Winter 2025 Seattle Survey

Wintertime survey

Welcome to the website for Civic Heartbeat, the Northwest Progressive Institute's expanding public opinion research initiative that seeks to regularly measure the pulse of communities in the Pacific Northwest, like Seattle and King County, building on NPI's years of successful polling in the public interest.

This is the online home of the initiative's inaugural research instrument — a lengthy, thirty-five question survey of likely general election voters in Seattle, which fielded from January 31st - February 5th, 2025 and looks at a range of issues, with a special emphasis on public safety concerns.

The survey was conducted for NPI by Change Research, which NPI has worked with since mid-2021 on local polling projects. NPI and Change Research's partnership correctly suggested who the winners might be in all seven out of seven citywide contests in the November 2021 general election.

See this recap for more details.

Below, you'll find:

The questions we asked
Responses to each question
Links to additional analysis prepared by the NPI team
Detailed methodology information

The team at NPI is grateful to Carrie Barnes, who shares our commitment to public interest polling, for providing the funding to make this survey possible.

Begin questionnaire:

Demographic questions

QUESTION: Are you:

ANSWERS:

A man: 48%
A woman: 49%
Neither of these: 3%

QUESTION: What is your age?

ANSWERS:

18 to 34: 26%
35 to 49: 27%
50 to 64: 21%
65+: 26%

QUESTION: What is your race?

ANSWERS:

White / Caucasian: 73%
Asian / Pacific Islander: 13%
Hispanic or Latino/a: 6%
Black or African American: 5%
American Indian or Alaska Native: 0%
Other: 3%

QUESTION: What is the highest level of education you have completed?

ANSWERS:

High school diploma or less: 5%
Some college, but no degree: 16%
Associate’s degree, or two-year college degree: 12%
Bachelor’s degree, or four-year college degree: 39%
Graduate degree: 27%

QUESTION: Generally speaking, do you think of yourself as a:

ANSWERS:

Strong Democratic: 42%
Weak Democratic: 15%
Independent lean Democratic: 13%
Pure independent: 10%
Independent lean Republican: 7%
Weak Republican: 3%
Strong Republican: 9%

Democrats: 70%
Pure independents: 10%
Republicans: 20%

QUESTION: In what city council district do you currently live?

ANSWERS:

District 1 – West Seattle, South Park: 15%
District 2 – Southeast Seattle, Georgetown: 12%
District 3 – Central Seattle: 17%
District 4 – Northeast Seattle: 12%
District 5 – North Seattle: 17%
District 6 – Northwest Seattle: 16%
District 7 – Pioneer Square to Magnolia:

QUESTION: Do you plan to vote in the November general election for offices like Mayor and City Council?

ANSWERS:

Yes, definitely: 88%
Yes, probably: 7%
Maybe (50-50): 3%
No, probably not: 1%
No, definitely not [Terminated]: 0%

QUESTION: Have you voted on the local propositions from the City of Seattle and Seattle Public Schools in the ongoing February 11th, 2025 special election?

ANSWERS:

Yes, I have already voted: 45%
No, I haven’t voted yet: 55%

QUESTION: How did you vote in the 2024 election for President, or for some reason were you unable to vote?

ANSWERS:

Kamala Harris, the Democrat: 72%
Donald Trump, the Republican: 22%
Chase Oliver, the Libertarian: 1%
Other: 4%
Not registered/Too young/Ineligible: 0%
Did not vote: 1%

QUESTION: How did you vote in the 2020 election for President, or for some reason were you unable to vote?

ANSWERS:

Joe Biden, the Democrat: 75%
Donald Trump, the Republican: 18%
Jo Jorgensen, the Libertarian: 3%
Not registered/Too young/Ineligible: 2%
Did not vote: 3%

Job approval

QUESTION: Please indicate whether you approve or disapprove of the following federal, state, and county elected officials’ job performance. (Sorted descending by ‘Total Approve’)

ANSWERS:

Elected Official Name	Strongly Approve	Somewhat Approve	Somewhat Disapprove	Strongly Disapprove	Not Sure	Total Approve	Total Disapprove
Governor Bob Ferguson	27%	29%	10%	17%	17%	56%	27%
King County Executive Dow Constantine	18%	26%	10%	19%	27%	44%	29%
Attorney General Nick Brown	20%	15%	7%	13%	45%	36%	20%
King County Councilmember Girmay Zahilay	13%	12%	6%	13%	57%	25%	19%
Vice President J.D. Vance	18%	5%	4%	68%	5%	23%	72%
President Donald Trump	17%	5%	3%	74%	2%	21%	77%
King County Councilmember Claudia Balducci	7%	11%	5%	13%	63%	19%	18%
King County Assessor John Arthur Wilson	4%	13%	4%	12%	67%	17%	16%

