As New Jersey Struggles, Politicians Give Themselves Raises

While New Jersey residents struggle under some of the highest property taxes and cost-of-living pressures in the nation, elected officials continue to approve pay raises for themselves, raising serious questions about priorities, ethics, and the long-term direction of public service in the state.

At the center of this controversy is Brian Stack, who simultaneously serves as Mayor of Union City and as a member of the New Jersey State Senate.

A local raise, approved by allies

In Union City, the mayor’s salary was increased by municipal ordinance to $95,000 per year, the first such raise in decades. While the mayor abstained from the formal vote, the ordinance was approved by a city commission composed of long-time political allies—fueling criticism that the decision reflects machine politics rather than independent oversight.

Under New Jersey law, municipal salaries are set by ordinance of the governing body. That makes the raise legal—but legality does not eliminate concerns about optics and accountability, particularly when residents see little relief from escalating property taxes and housing costs.

A statehouse raise on top of it

Only days ago, New Jersey lawmakers also benefited from a long-planned salary increase at the state level. Legislative pay rose from $49,000 to $82,000 per year, a 67% increase, authorized in prior legislation and taking effect with the new legislative term.

Because Brian Stack serves as both mayor and state senator, he now earns a combined base public salary of approximately $177,000 per year:

$95,000 as Mayor of Union City $82,000 as a New Jersey State Senator

This figure reflects base salaries only and does not include benefits, pensions, stipends, or any outside income sources.

The disconnect with everyday New Jersey

For many New Jersey families, this moment feels profoundly disconnected from reality. Residents are:

working multiple jobs, struggling to pay rent or mortgages, facing annual property-tax increases, absorbing higher utility, grocery, and transportation costs.

Against that backdrop, politicians approving substantial raises for themselves—before delivering meaningful tax relief or affordability reforms—appears tone-deaf at best, and self-serving at worst.

When public office becomes a career

The Founding Fathers were deeply skeptical of public office becoming a career or lifetime occupation. They feared exactly what many New Jerseyans see today: entrenched officials holding multiple offices at the same time, accumulating power, influence, and compensation far removed from the economic realities of the people they represent.

Public service was never meant to be:

a pathway to long-term personal enrichment,

a system of stacked titles and salaries,

or a profession insulated from the consequences of poor policy decisions.

The case for term limits and reform

This is why term limits and stronger ethics reforms remain central to restoring public trust. Regular turnover reduces the incentive for self-dealing, weakens political machines, and ensures elected office remains a temporary duty—not a permanent career.

Before raising their own pay, lawmakers should be focused on:

lowering property taxes,

addressing housing affordability,

reducing the overall cost of living,

and proving measurable results for working families.

A question of priorities

No one disputes that public servants deserve fair compensation. The real question is timing and priority. In a state where affordability dominates every household conversation, leadership should begin with relief for taxpayers, not raises for politicians.

Until that balance changes, cases like Brian Stack’s—holding dual offices while benefiting from multiple public paychecks—will continue to symbolize what many New Jersey residents believe is fundamentally broken in Trenton and in local government.

Public office should serve the people—not become a career built on their financial strain.