Upper Allen forum hears county plan and Silver Spring case study as residents split on tax, timing and scope

Upper Allen Township commissioners held a public forum to review a potential voter-funded open-space program after presentations from Cumberland County planners and Silver Spring Township officials.

County planner Stephanie Williams told the township that the county’s farmland-preservation work has preserved about 235 farms — roughly 26,000 acres — and that a municipal funding stream would allow Upper Allen to cost-share acquisitions and ‘bump’ locally prioritized parcels to the front of the county’s preservation queue. “We preserved about 235 farms, almost 26,000 acres of farmland, and we have a goal of getting to 30,000 acres by 2030,” Williams said.

The forum included a Silver Spring Township case study. Vince Di Filippo, a former county commissioner who helped lead Silver Spring’s 2013 referendum, described that township’s experience increasing an earned-income tax (EIT) by 0.1 percentage point and organizing a volunteer campaign. “My only regret is that we didn't do it sooner,” Di Filippo said, urging careful outreach, a campaign committee and preparation for opposition from real-estate interests.

Why it matters: Residents and officials said land-preservation decisions are time-sensitive — nearby development pressure, including a proposed data center in Monroe Township, was cited repeatedly — and that municipal revenue would let Upper Allen buy easements or parcels before they are lost. Williams noted access gaps in parts of the township and argued that an open-space fund could be used to acquire parkland, protect riparian corridors such as portions of the Yellow Breeches, or secure trail connectors.

What supporters said: Several speakers from the public urged placing a referendum on the ballot this year. County Commissioner Jean Fashie and Cumberland County Planning Commission member Ed Franco both urged giving voters the choice. “Getting this on the ballot quickly makes a lot of sense,” Fashie said, adding that the township should let voters decide.

What opponents and questioners asked: Many residents supported preservation in principle but pressed for more specifics before approving a new tax. Questions focused on: how many acres would be targeted; estimated cost per acre (Williams declined to give a single figure and said appraisals determine value); whether the EIT is the most equitable funding mechanism (some residents favored a property-tax or bond option); whether smaller parcels would be eligible; and how public access or trail easements would be handled. “Before creating a new tax, I believe residents deserve a clear understanding of what they are receiving in return,” said Christina Dryden, a township resident.

Consultants and timeline: Some attendees asked whether consultants (Natural Lands, Grow Conservation) would run a campaign; Natural Lands representatives said their contract covered feasibility, mapping and ballot-language support, not campaign operations. Grow Conservation is running focus groups to inform ballot language. Multiple residents said the compressed timeline to put a question on the November ballot raises concerns about adequate outreach and transparency; others argued development threats create urgency.

On funding and scale: Panelists explained funding options — the EIT is common for municipal open-space programs but is not the only option — and stressed cost-sharing and grant leverage. Williams said county programs can prioritize cost-share-ready farms and that municipal funds can be matched to attract additional state or federal grants. Silver Spring officials described appraisals in their program that ranged, in past cases, from roughly $3,000 to $15,000 per acre depending on parcel attributes.

Next steps and legal mechanics: Panelists and staff said that if voters authorize a revenue measure, the township must then adopt an ordinance establishing how to use funds and set selection criteria; many implementation details (board composition, selection criteria, whether to buy fee-simple parcels for public access) are typically put in place after voter approval but before spending funds. County planners said conservation easements are voluntary and monitored annually once recorded.

Voices from the forum indicated broad agreement on the goal of preserving key land and expanding access to parks and trails, but clear disagreement on method and timing. Commissioners and staff said they would continue outreach, finalize focus-group work and provide additional materials to residents ahead of any ballot question.