QUESTION: Please indicate whether you approve or disapprove of the following city elected officials’ job performance. (Sorted descending by ‘Total Approve’)

ANSWERS:

Elected Official Name	Strongly Approve	Somewhat Approve	Somewhat Disapprove	Strongly Disapprove	Not Sure	Total Approve	Total Disapprove
Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell	9%	29%	22%	26%	15%	38%	48%
Seattle City Attorney Ann Davison	12%	17%	7%	25%	39%	29%	32%
Seattle City Councilmember Alexis Mercedes Rinck	13%	13%	8%	17%	49%	26%	24%
Seattle City Councilmember Sara Nelson	9%	14%	9%	24%	44%	23%	33%
Seattle City Councilmember Joy Hollingsworth	3%	16%	11%	17%	54%	19%	27%
Seattle City Councilmember Dan Strauss	4%	15%	14%	20%	47%	19%	34%
Seattle City Councilmember Cathy Moore	3%	15%	10%	20%	52%	18%	31%
Seattle City Councilmember Bob Kettle	4%	12%	10%	19%	55%	16%	29%
Seattle City Councilmember Rob Saka	3%	12%	8%	22%	55%	14%	31%
Seattle City Councilmember Maritza Rivera	3%	11%	9%	21%	56%	14%	30%
Seattle City Councilmember Mark Solomon	2%	9%	6%	18%	64%	11%	24%

Special election ballot measure questions

These questions were weighted for a February special election electorate

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD ALREADY VOTED): On the February special election ballot are Proposition 1A (submitted by Initiative Petition No. 137) and Proposition 1B (alternative proposed by the Seattle Council and Mayor) concerning payroll expense tax funding for the Social Housing Developer.

Proposition 1A would impose a tax on payroll expenses for employers doing business in Seattle. The tax rate would be 5% on annual compensation above $1,000,000 paid in Seattle to any employee. Proceeds would support the Social Housing Developer, a public development authority created to develop, own, and maintain social housing in Seattle. The tax imposed would be in addition to the City’s payroll expense tax levied under Seattle Municipal Code Chapter 5.38.

As an alternative, the Seattle City Council and Mayor have proposed Proposition 1B (Ordinance 127101), which would allocate $10,000,000 of existing payroll expense tax revenues from the next five annual budgets to fund the Social Housing Developer. Proceeds would support the acquisition and development of social housing in Seattle. The Developer would have to apply and meet certain conditions as determined by the City before the award of funds. If no allocated funds are awarded within three years of their initial allocation, they would be available to support other affordable housing projects.

When you cast your ballot, did you vote Yes to enact either of these measures into law, or did you vote No on both?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 45%
No: 41%
Did not vote on this: 7%
Don’t recall: 6%

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD ALREADY VOTED): How did you vote on the second question, which asked: Regardless of whether you voted yes or no above, if one of these measures is enacted, which one should it be?

ANSWERS:

Proposition 1A [proposed by citizen initiative petition, would impose a tax on payroll expenses for employers doing business in Seattle to fund the Social Housing Developer]: 34%
Proposition 1B [proposed by the Council and Mayor, would allocate existing payroll expense tax revenues from the next five annual budgets to fund the Social Housing Developer]: 41%
Did not vote on this: 11%
Don’t recall: 14%

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED): On the February special election ballot are Proposition 1A (submitted by Initiative Petition No. 137) and Proposition 1B (alternative proposed by the Seattle Council and Mayor) concerning payroll expense tax funding for the Social Housing Developer.

Should either of these measures be enacted into law?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 50%
No: 24%
Not sure: 26%

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED): How do you plan to vote on the second question, which asks: Regardless of whether you voted yes or no above, if one of these measures is enacted, which one should it be?

ANSWERS:

Proposition 1A [proposed by citizen initiative petition, would impose a tax on payroll expenses for employers doing business in Seattle to fund the Social Housing Developer]: 37%
Proposition 1B [proposed by the Council and Mayor, would allocate existing payroll expense tax revenues from the next five annual budgets to fund the Social Housing Developer]: 32%
Not sure: 31%

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED AND ANSWERED NOT SURE TO PREVIOUS QUESTION): Here’s some more information about the two alternative measures from the voter’s pamphlet.

