superior court (case no. 2581CV01275) and prohibiting the use of city resources to support or reimburse any legal fees or court expenses incurred by the council president in that case. A separate order establishing that members must obtain an affirmative council vote before initiating litigation in their official capacity was also adopted.

What the council did not decide

Councilors repeatedly said they wanted the substance of the underlying complaints addressed, but many objected to the process used to initiate litigation. The council did not reach any judicial determination during the meeting; the court filing and any ensuing litigation would proceed or stop according to the city solicitor’s withdrawal and any subsequent private action.

Context and next steps

Councilors urged internal review of the processes that govern when and how the city solicitor’s office can be asked to litigate on the council’s behalf and discussed drafting rules or ordinances to require full‑council authorization for initiating litigation. The city solicitor said filing fees had been paid and that constable service fees had been incurred; the council’s orders intended to prevent further city resources being diverted to the case.

The council also adopted a non‑binding resolve thanking library staff and trustees and pledged to pursue “open transparent community‑based dialogues” on outstanding concerns.

Ending note

Councilors said they hoped the actions taken would de‑escalate relations between the council and the library trustees and allow the city and trustees to work toward solutions outside court. Several councilors said they intended to pursue procedural changes to avoid similar conflicts in the future.