Ferguson Township supervisors vote down ‘aggressive’ tax hike after resident outcry

The Ferguson Township Supervisors narrowly shot down a significant tax hike for their 2026 draft budget at their meeting Tuesday following backlash from residents, including about 70 who showed up to oppose the increase.

The proposed budget’s one mill tax increase would’ve taken the rate from 3.172 mills to 4.172 mills — a 31.5% raise. It was originally discussed at the supervisors’ Nov. 18 meeting as a way of providing a stable funding source for the township’s fire protection services.

It was estimated that the increase would have generated an additional $616,117, with that money serving as a replacement for the township’s recently-repealed fire hydrant assessments that had covered the cost of the fire protection services.

Ultimately the increase was shot down by a vote of 3-2, with supervisors Omari Patterson and Patricia Stephens voting for the draft budget and supervisors Jeremie Thompson, Lisa Strickland and Matthew Heller opposed.

“I’m committed to open, honest, transparent communications, and sometimes those conversations have to be tough conversations — I don’t believe that we have to have a tough conversation about taxes tonight, and I am opposed to this [increase]” Heller said. “I believe that tax is a last resort when all other options have been investigated, tried ... we haven’t done that yet, we’re not there.”

The proposed tax raise would’ve also helped erase a deficit in the draft budget, but Heller said the township could afford to take care of that with the approximately $11 million in the township’s reserve fund, and that if necessary, a tax increase conversation should be had next year. Patterson said the deficit sat at about $2.5 million without the tax increase, and Ferguson Township Manager Centrice Martin did not immediately respond Wednessday for clarification on the current deficit.

The supervisors took their vote after three hours of public comment, where 19 residents in the packed meeting room addressed the board.

Several residents questioned why the increase was being considered in the first place, with planning commission member and township resident Bill Keough calling the real estate tax rate increase one of the most “aggressive” moves the supervisors could consider.

Keough said that the increase would cause a ripple effect of unintended consequences, such as farmers having to pay a significantly larger amount due to their large swaths of property, rising rent costs across the township and the representation of Ferguson Township as a place that’s not business-friendly.

He and others also brought up how the proposed raise would affect the township’s senior citizens, as many operate on a fixed income post-retirement.

“You’re taking money from senior citizens,” resident and former planning commission member Lisa Rittenhouse said, followed by a roar of applause.

Other residents pointed to what they called negligent spending that they believe led to the deficit in the budget.

“I see this tax increase proposal as a statement on the mismanagement of the township’s funds, township personnel and future planning by the township manager and board of supervisors,” resident Jennifer Money said. “We need better management of funds and personnel in the township, and should not be running deficits.”

Along with Money, several other residents critiqued the township’s spending habits, raising questions about the 2.5% increase on personnel costs ($9,277,728 in 2026 versus $9,050,651 in 2025), the necessity of various 2026 projects and more.

Township manager Centrice Martin, who is stepping down from her role in January, and the supervisors explained that things like inflation, state requirements in municipal budgets and non-negotiable budget items made it tough to create wiggle room for any potential cuts.

Resident Scott Henderson offered money-saving suggestions, however, including holding off on hiring consultants for unnecessary studies, cheaper repairs to playgrounds and vehicle components as opposed to full replacements, delaying smaller renovation projects around the municipal building, slowing down the speed of development in the township in general and utilizing the township’s vehicles for their full life spans, and not replacing them every five years.

Henderson was joined by incoming supervisor Trevor White, who shared that in the future, supervisors and township staff could hold off on some road and engineering projects to save money as well.

“There are solutions on the table, but it requires constructive dialogue, and I’ve heard a lot, but I really think we can come together to create some kind of creative solutions here,” White said. “We really need to digest [the budget issues] and figure out a path forward and think together as a township, because there are a lot of creative minds in here, and I’ve heard a lot of really good points.”

Heller encouraged residents to engage in future meetings where the budget is discussed.

“We had three operating budget meetings in October where we went line for line, for line, for line through 600-odd pages, and I just want to encourage folks for next year to please look at the calendar,” Heller said. “Bring some of those thoughts early to the table so we can have these discussions earlier, before we get to the budget season.”

Moving forward, the board of supervisors will be reviewing the 2026 draft budget at their meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 9, although it was not determined whether the final budget’s approval would also take place that evening, or at a special meeting soon after.

The deadline to approve the final budget is the end of the year, and as it stands, it does not include an increase in real estate taxes.

Details on future meetings and their agendas can be seen on the township’s agenda and minutes portal.