Franklin Park council advances information campaign on home rule study commission ahead of November ballot

Franklin Park Borough leaders presented background and answered resident questions June 18 about a proposed government study commission (GSC) question that, if placed on the Nov. 2025 ballot, would authorize voters to elect a commission to study whether Franklin Park should draft a home rule charter.

The presentation, led by borough staff and accompanied by slides sourced from the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED), laid out a two-step, referendum-driven process: first, voters would approve whether to form a study commission and elect up to seven commission members; second, if the commission recommends pursuing a charter, it would draft a proposed charter for a later public referendum. Borough officials stressed that placing the question on the ballot only authorizes investigation — it does not adopt a charter or change taxes.

Why this matters: Borough staff and several council members said deficits and aging infrastructure were key reasons to evaluate options. Presenters noted the borough has used reserve funds to cover shortfalls in recent years and that future stormwater and capital work would pressure the budget. Officials described home rule as a tool that would shift some municipal authorities from state code to a locally drafted charter, but they emphasized statutory limits and voter approval steps.

The presentation summarized a likely timeline tied to the November 2025 election: August 2025 petition and nomination activities, certification and oath for elected commission members shortly after the election, a nine-month period for the commission to decide whether to proceed, and up to an additional nine months (18 months total) to draft a charter if the commission votes to pursue one. Staff said the ordinance before council (Ordinance 693 of 2025) would set the commission size at the seven-member minimum allowed under state law and would be advertised for possible action at the July 16 regular meeting.

Council members and residents focused questions on fiscal effects, checks in the process and what powers a charter would enable. Borough staff said home rule does not permit “inventing” new taxes without conforming to state limits; they cited examples such as real estate transfer-fee adjustments used by some nearby home-rule municipalities to alter revenue mixes. Staff provided the borough’s reserve policy benchmark (roughly 16–17%) and warned that sustained reserve draws could affect bond ratings and borrowing costs.

Multiple residents and elected members took part in the Q&A. One resident asked whether the commission process could be used to raise taxes; council members responded that the process contains multiple voter checkpoints and that the commission itself would only produce a draft for another public vote. Another resident said the borough has used reserves in recent budget cycles and urged exploring new revenue sources. Council members said options and outcomes would be for voters to decide if the study moves forward.

No formal adoption of a charter or new revenue measure occurred at the meeting. The ordinance to place the GSC question on the ballot was introduced for advertisement and potential action at the July 16 meeting; the next formal step would be council action to place the question on the November ballot.

Looking ahead: If voters approve formation of a government study commission in November, the borough expects the commission to organize quickly and publish public meetings and materials; if the commission later proposes a charter, that draft would itself be subject to a public referendum before taking effect.