On Tuesday, March 31st, Malden residents will vote on the fate of Proposition 2 ½. The measure proposes an override for the 2027 Fiscal Year for the first time in the city’s history.
In 1980, Massachusetts enacted Proposition 2 ½, which states that a town cannot levy more than 2.5 percent of the total full and fair cash value of all taxable real and personal property in the community, limiting the annual revenue a town can raise. If cities or towns would like to amend the percentage, they must present it to their district’s voters.
The legislation was implemented due to Massachusetts’s high property tax rates, which were approximately $60-80 per $1,000 in value for both residential and commercial properties. In 2026, the residential and commercial tax rates in Malden have simmered down to $11.40 and $17.08. Overturning the proposition risks returning to inflated prices and less money for bills.
While this legislation prevents overtaxation on individual property and protects small businesses, it also creates obstacles for the city to collect satisfactory funds to support the community. For several years, Malden has met the 2.5 levy threshold, limiting its revenues to roughly the same amount and creating a wall between us and additional funds.
“In the United States, there are three forms of government: national, state, and local. The primary funding source for most cities and towns is property taxes,” stated AP Economics and History teacher James Hill.
These additional funds would be circulated back to its residents, allocating them to school, community services, and infrastructure. In doing so, the City’s budget would further “stabilize and support essential city services.” Even for the city of Boston, Mayor Michelle Wu has called for the proposition’s repeal multiple times.
Hill expressed that “additional funds would mean better resources, better books, and better equipment” for teachers to “deliver the best possible education to Malden students.”
On September 25, 2025, Mayor Gary Christenson asked the City Council to reevaluate the significance of the proposition and put the idea of an override on the table. After dissecting the topic through a careful lens, the council decided to offer two override options on the ballot: Questions 1A and 1B.
Similar to last year’s MCAS ballot question, voting yes implements the legislation. Question 1A would allow an additional $5.4 million in real estate and personal property taxes to be collected and redistributed to city services, while 1B would allow for an additional $8.2 million. The question that receives more than 50% of support will be administered. If both receive more than 50% of support, 1B will be used instead. If neither receives the required support, the proposal will fail.
To spread information about the City Council’s plan and answer questions, public forums have been held at the K-8 schools on February 11th, February 28th, March 5th, and March 16th. The upcoming forum on Wednesday, March 25th, at Linden STEAM Academy’s Auditorium will be the last chance to attend.
To analyze the impact the proposed questions will have on residents, the City of Malden website has provided an online tax calculator to estimate the change in an individual’s annual property tax bills.
The challenge lies in inviting a large voter turnout. Malden is predominantly an immigrant town, with foreign-born residents making up 41.2% of the population. Many of these residents are not citizens, creating a legal barrier that prevents them from voting. Those who care cannot even represent themselves.
“Immigrant families who want the override to provide a better education for their children are barred, and so are those who would rather not deal with an increase in rent from landlords trying to reduce their own burden,” continued Hill.
A loophole around the proposition is to increase housing. Construction of new homes will inadvertently invite more homeowners, in turn, raising the annual property tax collected. However, people worry that such an action leads to gentrification—the process by which a poor urban area is changed by wealthy people moving in and displacing current inhabitants.
Although in this case, gentrification should not be a cause of concern, as adding more housing actually reduces pressure on existing neighborhoods rather than pricing people out. By increasing the overall supply of homes, Malden can stabilize rents, create more affordable options, improve infrastructure, and strengthen the city’s revenue.
“It’s like a game of musical chairs. If more people join and there are only a few chairs, only the quickest get a seat. Similarly, if housing in Malden remains the same, but people continue to pour in, only the wealthy will be able to keep up with increasing prices,” concluded Hill.
Ultimately, the path forward depends on the people who call this city home, so make sure your voice is heard on March 31st.
About the Author
