Upper Allen Township Referendum

Understanding the Proposed 50/50 Funding Approach

Overview

Upper Allen Township is considering a referendum that would ask voters whether they support creating a dedicated funding source for land preservation, open space, and related preservation purposes.

Based on current discussions, the referendum appears to be structured around a 50/50 funding approach, using both Earned Income Tax and Property Tax. This means the cost would be shared between residents who earn taxable income and property owners within the Township, rather than relying entirely on one tax source.

At this moment, there does not appear to be a clearly defined public plan identifying exactly what properties, parcels, or preservation projects would be funded if the referendum is approved. The current goal appears to be raising approximately $1 million per year through this combined tax approach, but residents have not yet been provided with a finalized list of properties to be preserved, confirmed participating landowners, acquisition priorities, or a detailed spending plan.

Because this referendum would create a dedicated annual funding source, residents should have clear, factual, and transparent information before being asked to vote. This includes understanding how much would be collected, how the 50/50 split would work, what land is realistically eligible for preservation, who would oversee the fund, how decisions would be made, and what happens if revenue is collected but viable preservation opportunities are limited.

What is the proposed referendum?

The proposed referendum would ask Upper Allen Township voters whether they support creating a dedicated funding source for land preservation, open space, and related preservation purposes.

If approved by voters, the Township would be authorized to collect additional revenue specifically for this purpose.

How would the referendum be managed?

If approved by voters, the referendum would provide for an advisory board that reports to the Board of Commissioners. The advisory board would review and make recommendations regarding property acquisition, land preservation, conservation easements, and related matters. As an advisory body, it would not have decision-making authority; the Board of Commissioners would determine whether to move forward with any recommendation. As of the July 15, 2026, Board of Commissioners meeting, an advisory board had not been discussed or formed.

How would the referendum be funded?

Based on the current discussion, the funding would be split between two sources:

1. Earned Income Tax

2. Property Tax

This is commonly referred to as a 50/50 funding approach, meaning the total amount collected would be shared between income-based tax revenue and property-based tax revenue.

What does “50/50” mean?

Using the 2026 budget numbers and the figures quoted during the Board of Commissioners meeting, residents can better understand how different revenue options may affect Upper Allen Township. At the meeting, it was stated that 0.1 mills would generate approximately $256,000, which means a 0.2 mill property tax increase would generate approximately $512,000. The Township’s current 0.5% Earned Income Tax was discussed as being worth approximately $5.1 million, meaning that 0.1% of EIT would be worth about $1 million, 0.01% would be worth about $100,000, and 0.044% would be worth about $440,000. When combining 0.2 mills in property tax with 0.044% in EIT, the Township could generate approximately $952,000 per year.

This type of approach is sometimes described as a 50/50 revenue approach, but it is important to understand what that actually means. A true 50/50 split means the Township would raise the same amount of money from Earned Income Tax as it raises from property tax. If the goal is to raise about $1 million per year, then approximately $500,000 would need to come from EIT and approximately $500,000 would need to come from property tax. The example of 0.2 mills plus 0.044% EIT is close to that goal, but it is not a perfect 50/50 split because the property tax side would generate about $512,000, while the EIT side would generate about $440,000. That means the total would be close to $1 million, but slightly more of the revenue would come from property tax than from EIT.

For residents, the impact would depend on both income and property assessment. A 0.044% EIT increase would cost someone with $100,000 in taxable earned income about $44 more per year, and someone with $150,000 in taxable earned income about $66 more per year. A 0.2 mill property tax increase would cost a homeowner with a property assessed at $250,000 about $50 more per year, and a property assessed at $300,000 about $60 more per year. Combined, a resident with $100,000 in taxable earned income and a home assessed at $250,000 would pay approximately $94 more per year, including about $44 from EIT and about $50 from property tax.

The key point is that using both EIT and property tax does not automatically make something a true 50/50 split. A true 50/50 split requires both tax sources to generate the same amount of revenue. The 0.2 mill plus 0.044% EIT example is a blended revenue option that would raise approximately $952,000 per year, but it would raise slightly more money from property tax than from EIT. These numbers are meant to help residents understand the facts, compare options, and form their own opinion.

Why use both Earned Income Tax and Property Tax?

Using both tax sources may reduce the impact that would occur if the Township relied only on one form of taxation. For example, if the referendum were funded only through Earned Income Tax, the burden would fall more heavily on wage earners. If the referendum were funded only through Property Tax, the burden would fall more directly on property owners. A 50/50 approach attempts to divide the funding responsibility between both groups.

Would renters be affected?

Renters may be affected through the Earned Income Tax portion if they live in Upper Allen Township and earn taxable income. Renters would not directly receive a Property Tax bill unless they own property, but property tax increases can sometimes indirectly affect rent costs over time depending on the property owner.

Would retirees be affected?

Retirees who do not have taxable earned income may not be affected by the Earned Income Tax portion. However, retirees who own taxable property in Upper Allen Township would generally be affected by the Property Tax portion. Retirees who continue to earn taxable wages may also be affected by the Earned Income Tax portion.

Is there a defined preservation plan at this time?

At this moment, there does not appear to be a clearly defined public plan identifying exactly what properties, parcels, or preservation projects would be funded if the referendum is approved. Based on current discussions, the goal appears to be raising approximately $1 million per year through a combination of Earned Income Tax and Property Tax. However, residents have not yet been provided with a finalized list of properties to be preserved, confirmed participating landowners, acquisition priorities, or a detailed spending plan. Because this referendum would create a dedicated annual funding source, it is important for residents to understand what the money would be used for before voting. Clear answers should be provided on eligible properties, preservation priorities, program oversight, annual reporting, and what happens if the Township collects revenue but does not have enough viable land preservation opportunities.

Would this create a dedicated fund?

If approved, the revenue would be placed into a dedicated fund for the purpose outlined in the referendum.This means the money would be restricted for the uses authorized by the referendum and applicable law.

What could the funds be used for?

The funds could potentially be used for purposes such as land preservation, open space acquisition, conservation easements, and other preservation-related activities permitted under state law and the final referendum language. The exact uses should be clearly explained by the Township before voters are asked to decide.

Would voters know exactly which properties would be preserved before voting?

Not necessarily. In many referendum processes, voters are asked to approve the creation of a funding mechanism first. Specific properties, agreements, appraisals, easements, or acquisitions may be reviewed later through an established public process. However, residents may reasonably ask the Township to provide as much information as possible before the vote, including priority areas, eligibility criteria, estimated costs, and how decisions would be made.

Who would decide how the money is used?

That would depend on the final ordinance, referendum language, and any review process established by the Township. The Township may create a board, committee, or review process to evaluate potential preservation opportunities and make recommendations. Final authority may still rest with the Board of Commissioners depending on how the program is structured. Residents should ask for clear answers on the decision-making process before the referendum appears on the ballot.

Would this tax increase be permanent?

That depends on the final referendum language and ordinance. Residents should ask whether the tax would continue indefinitely, whether it would have a sunset date, whether it could be reduced, and how it could be repealed in the future.

Bottom line

The proposed referendum would allow Upper Allen Township voters to decide whether to create a dedicated preservation fund supported by both Earned Income Tax and Property Tax.

The 50/50 approach is intended to divide the cost between wage earners and property owners rather than relying on only one tax source.

At this time, residents have not yet been provided with a clearly defined preservation plan showing exactly what would be preserved, even though the proposed funding goal appears to be approximately $1 million per year.

Before the referendum moves forward, residents should be provided with clear, factual, and transparent information so they can fully understand the financial impact, the preservation plan, and how the money would be used.