Cresskill, New Jersey’s town council on September 24 voted on a permit to carry rebate ordinance. The move, with bipartisan support, passed via a 4-1 vote, with one councilmember absent.
Since June 2025, permit to carry rebate resolutions and ordinanceshave been spreading across New Jersey. Originally introduced and passed in Englishtown, the initiative has since spread to multiple municipalities across several New Jersey counties. Cresskill, N.J. is the seventh town that voted to refund the $150.00 municipal portion of permit to carry fees.
Post-Bruen, the New Jersey legislature passed a law, enacted by Democratic Governor Phil Murphy, that raised the cost for a permit to carry to $200.00. The price increase was quadruple the former fee. However, of the $200.00, $150.00 is payable directly to the issuing authority’s municipality. The $50.00 portion went to a state “victim compensation fund.”
The New Jersey permit to carry rebate initiative has been supported by and co-championed by several organizations: The National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and the New Jersey Firearms Owners Syndicate. The three groups came together while the Englishtown resolution movement got off the ground. They have been working together to support their members seeking to introduce resolutions in their municipalities.
“The Borough of Cresskill recognizes that the United States Supreme Court has long held that taxes on fundamental rights are unconstitutional,” the ordinance reads. It further states that the excessive fee is “a tax on a core constitutional right …” Any applicant who provides proof of payment for a permit to carry to the CFO of Cresskill is eligible to receive a refund of the $150.00 paid to the Borough.
The vote tally for the ordinance was bipartisan, with only one “nay” vote. Democratic Councilman Arthur McLaughlin joined his Republican colleagues; Councilmembers Mark Spina, Hectare Olmo, and Kathy Schultz Rummel, in voting in favor of the ordinance.
Democratic Councilwoman Kathleen Savas was absent for the meeting and not present asynchronously or telephonically — without excuse.
Democratic Councilman Les Kaplan voted against the passage of the ordinance.
The bipartisan support of Cresskill’s ordinance comes at the heels of – and vindicates in a way — an upset in the movement. Last month, the all-Republican town council of Old Tappan voted down their rebate resolution. The move was a stunning disappointment and seen as a betrayal of gun owners in the town.
The failure of Old Tappan’s leadership to pass their resolution has been described as a defense of a “discriminatory and exclusionary policy” by CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. He also said their inability to pass the resolution was a tremendous disappointment.
NJFOS Director of Legal Operations Joe LoPorto pointed out that it's a crucial time, with GOP politicians seeking the support of the members of these organizations at polling places come November. The Old Tappan fumble is not likely to be forgotten anytime soon.
Cresskill Interim Mayor John Morgan said he first heard about the rebate movement from Old Tappan Councilman Juan Marti and two of his constituents around the same time. Admittedly, Mayor Morgan is a gun owner, but he was quick to point out that the passage of Cresskill’s rebate ordinance would be of no benefit to himself.
“This has zero bearing on me,” Morgan told Bearing Arms. He said he did find the process of applying for a permit to carry “really annoying” and “cumbersome.” Important to note, mayors of towns cannot apply to their own municipalities for their permits. Morgan’s $150.00 fee would not be eligible for a refund though the Borough.
After being approached, Mayor Morgan promised he would “look into it.” He said that he realized that the fee was unconstitutional and egregious. “I didn't think it's fair that the state would have the authority to force municipalities to charge these fees,” Morgan said.
As far as the money that the municipality would not be collecting, Morgan said the ordinance won't have a negative impact. “It's relatively insignificant, considering our multi-million dollar budget,” he said. “I want to say this constitutes somewhere around one to $2,000.00 a year in fees that we would have collected. It's relatively negligible.”
Mayor Morgan said that Democratic Councilman McLaughlin is an ex police officer and former chief of police in the Borough. “So he voted yes,” Morgan explained. “And he didn't understand it at first, and then once I explained it to him, he understood it — and he subsequently voted yes.”
Democratic Councilman Kaplan, Morgan said “was very vocal during the discussion at our last meeting.” Morgan explained that Kaplan “felt that residents should be charged fees, even though they were egregious and exorbitant.”
Councilman Les Kaplan was the lone dissenting vote and unable to join his Democratic colleague Councilman McLaughlin — with the Republicans — in voting in favor of the ordinance.
“Although I am a gun owner and I do have a carry permit, it might seem as if I'm biased from the get go,” Morgan explained. “The reality is, just as a matter of principle, I feel like this is a fundamental right that we have and is protected by our Constitution.
“I feel like once government overreach starts to infringe on any of our rights; our right to vote, our right to assemble peacefully — which we kind of see already happening with the federal government … this is another fundamental right, and I think once our right to keep and bear arms is infringed upon, then we'll lose all the other rights immediately following it.”
The permit to carry rebate initiative is going strong in New Jersey. Sources say there are over 50 municipalities considering adopting the measure, in either resolution or ordinance form, and that three or four are close to passing them in the near future. As reported by Tom Knighton, Readington, N.J. is considering passing a fee nullification resolution, with the parties involved indicating there’s adequate support.
These new developments come as the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals has enjoined the state from collecting the $50.00 fee for the victims compensation fund. The combined Koons and Siegel cases challenged that portion of the fee.
The court said: “We agree with Plaintiffs that the fee implicates the text of the Second Amendment—it imposes a condition on the ‘individual right to possess and carry weapons’ that the Second Amendment plainly protects …” And that, “The statute does not connect that fee to either the administration of the permitting scheme itself or maintenance of public order created by the licensed conduct.” The opinion notes that the fee is likely unconstitutional.
Applicants who live in municipalities that pass these measures will no longer have to pay any punitive fees for their permits — excepting the state background check fee (which should be free if N.J. used the federal NICS system — but they don’t) and the payment of other expenses such as training.
We’ll be continuing to watch the progress of this initiative in the Garden State. Between the Third Circuit affirming that the $50.00 fee is punitive in nature and jurisdictions recognizing the same for the $150.00 fee, there’s likely to be an interesting outcome in the forthcoming months and years. Our friends at News2A.com are maintaining a timeline and list of municipalities who pass fee nullification resolutions HERE.
Author’s note: I serve as an unpaid volunteer member of the Board of Directors of CCRKBA. Additionally, an earlier version of this story referred to Cresskill's move as a resolution, but it is, in fact, an ordinance. This post has been updated to correct that error.
Editor’s Note: Second Amendment advocates across the country are doing everything they can to protect our right to keep and bear arms.
Help us continue to report on their grassroots efforts and successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member