Proponents of Proposition 1A say it taxes the wealthiest businesses to establish a dedicated fund for the Seattle Social Housing Developer (SSHD) to carry out its voter approved mandate. The City estimates Prop 1A will raise $50 million a year for the SSHD to create permanently affordable, publicly owned, mixed income social housing.

Proponents of Proposition 1B say it adds the accountability and reporting requirements that Proposition 1A does not have. Proposition 1B requires the City’s Office of Housing, a successful agency with a forty-year track record building thousands of housing units, to oversee and report on the progress of this social housing PDA.

If you had to choose, how would you vote?

ANSWERS:

Proposition 1A [proposed by citizen initiative petition, would impose a tax on payroll expenses for employers doing business in Seattle to fund the Social Housing Developer]: 25%

Proposition 1B [proposed by the Council and Mayor, would allocate existing payroll expense tax revenues from the next five annual budgets to fund the Social Housing Developer]: 31%

Not sure: 27%

Would not vote: 17%

AGGREGATE RESPONSES — City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B Question 1:

Yes: 48%
No: 32%
Not sure: 14%
Did not vote on this: 3%
Don't recall: 3%

AGGREGATE RESPONSES — City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B Question 2:

Proposition 1A: 33%
Proposition 1B: 31%
Did not vote on this: 7%
Don't recall: 10%
Not sure: 15%
Would not vote: 3%

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD ALREADY VOTED): Also on the February special election ballot is Seattle School District No. 1 Proposition No. 1, Replacement for Educational Programs and Operations Levy. Its official description is as follows:

The Board of Directors of Seattle School District passed Resolution No. 2024/25-3 concerning this proposition to maintain current educational funding. To continue high quality programs that are not state funded or fully funded, this authorizes the District to levy the following excess taxes replacing an expiring levy on all taxable property within the District:

Collection Years	Estimated Levy Rate / $1,000 Assessed Value	Levy Amount
2026	$0.78	$250,000,000
2027	$0.75	$249,000,000
2028	$0.72	$248,000,000

as provided in the Resolution, subject to legal limits at time of levy.

How did you vote on this proposition?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 50%
No: 35%
Did not vote on this: 7%
Do not recall: 9%

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED): Also on the February special election ballot is Seattle School District No. 1 Proposition No. 1, Replacement for Educational Programs and Operations Levy. Its official description is as follows:

Collection Years	Estimated Levy Rate / $1,000 Assessed Value	Levy Amount
2026	$0.78	$250,000,000
2027	$0.75	$249,000,000
2028	$0.72	$248,000,000

as provided in the Resolution, subject to legal limits at time of levy.

How are you voting on this proposition?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 46%
No: 24%
Not sure: 30%

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED AND ANSWERED NOT SURE TO PREVIOUS QUESTION): Here’s more information from the voter’s pamphlet.

Proponents say that a great city must have great public schools. This levy benefits every school in every part of Seattle. It replaces our current levy and provides needed funding to pay for critical educational support such as STEM education, Career and Technical Education, school security staff, counselors, custodians, child nutrition programs, instructional materials and new curriculum, and Special Education services.

There is no statement in opposition to this levy because no persons came forward to serve on the committee and to write a statement in opposition.

If you had to choose, how would you vote?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 49%

No: 23%

Not sure: 22%

Would not vote: 6%

AGGREGATE RESPONSES — Seattle School District No. 1 Proposition No. 1 Replacement for Educational Programs and Operations Levy Aggregate

Yes: 55%
No: 23%
Not sure: 17%
Would not vote: 2%
Did not vote on this: 0%
Do not recall: 2%

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD ALREADY VOTED): Also on the February special election ballot is Seattle School District No. 1 Proposition No. 2, Building Excellence Program (BEX) VI – Capital Levy. Its official description is as follows:

The Board of Directors of Seattle School District requests approval of a capital levy as described in Resolution No. 2024/25-4. The proposition replaces an expiring capital levy and authorizes the levy of excess taxes to fund BEX VI for safety and security, energy efficiency projects, construction or renovation at five schools, projects for building systems and major maintenance, and technology and other projects throughout the District:

