Should new senior citizen tax cut plan stay or go? Governor candidates are split
Senior citizens are expected to begin getting Stay NJ tax credits next year — but the 11 people hoping to be our next governor are split on whether the program will work. (Illustration by Alex Cochran for New Jersey Monitor)
New Jersey's next governor may inherit a new property tax cut program aimed at seniors, but the candidates don't all embrace it as is.
Some of the 11 candidates hoping to become our next chief executive say income limits for the program — called Stay NJ — are too generous. Others worry the state's uncertain fiscal outlook makes the program unfeasible unless it's revamped. One candidate, Republican Bill Spadea, called Stay NJ a 'gimmick' that should be eliminated outright.
'We cannot continue with smoke and mirrors that shift the tax burden from one group to another while calling it a tax cut,' Spadea said in a statement from his campaign.
Democratic lawmakers have been promising Stay NJ for years, saying it will be essential to keep senior citizens from fleeing to states with lower taxes. But budget experts have issued private and public warnings about the program's price tag, which is expected to top $1 billion annually.
'The state just can't afford to pay for it,' Richard Keevey, a former state budget director and comptroller, told the New Jersey Monitor.
StayNJ was signed into law by Gov. Phil Murphy in 2023, but it is not scheduled to begin delivering payments to eligible taxpayers until 2026. The program will offer homeowners 65 and over tax credits to make up for half of their property tax bills, capped at $6,500. Homeowners must make less than $500,000 annually to qualify.
Stay NJ payments could go out just as a new governor takes office in January. Murphy, a Democrat, cannot seek a third term this November, and six Democrats and five Republicans are running to succeed him.
Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, a Democrat, has called Stay NJ 'inherently flawed and regressive.' In a statement from his campaign, Baraka said it 'must be overhauled or dismissed,' and took aim at the program's half-a-million-dollar income limit.
'We need to direct government resources toward lifting all boats, not just those already floating comfortably. That means capping rents, building more housing, and investing in real solutions for affordability across the board. Our state budget should reflect our values: working people, not the wealthy, should be first in line for help,' he said.
Two of Baraka's Democratic rivals — Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop and Rep. Mikie Sherrill — noted that statutory language bars the state from issuing Stay NJ payments if certain fiscal goals are not met, like maintaining a surplus that is at least 12% of annual spending (lawmakers could override that provision, and did last year).
Speaking at a press conference in Edison this week, Fulop said 'of course we're not going to stand in the way of a 50% tax reduction for residents' if the state finds a way to fund Stay NJ while keeping its surplus above 12%. But the more likely outcome, he said, is that the program won't work.
Fulop has proposed either restructuring Stay NJ by lowering the income threshold to $150,000 and making the award a flat amount based on income rather than a percentage of property taxes paid, or implementing a new program to provide all homeowners with a single tax credit that limits a homeowner's property taxes 'to an affordable percentage of their income.'
'We're going to clean that up to make sure there's real property tax reform for residents here throughout New Jersey,' he said.
Sherrill told reporters in Bloomfield last month that she thinks StayNJ is a 'great program' for seniors. But in a statement from her campaign on Wednesday, she noted the state's budget issues.
'We have no way to know what state revenues will look like in 12 to 15 months or how much needed federal funding will be ripped away by Trump. However, there are things we must do like fully fund the pension system and protecting direct property tax relief is of equal importance. It is the most direct way our state government can create affordability for New Jerseyans,' Sherrill said.
Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-05) has pledged to cut all New Jerseyans' property tax bills by a dramatic 15%. Gottheimer in a statement from his campaign said he supports Stay NJ, but wants to add additional tax relief, including a $1,000 'senior bonus' for seniors who have lived in New Jersey for at least a decade before turning 70 and an annual tax rebate for renters.
'I'm the only candidate with a tax cut plan that meets our pension obligations, tackles our structural deficit, and is fully paid for without cutting the important programs and services Jersey families and seniors rely on,' he said.
Democrat Sean Spiller, president of the statewide teachers union, said he supports StayNJ. Spiller said in a statement from his campaign that he wants to streamline the state's multiple tax credit programs and make sure benefits get to people who need them most 'without the challenging layers of bureaucracy and redundancies.' Stay NJ benefits would be paid out only if homeowners do not already see their tax bill cut in half by the existing Anchor and senior freeze tax relief programs.
Former state Sen. Steve Sweeney, a Democrat, announced Wednesday he wants to slash the income limit for Stay NJ to $250,000 and eliminate income tax for seniors 65 and up with annual incomes of $250,000 or less. He calls his plan 'Stay NJ Plus.'
'Our seniors deserve the peace of mind that comes with financial stability,' Sweeney said in a statement from his campaign. 'By capping the Stay NJ program at $250,000, we can ensure a fair distribution of resources while continuing to support the goal of keeping our cherished residents in their homes.'
