New Jersey’s former mayor steps in to lead NYC’s biggest business group and faces the question of relevance in a socialist city
A New Leader for the Partnership Faces a New Kind of Mayor
Steven Fulop, the former 12-year mayor of Jersey City who mounted an unsuccessful run for New Jersey governor in 2025, took over as president and CEO of the Partnership for New York City in early 2026, replacing longtime leader Kathryn Wylde. In a lengthy interview with the New York Editorial Board published last week, Fulop offered a candid and wide-ranging assessment of what the Partnership needs to become under a democratic socialist mayor and a city facing real fiscal strain.
Who Is Fulop and How Did He Get the Job?
Fulop’s path to the Partnership was neither direct nor expected. After losing the New Jersey gubernatorial primary to Rep. Mikie Sherrill in a race he had been favored to win, he was approached through a network of connections that included Jim Simpson, a former Christie DOT commissioner, and Rob Speyer, a real estate executive with ties to the Partnership’s board. He went through roughly ten interviews before landing the role. His pitch, which he outlined in the interview, was that the Partnership’s old model of shuttle diplomacy and CEO-to-politician relationships was no longer effective. He argued the organization needed to mobilize its 800,000 employees as a civic force, not just rely on the boardroom relationships of the past.
On Mamdani’s Tax Agenda and the Business Climate
Fulop was clear about the Partnership’s opposition to Mamdani’s proposed tax hikes on corporations and high earners. He argued that citing a lack of corporate flight as evidence that taxes are not harmful misreads how business decisions actually work. Companies do not immediately relocate when taxes rise, he said, but they make incremental decisions about where to scale, and those decisions accumulate over time in ways that do not show up immediately in the headlines. He warned that layering all of New York’s proposed taxes together, including income taxes, the PTET pass-through tax, corporate taxes, estate taxes and property taxes, would put the city at a significant premium over New Jersey and make it harder to attract and retain businesses. He also acknowledged, with some candor, that Gov. Hochul’s resistance to the income tax hikes is, for now, working in the Partnership’s favor.
Areas of Agreement and a Shared Priority
Not everything Fulop said was critical of the mayor. He expressed agreement with Mamdani and Hochul on universal child care, noting that roughly two-thirds of Partnership member companies already provide some form of child care support. He argued the Partnership has practical experience with what works and what does not in running workplace child care programs, and could be a valuable partner for the administration. He also praised how Mamdani has handled his relationship with President Trump, saying the city is in a better place with Washington than many would have predicted post-election.
The Bigger Question: Can Business Make Itself Relevant Again?
The interview is worth reading in full as a document about the power dynamics of New York City at a moment of genuine ideological contest. Fulop’s frank acknowledgment that the Partnership spent millions supporting the Cuomo campaign and still lost is a rare admission of the limits of traditional business political power. His argument that the organization needs to become more employee-focused, less CEO-centric and more willing to call out issues publicly is a significant course correction for an organization that has historically preferred quiet influence. The Partnership for New York City maintains public resources on its policy positions and research. The Citizens Budget Commission provides independent analysis of the city’s fiscal situation. And the Independent Budget Office tracks revenue and expenditure projections that are essential context for any assessment of the tax debate. Whether Fulop’s new approach can build enough influence to shape the direction of city policy under a mayor who explicitly ran against the interests the Partnership represents remains the central open question.