Collection Years	Estimated Levy Rate / $1,000 Assessed Value	Levy Amount
2026	$0.93	$300,000,000
2027	$0.90	$300,000,000
2028	$0.87	$300,000,000
2029	$0.84	$300,000,000
2030	$0.81	$300,000,000
2031	$0.79	$300,000,000

How did you vote on this proposition?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 48%
No: 37%
Did not vote on this: 8%
Do not recall: 7%

QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED): Also on the February special election ballot is Seattle School District No. 1 Proposition No. 2, Building Excellence Program (BEX) VI – Capital Levy. Its official description is as follows:

Collection Years	Estimated Levy Rate / $1,000 Assessed Value	Levy Amount
2026	$0.93	$300,000,000
2027	$0.90	$300,000,000
2028	$0.87	$300,000,000
2029	$0.84	$300,000,000
2030	$0.81	$300,000,000
2031	$0.79	$300,000,000

How are you voting on this proposition?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 45%
No: 26%
Not sure: 29%

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION (ASKED OF RESPONDENTS WHO HAD NOT YET VOTED AND ANSWERED NOT SURE TO PREVIOUS QUESTION): Here’s more information from the voter’s pamphlet.

Proponents say the Capital Levy replaces an expiring Capital Levy and is dedicated to building safe and healthy learning places for our children. Many of our school buildings are over 50 years old and need renovation or replacement. The Capital Levy funds critical repairs and renovations across Seattle including major construction, renovation, or replacement of five schools.

Opponents say the levy should be rejected so a better Capital Levy can be written with three aims: (1) Keep schools open and sparkling. (2) Set aside portions of Capital levy funds in bank accounts to generate interest which by state law (RCW 28A.320.320) can be used to help the District’s separate Operating budget. (3) Shrink this $1.8 billion Capital levy to reduce taxes and make Seattle more affordable including for families.

If you had to choose, how would you vote?

ANSWERS:

Yes: 41%

No: 30%

Not sure: 25%

Would not vote: 4%

AGGREGATE RESPONSES — Seattle School District No. 1 Proposition No. 2 Building Excellence Program (BEX) VI – Capital Levy Aggregate

Yes: 49%
No: 30%
Not sure: 19%
Would not vote: 1%
Did not vote on this: 0%
Do not recall: 1%

Quality of life and priorities

QUESTION: How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your quality of life as a resident of Seattle?

ANSWERS:

Very satisfied: 9%
Somewhat satisfied: 40%
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied: 11%
Somewhat dissatisfied: 23%
Very dissatisfied: 17%

Total Satisfied: 49%
Total Dissatisfied: 40%

QUESTION: What causes do you want the candidates seeking your vote in this year’s city elections to prioritize?

ANSWERS:

Improve public safety, including on trains, buses, and water taxis: 69%
Get unhoused people into shelter and connect them to human services they need: 67%
Opposing Trump policies targeting undocumented workers, LGBTQIA+ residents, and members of vulnerable, underrepresented communities: 59%
Require large corporations to pay higher taxes to support Seattle’s public services: 53%
Make the Seattle Police Department more accountable and transparent: 52%
Find new ways to support small businesses and strengthen the city’s economy: 52%
Accelerate the construction of affordable housing: 51%
Enforce local laws protecting the rights of renters and workers: 48%
Ensure developers are doing their part to protect Seattle’s tree canopy: 40%
Reduce air and water pollution that’s contributing to the climate crisis: 37%
Other: 28%

Comprehensive Plan and housing questions

QUESTION: This year, the City Council and Mayor must approve a new Comprehensive Plan for Seattle. The Plan sets rules for how much housing can be built and where in the city more dense housing can be built for the next ten years. Economic forecasts project that Seattle will add nearly 160,000 new jobs over the next twenty years.**

Advocates for more housing density argue that Seattle’s housing affordability crisis stems from an inadequate supply of homes, and that approving a Comprehensive Plan that does not allow for housing construction to keep pace with the city’s new jobs will further worsen the affordability crisis.

Opponents of more housing density argue that allowing the construction of townhomes and apartment buildings in neighborhoods currently zoned for single family homes would not guarantee more affordable housing while straining the city’s infrastructure and significantly altering the traditional character of those neighborhoods.

Which approach to Seattle’s Comprehensive Plan do you want your elected officials to take?

