Council rejects $36 million debt-exclusion ballot question for Northeast Metro Tech

Malden City Council · January 14, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The council voted 2–9 against placing a $36 million debt-exclusion question on a special municipal election ballot to fund construction of the Northeast Metropolitan Regional Vocational Technical School; finance committee had recommended against it citing overlap with a separate override question and voter confusion.

The Malden City Council voted 2–9 to reject an order that would have placed a proposed $36,000,000 debt-exclusion ballot question on a special municipal election ballot to pay for construction of the Northeast Metropolitan Regional Vocational Technical School.

Clerk read Paper 434-25 describing the question and the proposed ballot language. Councilor McDonald, chair of the finance committee, said the committee unanimously recommended the paper unfavorably because the question would add complexity to a ballot that already includes a proposed operating override and could confuse voters. "We intentionally scheduled a special election first before considering this," McDonald said of the committee’s approach.

Lead sponsor Councilor O'Malley acknowledged the paper was unlikely to pass but argued it would offer a lower-cost option for homeowners compared with other funding scenarios. He cited estimated homeowner impacts in the testimony but conceded the council likely would not support it at this meeting.

Councillors discussed procedural questions including whether the motion required a two-thirds majority under state rules for debt-exclusion questions; the clerk confirmed that state law requires a higher threshold for that question type. There were also conflicting mentions of an election date in the record: the paper’s language referred to a special municipal election on 02/10/2026, while a council remark later referenced a special election set for March 31; the transcript does not resolve which date is operative.

On a roll-call vote, only Councilor Colon Hayes and Councilor O'Malley voted to adopt the order and place the question on the ballot; the motion failed 2–9. Councilor McDonald warned that if the paper were defeated on an adopt vote, the council would be unable to reconsider it for six months. The finance committee said the matter can be revisited in future deliberations but the committee favored handling ballotwide budget items through the current override process.