(The Center Square) – Mayor Katie Wilson’s plan to balance Seattle’s $175 million deficit ahead of next year will reach a final vote next week, as the city council considers $55.5 million in additional spending.
Under her proposal, Wilson plans to balance the general fund’s structural gap by reprioritizing existing revenue sources to fund her agenda, various account transfers and relying on available fund balances.
The council wants to add $55.5 million in amendments above Wilson’s 2027-28 budget to fund district priorities.
The nine members spent Friday reviewing Councilmember Dan Strauss’ “balancing package” before deciding next Monday what else to add or remove ahead of a final budget vote set for Nov. 20.
The back-and-forth over the proposed budget since it was first unveiled last month has led to some concern on the council.
“I have to admit, at times this process has not felt, or has felt less than forthright,” Councilmember Maritza Rivera said, citing 3,000 pages of accompanying materials. “It feels like we don’t have all the information at the proper time we should … and it also makes our constituents distrust government.”
Under Wilson’s plan, the city would still face a roughly $23 million deficit in 2027, falling to $18 million in 2028 and $14 million in 2029 before a minor surplus in 2030. She proposed spending available fund balances to fill those three remaining deficits, with spending ultimately increasing despite the shortfall.
Wilson proposed her first budget without new taxes, despite her future hopes for progressive revenue.
Despite that, Seattle’s commercial parking tax could rise from 14.5% to 17%; property tax levies could increase by 1% as allowed by state law; certain street use permits could rise by 30%, and building and land use permits could increase along with other taxes and fees.
It’s unclear whether the additional council budget amendments will impact the extent of the structural deficit in 2028 and 2029 or Wilson’s plan to fill it with available fund balances.
Strauss said his package increases the structural gap only slightly, with spending ultimately balanced over four years.
“Total expenditure increase across all fund/departments is $70.3 million in 2027, and $17.8 million in 2028,” council staff wrote in a Nov. 4 email confirming how much additional spending Strauss wants to add to Wilson’s proposal, “of which $41.7 million in 2027 and $13.8 million in 2028 is [general fund].”
Council staff did not respond to an email before publication about whether those figures had changed as of Friday.
Altogether, the amendments could add more than $88 million in citywide spending to Wilson’s budget; about $55.5 million of that would come from the general fund, an indicator of the city’s fiscal health.
Last week, Strauss said he’d give himself an “A” for balancing the budget when asked how he justifies the additional spending, much of which the council has labeled one-time, despite recurring obligations.
The balancing act assumes all of the city’s projections go according to plan, without unexpected spending or issues.
“There’s the structural budget deficit … [and] the second lever and indicator is how many years are we balanced out,” Strauss told The Center Square on Nov. 3, explaining how he gauges their fiscal health.
“Those two levers, 100% success on four-year fiscal sustainability,” he said. “I’m giving myself an A.”
Some amendments in Strauss’ package are listed as one-time, such as restoring firefighter overtime that Wilson proposed reducing by $7.1 million annually. The council might need to reconsider that later if service levels continue to demand funding above what Strauss has proposed for 2027-28.
One way Wilson and the council are funding their priorities in a deficit is by transferring money between accounts when possible. This includes more than $400 million from the JumpStart Payroll Tax account in 2027-28, combined across Wilson and Strauss’ proposals, continuing a tradition of accessing the fund for other uses.
Another part of the budget proposals includes a $63.5 million interfund loan to the Seattle Department of Transportation. It’s not the first time; Seattle has bailed out SDOT twice in the last few years, with the department paying off the last loan in December 2025, according to council agenda materials.
Wilson and Strauss also want to ease pressure by closing the Firefighters’ Pension Actuarial Account and using the balance to fund pension obligations typically covered by the general fund.
The Seattle Firefighters’ Pension Board has filed a lawsuit against the city over the proposal, reports show.
“We were not made aware of the complications surrounding the use of the firefighter pension actuarial fund,” Rivera said. “It was presented as an option to reinstate funding for the Seattle Fire Department overtime, and we learned the firefighter pension board and the firefighters weren’t in support of this.”
The council will hold individual vote and discussions on a number of the amendments next week in the days leading up to the final adoption vote.