Seattle council committee hears briefing, public support and questions on proposed 0.3% transit sales-tax renewal

Chair Tim Saka opened the Select Committee meeting on June 18 by describing the Seattle Transit Measure (STM) renewal as one of the city’s most consequential transportation decisions in years and by setting procedural deadlines for amendments and future committee review. He told colleagues amendments are due to central staff by noon on June 24, with publication before the July 6 meeting and further deliberation on July 16.

Public comment dominated the morning. The president of Local 587, representing roughly 5,000 transit workers, told the committee the union supports using the full 0.3% taxing authority and urged Council members to back the proposal. The speaker told the committee, “Every dollar invested in public transit generates an estimated $5 in long-term economic returns.” Riders’ groups pressed for the measure’s larger service package, saying it would more than double some service and add late-night and weekend hours that riders need. A number of callers and in-person speakers framed the measure as critical to equity, climate goals and affordability and urged the Council to preserve or expand low-income ORCA pass funding.

Several advocates and residents focused on safety and accessibility. A Seattle Housing Authority representative praised proposed expansions of subsidized ORCA access for low-income households; disability and sidewalk advocates urged the committee to protect investments in accessible sidewalks and curb ramps, calling those investments essential for people with mobility limitations to reach transit. One West Seattle resident who lost a spouse in a cycling crash urged immediate safety improvements at a recent fatality site.

Central staff (Calvin Chow and Amanda Allen) summarized the Executive’s proposal and its changes from prior measures. Key points from staff include: the Mayor’s proposal would seek an average 0.3% sales-and-use tax over a 10-year term; it would require a minimum of 60% of annual revenue be spent on transit (up from 50% in the current measure); it would increase the low-income Transit Access program up to $12 million per year; and the accessibility/capital line was renegotiated upward from a baseline $3.5 million to $5 million per year in the revised package the Chair described as a compromise with the Mayor’s Office. Staff also noted that several prior “emerging needs” and certain flexibility in the 2020 measure are not included in the new proposal.

Councilmembers used the briefing to probe how the City would deliver the new commitments. A recurring question was whether King County Metro can absorb and operate the substantial service increase envisioned in the proposal. Staff noted Metro is pursuing a restoration plan that could add tens of thousands of hours in the coming years, and that any expanded purchase of service would require new or revised service agreements with King County. Central staff and multiple councilmembers emphasized they need more data on what the expiring 2020 measure had contemplated versus what was actually delivered (service-hour totals), and they requested follow-up on farebox recovery ratios and unit costs to ensure accountability for the dollars spent.

Councilmembers also debated trade-offs between capital spending for accessibility and the direct purchase of bus service hours. Staff provided a working estimate during the meeting: $5 million in accessibility/capital work equates roughly to 15,000 bus service hours, and $1.5 million corresponds to about 4,500 annual service hours. Several councilmembers asked staff to supply more granular unit-cost figures (for example, cost per curb ramp and cost per purchased bus-hour) to better weigh those trade-offs before finalizing the Council’s preferred ballot language.

Public-safety concerns surfaced repeatedly. Multiple members asked what the measure provides, if anything, specifically for transit safety and security. Staff said the current proposal does not create a separate, dedicated safety bucket beyond items that are legally allowable within the transit measure’s spending categories; however, prior Council and Metro actions have directed funds toward safety initiatives, and King County has increased spending on behavioral-health specialists and other safety programs. Members asked for clearer accounting of how safety investments would be funded and coordinated across city and regional partners.

The committee also discussed fiscal and equity issues. Several speakers and councilmembers described sales taxes as regressive and pressed for complementary progressive funding options in future conversations. Staff outlined the limited toolbox for the City Transportation Benefit District (vehicle-license fees, bonds, tolling with state approval) and noted that some revenues require state or county action to implement.

Chair Saka closed by reiterating the near-term process: councilmembers should work with central staff to develop amendments by June 24, amendments will be published prior to July 6, and the committee expects to continue deliberations and aim for final committee action on July 16 to meet the administrative deadlines necessary to place a measure on the November 3, 2026 ballot.

What happens next: The committee will accept and review amendments, join follow-up briefings requested by members (detailed service-hour deliveries, unit-costs for accessibility, farebox recovery and Metro’s operational capacity), and continue public outreach before the July meetings. No formal votes or binding decisions were taken at the June 18 briefing.