ANSWERS:

Prefer an approach that prioritizes allowing enough homes to keep pace with new workers moving to Seattle: 50%
Prefer an approach that prioritizes preserving the traditional character of neighborhoods where only single family homes are allowed: 37%
Not sure: 12%

QUESTION: Mayor Bruce Harrell has proposed a Comprehensive Plan that increases housing density by the minimum required by state law and would add 80,000 new homes in the next twenty years. Seattle is expected to add nearly 160,000 new jobs over that same period of time.

Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for a candidate who supports Mayor Harrell’s proposed Comprehensive Plan?

ANSWERS:

Much more likely: 9%
Somewhat more likely: 23%
Wouldn’t make a difference to my vote: 19%
Somewhat less likely: 14%
Much less likely: 24%
Not sure: 11%

Total More Likely: 31%
Total Less Likely: 38%

QUESTION: Some critics argue that Mayor Harrell’s Comprehensive Plan does not go far enough to address Seattle’s housing needs, while others say it increases density too much.

Which of the following best describes your view?

ANSWERS:

The plan goes too far in increasing housing density: 28%
The plan strikes the right balance: 16%
The plan does not go far enough in increasing housing density: 38%
Not sure: 19%

QUESTION: A recent report from the federal government cited Seattle as a “national outlier” in how many homeless people live outside without shelter after the city shifted the focus of its limited budget for homelessness away from building emergency shelters to prioritizing building more affordable housing.

How do you want Seattle’s city leaders to respond to this report?

ANSWERS:

Build less affordable housing to spend those resources on more emergency shelter: 14%
Increase taxes on the wealthy and large corporations to build more emergency shelter without sacrificing affordable housing: 52%
Not sure: 10%
Other (respondents were able to specify): 25% '

Revenue and fiscal policy questions

QUESTION: The City of Seattle levies a 0.7 to 2.4% tax on corporations with employees who earn at least $150,000, known as JumpStart. The City originally reserved funds from this tax only to pay for affordable housing, climate initiatives, and small business support. However, in the face of a $251 million budget deficit this year, Mayor Bruce Harrell and the City Council decided against adhering to those investment priorities and instead used the funds to cover the shortfall.

Advocates for Jumpstart argue we should increase the tax to restore dedicated funding to affordable housing construction, climate programs, and small business supports. Advocates for austerity argue that we should instead rely on existing revenues to fund services and make cuts if necessary to close budget shortfalls.

Which approach do you think Seattle should take?

ANSWERS:

Increase the payroll expense tax, also known as Jumpstart, to fund affordable housing, climate action, and support small businesses: 43%
Leave the payroll expense tax at the current level and fund our obligations with existing revenues as suggested by several business leaders: 42%
Not sure: 15%

QUESTION: In 2021, the Washington State Legislature enacted a capital gains tax on wealthy households that provided nearly $900 million in funding for childcare and K-12 education in its first year. Now, Councilmember Cathy Moore is proposing that Seattle enact its own capital gains tax to fund public services that help low-income residents afford basic necessities like rent and food.

Do you support or oppose levying a capital gains tax at the city level to fund public services?

ANSWERS:

Strongly support: 35%
Somewhat support: 21%
Somewhat oppose: 9%
Strongly oppose: 29%
Not sure: 6%

Total Support: 56%
Total Oppose: 38%

Economic security and labor rights questions

QUESTION: Under the leadership of President Sara Nelson, the Seattle City Council attempted to cut the minimum wage for app-based delivery drivers. Nelson argued that the pay standards hurt restaurants and reduced orders. Labor leaders and some drivers argued that increased pay made up for fewer orders, and that corporations passed down costs to consumers while paying CEOs millions. The legislation to cut pay for these workers was shelved by the Council last year.

Do you support or oppose Nelson’s efforts to cut the minimum wage for app-based delivery drivers?

ANSWERS:

Strongly support: 16%
Somewhat support: 9%
Somewhat oppose: 21%
Strongly oppose: 40%
Not sure: 14%

Total Support: 25%
Total Oppose: 61%

QUESTION: When Seattle decided to raise the city’s minimum wage to $15 per hour, the legislation included a compromise to help the restaurant industry ramp up to the new standard. Specifically, the law allowed businesses that employ fewer than five hundred people to pay tipped workers a lower minimum wage for a period of ten years, so long as tips and benefits added up to the actual minimum wage. This sub-minimum wage provision expired on January 1st, 2025, and a number of restaurant owners say losing it is hurting their business.

