Jumpstart: The fight over how to spend Seattle’s big-business tax

The debate over its future  

For 2025, Harrell has proposed using $287M in Jumpstart revenue to balance the budget; $43M to create a reserve fund for Jumpstart; about $144.5M for affordable housing; $35M for economic revitalization; $21M for Green New Deal projects; $21M for the Economic Development Initiative, $19.5M for youth mental health and $11M for administrative costs.  

The mayor is also proposing legislation that would allow ongoing use of Jumpstart funds above the 2020 projected revenues to bolster the general fund, rather than the current year-by-year allowance.  

At a Sept. 24 briefing about the mayor’s budget proposal, interim City Budget Office Director Dan Eder framed their proposal as a choice between making deep cuts to city services and redirecting Jumpstart funds into the general fund. He said that while preparing the budget, they explored the possibility of making a 14% cut to all city departments in the general fund. They also explored making a 30% cut to all departments except those with public-safety functions.  

“Both would have been devastating to public-facing services that people rely on,” said Eder at the September briefing.  

Council budget chair Dan Strauss, who co-sponsored the legislation to create Jumpstart, told Cascade PBS that he thinks the mayor’s proposal is consistent with how the tax has been used to shore up the budget every year since its creation. But he said he will be taking a closer look at the mayor’s legislation to permanently modify Jumpstart spending to make sure the original four spending categories remain a priority. 

“Here we are four years out from passing the original legislation. It’s time to take a review and map the future,” said Strauss. “We have to make sure we’re maintaining the promises originally made and look at the realities that have changed since that original passage.”

A coalition of 35 housing and service providers, labor groups and community advocates has come out against the redirection of Jumpstart, arguing instead that the city should pass new progressive taxes or increase the Jumpstart tax rate so it can balance the budget and continue investing fully in Jumpstart priorities.  

“I would hope to see a longer-term plan where we recognize that the Jumpstart tax and all of its revenue is meant to address profound systemic issues the city has failed to address for a long, long time, including affordable housing, the climate crisis, the displacement crisis,” said Katie Wilson, general secretary of the Transit Riders Union, one of the coalition members.  

The coalition argues that the need for investments in housing and community development especially have grown in recent years. Wilson points to the staffing shortages, rising construction costs, unpaid rent and other issues affordable-housing providers are grappling with.  

“If you’re going to broaden out what you’re spending Jumpstart money on, it feels like very much the wrong time to be de-emphasizing affordable housing,” said Wilson. “One could imagine repurposing some of the quote-unquote extra Jumpstart funding to really bolster skilled staffing and operations at permanent supportive housing projects.” 

Speaking for herself and not the coalition, Wilson said she recognizes the need for using Jumpstart funds in the short term to avoid far deeper cuts to city services, but takes issue with the mayor’s longer-term plan. For one, the city is using the 2020 projections for Jumpstart to decide what constitutes “excess” revenues that can be used for purposes other than the Jumpstart spend plan. The 2020 projections estimated a 2.5% rate of inflation, which is lower than reality.  

“Capping it at arbitrary amount is not taking seriously what this money is supposed to do,” said Wilson.  

The coalition has an ally in Councilmember Tammy Morales, who has expressed concern with repurposing Jumpstart, calling instead for the city to pass new taxes.  

“What I am taking away from this proposal [from the mayor] is a tacit acknowledgment that we need more revenue to fund basic city services, especially as a growing city,” said Morales at a Sept. 25 budget hearing.  

But it’s unlikely new taxes are coming from the City Council any time soon. Some Councilmembers have expressed concerns about the specifics of what Harrell has proposed – for example, Councilmember Cathy Moore has concerns about using $43 million of Jumpstart for a new reserve fund while the need for affordable housing is so great. The majority of Councilmembers have opposed the idea of imposing any new taxes.