Poll: Seattle Voters Want Progressive Taxes, Don't Want Budget Cuts

Will Bruce Harrell and the Council Listen?

The Mayor and the Seattle City Council look poised to pass a very conservative budget—cutting housing, city state, and oversight of labor violations, beefing up only on policing, and ensuring that taxes for the richest and big business remain extremely low.

NPI, which consistently produces very good/accurate polls, recently asked Seattle voters whether they like Harrell and the council’s plan to cut the the city’s budget, or would prefer to raise progressive taxes.

The poll was used the exact language of Bruce Harrell’s pitch to voters and a very bland, anodyne alternate for more progressive revenue. And yet voters resoundingly rejected the approach of Harrell and the more conservative council.

See for yourself.

QUESTION: As part of his proposed 2025–2026 budget, Mayor Bruce Harrell is asking the Seattle City Council to cover a fiscal shortfall by transferring $287 million of the $430 million in revenue that the Jumpstart payroll expense tax is projected to bring in next year to the general fund.

Jumpstart revenue has been diverted to the general fund to cover shortfalls before, but the previous Seattle City Council had resolved to stop doing this in order to ensure Jumpstart revenue could benefit the priorities for which it was established: affordable housing, climate action, and investments in greater equity and economic development.

“It is my obligation as mayor to ensure the City is spending every dollar we have toward the needs of Seattle communities in a responsible, efficient, and effective way,” Mayor Harrell said. “With a strong foundation rooted in our One Seattle values, this budget proposal represents an important step putting our city on a better fiscal trajectory.”

Advocates for housing, social responsibility, and environmental justice are urging the city to instead levy new progressive taxes on wealth, like a city-level capital gains tax on the wealthy, to avoid painful cuts to public services, so that these priorities, especially housing, aren’t deprived of the hundreds of millions in better than expected Jumpstart revenues.

Which approach would you prefer?

ANSWERS:

Prefer Mayor Harrell’s proposal to transfer $287 million in Jumpstart revenue to the general fund to cover much of the city’s anticipated fiscal shortfall: 25%

Prefer advocates’ proposal to instead levy new progressive taxes to cover the shortfall, which would allow all the Jumpstart revenue to flow to its original priorities, like housing: 58%

Not sure: 17% 

(I highly recommend reading the whole piece).

It is notable that this result pretty perfectly mirrors Alexis Mercedes Rinck’s result in the election: as it stands now, she won 58% of the vote.

The question is, does the Mayor care what the voters want? Does the council?

Do they work for us? Or their corporate backers?