What position do you want the Mayor and the City Council to take in response?

ANSWERS:

Continue requiring all businesses to pay tipped workers the minimum wage: 54%
Bring back the sub-minimum wage for tipped workers to help restaurant owners: 28%
Not sure: 10%
Other (respondents were able to specify): 7%

QUESTION: In the City’s 2025-2026 budget, Mayor Harrell and City Council President Nelson cut more than $600,000 from the Office of Labor Standards (OLS), which The Stranger noted is the City’s only mechanism to enforce is nineteen unique labor laws, including the minimum wage ordinance, the wage theft ordinance, the Fair Chance Employment ordinance, four laws specifically protecting hotel workers, and three laws protecting gig delivery drivers. Since it was created in 2014, OLS has recovered more than $42 million in stolen wages and other labor law violations for more than 88,000 workers in Seattle.

Do you support or oppose this cut to the Office of Labor Standards?

ANSWERS:

Strongly support the cut: 14%
Somewhat support the cut: 7%
Somewhat oppose the cut: 20%
Strongly oppose the cut: 42%
Not sure: 18%

Total Support: 21%
Total Oppose: 62%

Public safety questions

QUESTION: Amid a national shortage of qualified police officers, Mayor Bruce Harrell and City Council President Sara Nelson both campaigned on hiring more police officers. Despite spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on hiring bonuses for new police officers during their time in office, the Seattle Police Department has fewer officers now than when they took office.

Other major American cities have chosen to dispatch unarmed crisis responders instead of police officers to handle lower-priority, non-violent 911 calls as a solution to staffing shortages in their police departments.

Which strategy do you think Seattle’s leaders should pursue?

ANSWERS:

Continue trying to hire more police officers and rely on them to respond to all 911 calls: 29%
Allow unarmed crisis responders to handle lower priority, non-violent 911 calls without a police officer: 59%
Not sure: 3%
Another approach (respondents were able to specify): 8%

QUESTION: In 2024, Mayor Bruce Harrell and the City Council approved a new contract for Seattle’s police officers that gave them a 23% pay raise. Some people believe the contract should have included stronger accountability measures for officer misconduct, while others think the agreement was appropriate as is. Do you agree or disagree with their decision to approve this contract?

ANSWERS:

Strongly agree: 20%
Somewhat agree: 18%
Somewhat disagree: 24%
Strongly disagree: 27%
Not sure: 10%

Total Agree: 39%
Total Disagree: 51%

QUESTION: In 2023, Seattle police officer Kevin Dave struck and killed a pedestrian while driving his police car 74 mph on a street with a twenty-five mile per hour (25 MPH) speed limit. City Attorney Ann Davison chose to issue Dave a $5,000 citation for negligent driving instead of charging him with a crime. Do you agree or disagree with how Davison handled this case?

ANSWERS:

Strongly agree: 11%
Somewhat agree: 14%
Somewhat disagree: 14%
Strongly disagree: 53%
Not sure: 9%

Total Agree: 25%
Total Disagree: 66%

QUESTION: Last year, at the urging of City Attorney Ann Davison and City Council President Sara Nelson, Seattle enacted laws that would ban people accused of possessing illegal drugs or paying for sex from specific zones of the city. The laws allow police to arrest anyone subject to a ban who they find in any of these zones and book them into jail.

Proponents of these laws argue that enforcing them will improve public safety in areas, such as downtown and along Aurora Avenue, where drug markets and prostitution have been concentrated in recent years.

Opponents of the laws argue that enforcing them would simply push criminal activity into other neighborhoods and take police away from investigating violent crimes during a staffing shortage.

Do you support or oppose the passage of these laws?

ANSWERS:

Strongly support: 28%
Somewhat support: 20%
Somewhat oppose: 18%
Strongly oppose: 25%
Not sure: 10%

Total Support: 48%
Total Oppose: 42%

QUESTION: Unless a police officer suspects an undocumented immigrant of committing a felony, Seattle employees must not ask about a person’s immigration status. Research shows that this “don’t ask policy” allows officers to build trust in immigrant and refugee communities.

In a recent interview, Mayor Bruce Harrell said he would “embrace” parts of President Donald Trump’s immigration policy and “implied](https://mynorthwest.com/ktth/ktth-opinion/rantz-seattle-mayor-bruce-harrell-illegal-immigrations-trump-sanctuary-city/4021284)” support for federal efforts to deport undocumented immigrants accused of committing crimes.

