Malden discussion on raising residential tax exemption from 30% to 35% focuses on homeowners, large apartment complexes and renter impacts
Loading...
Summary
City Assessor Nate Kramer presented options to raise Malden’s residential exemption from 30% to 35%. Councilors debated who would benefit, how landlords and large apartment buildings could be affected, enforcement of eligibility, and next procedural steps including an Oct. 28 classification hearing.
City Assessor Nate Kramer told the Malden City Council that raising the city’s residential exemption from 30% to 35% would shift tax burden within the residential class and could increase savings for many owner-occupied homes while raising bills for higher-valued residential properties, including large apartment complexes.
Kramer said the exemption does not reduce the overall levy but “it stays in the residential class,” shifting value so lower-valued owner-occupied properties see tax savings while higher-valued residential parcels pay more. He illustrated that on current Fiscal Year 2025 numbers a $500,000 owner-occupied house would see about $2,003 in annual savings under a 30% exemption and that figure would rise to about $2,455 at 35% under the slides shown to councilors.
Councilors debated the distributional effects. Councillor Spadafore argued the change targets savings toward lower-valued owner-occupied homes and away from absentee landlords and large apartment owners, saying, “I am 100% in support of this.” Councillor Simonelli raised a concern that apartment owners could pass increased costs to renters, saying increases “are going to end up raising the rents on rents that are are already not affordable here in the city.” Councillor Colon Hayes asked whether large apartment owners would be able to shift the cost to renters and received an assessor reply that the market would limit the ability to raise rents dollar-for-dollar.
Councilors and staff also discussed enforcement and eligibility. Kramer described ongoing checks: changes in deed or transfer into a trust trigger removal from the exemption list and the assessor’s office mails re‑application forms; the office additionally cross-checks with building, health and clerk records. Clerk Cesar Cramer said the clerk’s office “run[s] their application through the census to make sure that they are listed as a resident at that address.” Kramer reported about 391 accounts were removed this year after deed changes, and about 116 of those did not respond to re-application notices.
Councilors asked for more specificity on who benefits. Kramer explained the exemption uses the average residential assessed value (including single-family, two-family and large apartment complexes) to calculate the deduction; larger apartment complexes raise the average, changing the break-even point at which higher-value owners begin to pay more. He gave the example that very high-value properties can see substantially larger bills on the residential side (he cited a $25,000,000 residential property example and discussed a $100,000,000 example in the presentation).
Several councilors requested follow-up analyses before any formal vote. Kramer said he will return for the classification hearing and tax-rate setting on Oct. 28: “I’m back here October 28 for the classification hearing, which is when we set the tax rate for fiscal 26.” Councillor McDonald and others asked staff to model the exemption’s interaction with a possible override and to supply a spreadsheet showing impacts at different value tiers.
The mayor’s office told the council it supports increasing the exemption to 35%, a point Kramer relayed during the discussion. Multiple councilors said they expect to consider a formal paper to send the question to the finance committee; Councillor Spadafore said he planned to file a paper to begin that process.
Why this matters: the residential exemption is one of the largest local tools the city can deploy to shift tax burden within the residential class; the council framed the question as balancing relief for lower-valued owner-occupied homes against possible cost increases for larger residential holders and potential downstream effects on renters. Kramer and councilors emphasized that eligibility enforcement and outreach (application window and re-application after deed changes) matter for program integrity and for ensuring eligible residents receive the benefit.
Next steps: assessor Kramer will appear at the Oct. 28 classification hearing where the council will set the tax rate for Fiscal Year 2026 and may vote on whether to adopt a 35% residential exemption; council members requested staff-provided spreadsheets modeling impacts and documentation on enforcement actions before a final decision.
