Seattle voters have till 8 p.m. Tuesday to resolve three funding questions: whether or not Seattle Public Faculties ought to get extra {dollars} for operations and capital bills, and whether or not town’s new developer of public housing ought to obtain a devoted funds.
Though February particular elections usually are not unusual in Seattle, this one carries a selected weight as Seattle Public Faculty grapples with a funds disaster and native companies pour a whole lot of 1000’s of {dollars} into making certain voters don’t approve a brand new tax on employers with extremely paid employees.
Funding for social housing developer: Proposition 1A, 1B or neither
The vote on Seattle’s Social Housing Developer has attracted essentially the most consideration. The objective of the physique, created by voters in 2023, is to buy or construct housing that’s publicly owned and reasonably priced eternally. Based mostly on the general public housing fashions of locations like Vienna, the developer hopes to fill the void between market-rate and deeply sponsored flats with mixed-income buildings aimed toward serving to working-class households keep in Seattle.
Attributable to state legal guidelines limiting the scope of voter initiatives, it was established with none funding mechanism connected. That’s the place Tuesday’s vote is available in.
Voters have two decisions to make. The primary is whether or not it needs to be funded in any respect. The second, whatever the reply to the primary, is how.
The marketing campaign to determine the developer within the first place gathered signatures to fund it by the use of a brand new tax on firms with staff making greater than $1 million a 12 months. If handed, the tax would elevate an estimated $50 million a 12 months. That’s choice 1A.
Skeptics of that method, together with the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, pushed for an alternate: $10 million a 12 months, utilizing a metropolis tax on Seattle-based companies that already exists. The Seattle Metropolis Council agreed and used its unilateral energy to place choice 1B on the poll.
The dueling measures have attracted heavy political spending, notably in favor of 1B. Each Amazon and Microsoft have spent $100,000 on its behalf, with different firms like T-Cellular additionally giving massive.
Proposition No. 1: Substitute for Instructional Packages and Operations LevyProposition No. 2: Constructing Excellence Program (BEX) VI- Capital Levy
Voters may also be requested to approve two Seattle Public Faculties levies. Prop. 1 asks voters to approve a three-year, $747 million measure to pay for varsity operations and employees, equivalent to safety and particular training personnel, and packages that aren’t coated by the state. The operations levy may price taxpayers 78 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation in 2026. The district is asking voters to approve greater than it’s presently allowed to gather below state regulation.
Prop. 2 is a six-year, $1.8 billion capital levy. It consists of funds to rebuild two elementary colleges — Lowell and an unnamed faculty — for 650 college students; develop and modernize Aki Kurose Center Faculty; add lecture rooms to Chief Sealth Worldwide Excessive Faculty; and improve John Marshall Different Faculty, which is used as a brief faculty by college students when their colleges are present process development work.
The levy additionally consists of about $415 million for the district’s know-how division — nearly 90% of its funds — and tens of millions for safety enhancements and upgrades to fulfill the state’s earthquake constructing requirements and state and metropolis vitality effectivity requirements. The levy may also pay for upgrades to roofs, home windows, and heating, air flow and air-con techniques.
A Vote No-Prop. 2 marketing campaign urges voters to defeat the measure to pressure SPS to revise the proposal. The marketing campaign argues the capital levy will enhance faculty capability and result in faculty closures.
Sherry Carr, the secretary of Faculties First, which is working a marketing campaign in favor of the capital proposal, says the levy gives funding for mandatory upkeep and upgrades to make sure college students are in a secure and applicable studying surroundings.