Do you agree or disagree with the Mayor’s position?

ANSWERS:

Strongly agree: 21%
Somewhat agree: 17%
Somewhat disagree: 12%
Strongly disagree: 44%
Not sure: 6%

Total Agree: 38%
Total Disagree: 56%

QUESTION: Following a protest during a City Council meeting to urge the Council to fund temporary housing for asylum seekers living without shelter, City Council President Sara Nelson asked Seattle police officers to arrest six people who refused to leave City Hall when instructed by police. City Attorney Ann Davison then charged each protester with criminal trespass in the first degree, a crime punishable by up to 364 days in jail and/or a $5,000 fine if convicted.

No one was injured during the incident.

Former City Councilmember Tammy Morales objected to the arrests and charges, saying, “charging protesters for dissenting in the people’s chamber is undemocratic.” She also characterized the arrests and charges as “stifl[ing] first amendment rights” for people lobbying their elected officials in City Hall.

Do you support or oppose the decision to arrest and charge these protesters?

ANSWERS:

Strongly support: 23%
Somewhat support: 10%
Somewhat oppose: 17%
Strongly oppose: 43%
Not sure: 7%

Total Support: 33%
Total Oppose: 60%

Questions looking ahead to upcoming summer and autumn elections

QUESTION: Although Seattle positions are officially “nonpartisan,” most people serving in elected office in the city identify as Democrats. The notable exception is Seattle City Attorney Ann Davison, who joined the Republican Party in 2020, saying the Democratic Party had become too “far left” for her. Davison was elected to a four-year term in November of 2021 that will end this December. If the 2025 election for City Attorney were being held now and the choices were Davison and a challenger who identifies as belonging to the Democratic Party, who would you vote for?

ANSWERS:

Would vote for Ann Davison to serve a second term as Seattle City Attorney: 32%
Would vote for the challenger belonging to the Democratic Party: 46%
Not sure: 22%

QUESTION: Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for a candidate in this year’s municipal elections if they were supported by downtown real estate interests and executives at large tech companies, such as Amazon?

ANSWERS:

Much more likely: 4%
Somewhat more likely: 9%
Wouldn’t affect my vote: 19%
Somewhat less likely: 20%
Much less likely: 40%
Not sure: 7%

QUESTION: Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for a candidate in this year’s municipal elections if they were supported by progressive activists and labor unions, like those who represent grocery store workers and health care workers?

ANSWERS:

Much more likely: 35%
Somewhat more likely: 24%
Wouldn’t affect my vote: 12%
Somewhat less likely: 6%
Much less likely: 18%
Not sure: 4%

End questionnaire.

Methodology information

Change Research surveyed 684 likely November 2025 general voters online for the Northwest Progressive Institute (NPI) in Seattle, Washington from January 31st – February 5th, 2025.

Change used the following sources to recruit respondents:

targeted advertisements on Facebook and Instagram (579 respondents)
text messages sent, via the Switchboard platform, to cell phone numbers listed on the voter file for individuals who qualified for the survey’s sample universe, based on their voter file data (105 respondents)

Regardless of which of these sources a respondent came from, they were directed to a survey hosted on SurveyMonkey’s website.

Ads placed on social media targeted all adults. Anyone who indicated they were not registered to vote was terminated. As the survey fielded, Change Research used dynamic online sampling: adjusting ad budgets, lowering budgets for ads targeting groups that were overrepresented and raising budgets for ads targeting groups that were underrepresented, so that the final sample was roughly representative of the population across different groups.

The survey was conducted in English.

Post-stratification was performed on age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, ZIP code, and 2024 presidential results. For the ballot measures, weighting parameters were based on a weighted average of the electorates from the February 2022, February 2023, and February 2024 special elections, obtained from the voter file. That is, if a given age bracket or gender group represented x% of the 2022 electorate, y% of the 2023 election, and z% of the 2024 election, then that same group would be weighted to (0.1x+0.2y+0.7z)%.

For all other questions, weight parameters were based on a weighted average of the electorates from the November 2021, November 2023, and November 2024 general elections, obtained from the voter file. That is, if a given age bracket or gender group represented x% of the 2021 electorate, y% of the 2023 election, and z% of the 2024 election, then that same group would be weighted to (0.2x+0.3y+0.5z)%

The modeled margin of error* for this survey is 4.3%, which uses effective sample sizes** that adjust for the design effect of weighting.