Malden officials and residents met on Nov. 19 at a public forum to discuss a proposed Proposition 2½ tax override and possible alternatives. Mayor Christiansen and Treasurer Dan said the administration expects the package to include roughly $3 million in health‑plan savings and about $2 million in cuts; the mayor described a $5.4 million override as the core element meant to close the city’s operating gap.

Treasurer Dan explained the difference among ballot mechanisms: “There’s a tax override proposition 2.5, which is what we’re discussing here. There’s a debt exclusion and an expenditure exclusion,” and he added that “an override allows us to fund general fund operations on an ongoing basis” while a debt exclusion covers only a time‑limited borrowing obligation. Officials emphasized that an override would be a permanent levy increase while debt exclusions apply only for the life of particular debt.

Supporters at the forum — including the Malden Education Association, the Malden Police Patrolmen’s Association and public‑sector unions — urged the council to put the question on the ballot. Kate Quinn, president of AFSCME Local 3945 at the Malden Public Library, said the override would preserve library and other municipal services. The police association warned that patrol staffing (the department has operated below its authorized complement) faces retirements and that “longer response times for emergency calls” are likely without additional revenue.

Several residents asked whether the override would affect renters. Chloe of Loomis Street asked if the tax increase could be passed to tenants; the treasurer said “that is a possibility … how a landlord determines to pass on any of their costs … is really dependent on how the landlord chooses to do so.” Councillors and staff also noted the city has adopted an expanded residential exemption that shifts some burden within the residential tax base and may offset the net effect for many homeowners.

Some attendees pushed for a larger or tiered ballot question. Sarah Bridal said the proposed amount “feels like a $5,000,000 Band‑Aid” and urged the city to consider a multi‑question approach similar to Melrose’s recent ballot, where voters faced three dollar‑level choices and the highest passing dollar amount prevailed. The mayor said Melrose’s model was discussed but the committee selected a more modest single ask out of concern for residents’ ability to pay.

Officials outlined consequences of cutting services. The mayor warned response times would be affected if fire or police staffing falls: “If we were to impact those departments … there will be an impact.” The treasurer cautioned that using reserves or free cash to cover ongoing operations can harm bond ratings; he said Malden currently carries a double‑A rating and that stabilizing funds are limited.

Panelists also detailed longer‑term revenue strategies: a master plan to encourage commercial development (with focus on Lower Commercial Street), filling a vacant business‑development officer role, and conditioning zoning and development outreach to generate new growth. City staff noted some recent commercial wins — including a corporate move to Commercial and Charles and life‑science activity — but said such growth is a multi‑year effort.

Several written statements read into the record urged the council both to place the override on the ballot and to consider date and structure. The Malden Education Association and other civic groups recommended clearer information on what specific cuts would occur without new revenue and asked that the council consider a date that maximizes turnout.

The forum concluded with officials saying the ballot language, amount and election date will be finalized through further finance‑committee and council votes. Councillors directed staff to post materials and version histories on the city’s Legistar page and promised additional public forums and opportunities for comment before any council vote.