Republican Mario Kranjac, a former mayor of Englewood Cliffs, is open to keeping Stay NJ on a transitional basis,' but if elected governor, he would aim to cut spending and slash taxes, 'making the State more affordable for everyone without special programs primarily designed to buy votes,' said his campaign manager, Michael Byrne.
Republican state Sen. Jon Bramnick said he supports Stay NJ and believes senior citizens deserve tax relief.
'I still support the program but if the Democrats were truly serious about reducing the property tax burden they would have started the program immediately, not three years after passage,' Bramnick said.
Former Assemblyman Jack Ciattarelli, a Republican, did not respond to a request for comment.
Dana DiFilippo contributed.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


American Military News
11 minutes ago
- American Military News
New bill introduced on D-Day anniversary would ‘strengthen' US, UK partnership
A new bill introduced by a Republican congressman on the 81st anniversary of D-Day would allow the United States to share military technology with the United Kingdom. On Friday, Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) announced in a press release that he had reintroduced the Special Relationship Military Improvement Act of 2025 to strengthen the country's relationship with the United Kingdom on the 81st anniversary of D-Day. 'Our nation can never forget the sacrifice of thousands of Allied soldiers who lost their lives on D-Day and the invasion of Normandy. The price they paid ensured that millions could live free from tyranny,' Green said. 'And the best way to commemorate this momentous day is to strengthen our partnership with the United Kingdom—and that's exactly what this bill does.' In Friday's press release, the Republican congressman explained that advancements in military technology currently become the 'exclusive property' of the United States when sold to the federal government under the rules established by the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Green said that while Canada is provided exemptions under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, the United Kingdom is not provided exemptions. READ MORE: D-Day hero receiving medals for saving 200 lives If the Special Relationship Military Improvement Act of 2025 was passed, it would implement a change to the Arms Export Control Act to allow military technology to be shared between the United States and the United Kingdom. In Friday's press release, Green said advancements in U.S. military technology 'should be available to our allies' and that sharing military technology with allies was 'common sense.' Green explained, 'The U.S. and the U.K. work together in almost every aspect to share intelligence, fight terrorism around the globe, and ensure that, through our combined military strength, the world can enjoy unprecedented peace.' In a statement to Fox News on Friday, Green said, 'On the beaches of Normandy, it was British soldiers who ran in the sand alongside Americans.' He added, 'When we were attacked on 9/11, it was the United Kingdom that sent soldiers into Afghanistan to help us destroy al-Qaeda and the Taliban that gave them safe haven.' Green emphasized that the United States will 'never forget' the friendship it shares with the United Kingdom. The Republican congressman added that sharing military technology is 'crucial' in the face of increasing threats across the globe.


Boston Globe
18 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
‘Bottle bill' battle intensifies as R.I. legislative session enters home stretch
Bottles placed in recycling bins end up being crushed and spread on the Central Landfill, leaving Rhode Island with a 'despicable' 17 percent recycling rate, she said. 'That's pathetic for a state like us, the Ocean State,' McEntee said. 'Something needs to change drastically.' But that's where the disagreement begins. McEntee and Senator Mark P. McKenney have introduced Advertisement 'I think all of us here today are sick and tired of seeing our communities littered with drink bottles, liquor nips, and other pieces of the trash,' McEntee said. " It's long overdue that Rhode Island enters the modern age of waste disposal and reuse by combining the proven and successful strategies of a bottle bill program." Get Rhode Map A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State. Enter Email Sign Up But the Greater Providence of Chamber of Commerce and other business groups are waging a high-profile 'Our members support increasing the state's recycling rate but not by imposing a financial burden on local businesses and consumers,' the Rhode Island Business Coalition said in written testimony. 'By adding a 10-cent fee to nearly every beverage sold in the state, these proposals would raise prices for retailers working to keep their shelves stocked — and for families simply trying to afford everyday essentials like bottled water and soft drinks." Related : Advertisement Bottle bills have been introduced off and on in Rhode Island since the early 1980s, but they have run into stiff opposition from the national beverage companies and local retailers. The most recent push began in 2023. McEntee, a South Kingstown Democrat, and McKenney, a Warwick Democrat, co-chaired a special legislative commission that delved into the issue for 18 months. Jed Thorp, director of advocacy for the environmental group Save the Bay, said the commission held 13 meetings, and the House and Senate have had about 15 hours of committee hearings on the topic. 'Every person in the state who's wanted to weigh in on this has been heard,' he said. 'At this point, it is time to vote on this bill. It is time to get this done.' Thorp said the study commission heard from experts from across the country. 'Through all of those hearings, it has become clear that yes, bottle bills work,' he said. 'Bottle bills we know are effective at both reducing litter and improving recycling.' Thorp said advocates listened to opponents who said they support bottle bills if they are crafted in the right way. For example, retailers said they did not want to have to take back the empty containers. So the bill would require a producer responsibility organization to instead create a system that might involve 'bag-drop programs' or 'reverse vending machines,' he said. But on Wednesday, a coalition of 73 small business owners signed onto a letter urging Governor Daniel J. McKee, House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi, and Senate President Valarie J. Lawson to reject the 'bottle bill.' Advertisement 'This legislation will raise costs for businesses and Rhode Island families at a time when many are already struggling with high prices due to inflation,' the coalition said. 