New Jersey Assembly Bill ACR28

New Jersey 2026-2027 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/13/26
• Refer: 1/13/26

Caption

Proposes constitutional amendment to establish revenue responsibility through annual State appropriations cap limiting spending growth to one percent per year over six years and a permanent revenue responsibility fund reserved for reducing State pension benefit liabilities.

Summary

ACR28 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would impose a six-year cap on annual State appropriations growth, limiting total State spending to no more than 1 percent above the prior fiscal year’s enacted appropriations. It also requires State appropriations to be presented as line-item amounts in fixed dollar figures, rather than through broad or contingent language, so that all spending is counted within the cap. The resolution would also create a permanent Revenue Responsibility Fund in the State Treasury. Each year, any beginning-of-year revenue balance above 2 percent of anticipated State revenue would be deposited into the fund. Those balances would be dedicated first to reducing the State’s accrued, unfunded public employee pension liabilities; only after those liabilities are eliminated could the money be used for emergencies by a two-thirds vote of each legislative house, and, if the fund exceeds a 5 percent threshold, for property tax relief under specified conditions.

Impact

If approved by voters, the amendment would change Article VIII, Section II of the New Jersey Constitution and directly constrain future appropriations acts, supplemental appropriations, and other spending laws for six fiscal years. It would also require the State to convert many currently broad or conditional appropriations into specific line items, affecting how the annual budget is drafted and how off-budget spending is displayed. The Revenue Responsibility Fund would create a new constitutional reserve mechanism that channels surplus revenue toward pension debt reduction before allowing limited alternative uses.

Sentiment

The bill text presents the measure in strongly favorable terms, describing the cap and reserve fund as a “responsible approach” to State spending and fiscal management. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no additional legislative debate or formal voting history to indicate broader support or opposition. Based on the text alone, the proposal is framed as a fiscal restraint and pension-funding measure rather than a partisan or programmatic policy change.

Contention

The main points of potential contention are the spending cap, the restriction on legislative budget flexibility, and the mandatory diversion of surplus revenue into a pension-focused reserve fund. Supporters would likely emphasize fiscal discipline, transparency, and pension liability reduction, while opponents may argue that a 1 percent cap could limit the State’s ability to respond to inflation, emergencies, or changing service needs. The requirement that appropriations be line-itemed and the constitutional priority given to pension liabilities over other uses of surplus funds may also be disputed by lawmakers who prefer broader budget discretion or more immediate uses for surplus revenue, such as education, health care, or tax relief.