Montgomery Township board authorizes budget advertisement, proposes 11 full‑time firefighters and separate fire tax amid calls for independent study

The Montgomery Township Board of Supervisors authorized advertisement of the proposed 2026 operating budget on Nov. 24, a plan that includes hiring 11 full‑time firefighters and creating a separate fire tax line on property bills.

Township manager Carolyn McCreery presented the budget and supporting data during the meeting, saying the proposed staffing addition was included in the draft budget forwarded for public inspection and adoption on Dec. 15. McCreery said the 11‑hire scenario is intended to provide four firefighters per shift across four platoons. "Four shifts with four firefighters on a shift — that's how we came up with 11," a department representative stated during public Q&A, noting that current staffing (five firefighters plus chief and assistant chief) would increase to a 15–16‑person roster to maintain the shift model.

The budget presentation included township tax data: 10,182 taxable parcels, about $2 billion in assessed value, a current township millage of 2.94 mills and an average township share of a residential property tax bill of $491 per year. McCreery told the board that, because of the board’s action to include the 11 hires in the proposed fire budget, staff will advertise an ordinance to establish a separate fire tax. The ordinance will be advertised at an initial 1.71 mills for fire services (the new 1.15 mills plus the 0.56 mills currently allocated to fire in the general fund), the solicitor and manager confirmed.

The proposal drew strong public pushback and calls for further analysis. Eric Pelletier, identified in a letter read into the record as a Montgomery Township resident and supervisor‑elect, urged the board to table the staffing and tax proposal until the township commissions an independent, third‑party staffing and facilities study. "A decision of this scale must be defensible, both to the public and to future boards," Pelletier told the board, saying the internal numbers have changed repeatedly and that the current data are, at best, "incomplete and, at worst, fundamentally flawed." (Pelletier’s letter was read at the meeting.)

Other residents echoed concerns about transparency and documentation for the 11‑hire scenario. One speaker asked why the figures were not posted online and requested a metric‑based plan showing how additional hires would improve response times. Another asked whether the firehouse can accommodate full‑time staff and whether ancillary costs such as equipment and facility upgrades had been fully accounted for.

Several supervisors said they supported protecting public safety while also urging caution. One supervisor who opposed higher increases said he would support a smaller, one‑mill tax increase reserved partly for fire and partly for capital reserves so the township does not enter a long‑term staffing commitment without independent validation. Other supervisors argued the chief’s staffing analysis and regional comparisons support an expansion to ensure safe response levels.

The board voted to authorize advertisement of the budget and separately authorized advertising an ordinance to create a fire tax line item at 1.71 mills. During the record vote on the ordinance, multiple supervisors stated their positions on the record: at least two supervisors said they would vote no on the advertised figure and several said they would vote yes; the solicitor advised the advertised rate can be amended later if the budget is reopened, and the second‑class township code allows the board elected in January to reopen the budget if needed.

Next steps: the proposed budget will be available for public inspection, with adoption scheduled for the board’s Dec. 15 public meeting. Supervisors and members of the public said they expect further discussion, and several urged the board to commission an independent fire staffing and facilities study before finalizing any permanent staffing or tax changes.