'The cost of living and doing business in Rhode Island keeps going up, and this legislation would make matters worse.' The coalition includes businesses such as Eastside Mart in Providence, Iggy's Food Mart in Warren, Ollie's Pub in Warwick, and Sam's Food Store Woonsocket. While 10 cents per container may not sound like much, a 12-pack of soda would cost an extra $1.20, the coalition said. 'Rhode Island consumers and businesses cannot afford a bottle tax,' the letter stated. Both McEntee and McKenney disputed the idea that the 10-cent deposit amounts to a tax. 'This isn't a bottle tax,' McKenney said. 'I've been paying taxes for years, and I've never gotten all my money back. With this — real easy — you return the bottles, you get the money back." Ten states have bottle bills, including 'It's not like this is reinventing a wheel,' McKenney said. 'This is done in many states. My gosh, in Europe it's done in countries left and right.' Sam Tracy, director of legislative affairs for the CLYNK bottle recycling company, spoke at Thursday's news conference, saying the company's technology is used in five of the 10 bottle bill states. He said he also was representing a coalition of businesses that support legislation combining a 'bottle bill' with extended producer responsibility. That coalition includes Poland Spring, Guinness, and Red Bull, as well as local businesses like the Hot Club, and Frog & Toad, both in Providence. Advertisement With the 2025 legislative session entering its final weeks, the fate of the 'bottle bill' hangs in the balance. So what do legislative leaders have to say? Lawson, who is a cosponsor of the Shekarchi also issued a statement Friday, saying he appreciates the legislative commission's work during the past the past two sessions. 'I am reviewing all the options, looking at what other states are doing, and talking with the Senate,' Shekarchi said. 'I am fortunate to be receiving advice and guidance on this issue from former DEM Director Janet Coit, and will continue to consider the options.' Edward Fitzpatrick can be reached at


The Hill
19 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee has warned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that he could be 'on the hook' for hundreds of millions of dollars for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government. In a letter sent Wednesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that Hegseth's formal acceptance of the Boeing 747 jetliner last month – a move made so that the Air Force can upgrade its security measures so it may eventually be used as Air Force One – violates the Constitution emoluments clause. The rule bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without congressional approval. 'I write now to urge and advise you to promptly mitigate these violations—and your own personal legal exposure—by either returning the plane to the Qatari government or promptly seeking Congress's consent to accept it,' Raskin wrote. The Pentagon announced on May 21 that it had officially accepted the 13-year-old luxury jet previously used by the Qatari royal family, a supposed 'free,' gift that could be used to supplement the aging Air Force One fleet, according to President Trump. The transfer has been criticized by U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who say it raises ethical and corruption questions in addition to costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars to retrofit the plane into a secure and working Air Force One. Others have focused on the national security risks of such a gift, saying the aircraft would have to be swept for listening devices. Some have worried that in Trump's push to use the plane before he leaves office, the Air Force will rush security upgrades and cut corners on protection systems. A former professor of constitutional law and former ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Raskin has focused his criticisms on the ethical issues around accepting the Qatari plane, repeatedly arguing that it requires congressional approval. 'The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present 'of any kind whatever' from a foreign state without Congressional permission,' Raskin wrote on X last month after news of the gift broke. Congress has the authority to block federal officials from receiving gifts from foreign governments, as granted in the Constitution, but the government arm has not held any formal vote to accept the plane or not. Democrats largely have been unsuccessful in stopping Trump from accepting the Qatari jet. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last month attempted to pass a bill that would bar the use of a foreign jet as Air Force One, but that effort failed. Raskin, along with other Democrat lawmakers, have introduced resolutions to condemn the gift but Republicans have blocked them from being considered on the floor. Making matters more complicated, Democrats, given their status as the minority party, can't convene any oversight hearings that would force government officials to testify on the issue, and their colleagues across the aisle have not called any such hearings themselves. In his letter, Raskin says Hegseth is in violation of the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which could prompt the Attorney General to bring civil action and penalties against him. Under that law, government officials can accept certain gifts up to $480 in value, and they cannot 'request or otherwise encourage the tender of a gift or decoration' from another country. In violating the act, Hegseth can face a penalty 'not to exceed the retail value of the gift improperly solicited or received plus $5,000.' 'In other words, you may be on the hook for $400 million (plus $5,000) even for a jumbo jet that you accepted on behalf of the President but do not get to personally enjoy,' Raskin writes, referring to the cost of a new Boeing 747-8 jet. 'If you truly believe that there is nothing untoward about the President asking for and receiving a $400 million 'flying palace' from a foreign power, then you should let Congress and the President's Republican colleagues vote to approve the transaction,' he adds. 'If you're unwilling to do that, you must return the plane to Qatar.'