top of page
Writer's pictureseattleanimalwatch

The City of Seattle and Animal Services: The (Quite Clear) Funding Message

In October, Mayor Bruce Harrell announced his proposed adjustments to the City of Seattle’s 2023-2024 Biennial Budget. (The biennial budget is a two-year budget with adjustments to the second year occurring in the fall of the first year. Hence, adjustments to 2024 occur in Fall 2023.)


Midway through this 2023-2024 budget cycle, there are no dollar adjustments to the Seattle Animal Shelter’s (SAS) budget for 2024. While there has been no increase in SAS’s budget, at least there has been no decrease. Having said that, SAS is still underfunded, forcing SAS to rely on donations to fund critical expenses. The most glaring example of this underfunding is the addition of two positions with no additional City funding. Instead, funding will come from the “SAS Donation Fund.”


The story of the 2023-2024 City of Seattle budget is a story of paying the minimum possible for SAS operations, whether it be supplies, equipment or positions. A review of the SAS budget makes this story quite clear.



The City’s Resistance to Funding the Seattle Animal Shelter: A Deeper Dive


A Decrease in Support from the General Fund


The General Fund provides funding for the majority of operating resources for services typically associated with the City, such as police and fire or libraries and parks. SAS receives operational funds from the General Fund.


The 2023-2024 budget shows a decrease in the General Fund’s operational support of SAS as compared to the prior biennial budget. Prior to the 2023-2024 biennial budget, the SAS budget had been slowly increasing. While one can argue that the decrease is the result of COVID, it is important to note that this decrease occurs in the context of a significant influx of revenue from the Jumpstart Tax totalling more than $200 million per year. While the Jumpstart Tax revenues are primarily designated for affordable housing, they do relieve stress on the General Fund for other operational expenses.

Source: https://www.seattle.gov/documents/Departments/FinanceDepartment/23Adopted24Endorsed/FAS_2023Adopted_2024Endorsed.pdf



Public Donations Fund SAS Positions


The Seattle Animal Shelter Foundation (the Foundation) funded two new positions during COVID: the foster coordinator position and the behaviorist position. (The Foundation is a nonprofit that raises funds for the Seattle Animal Shelter. We reached out to SASF for an interview but they did not respond.)


The City has decided to keep these two positions in 2024 but not fund them. Instead, the positions will be funded by the “SAS Donation Fund.” (The Foster Coordinator position will be funded by the Foundation through mid-2024). Both of these positions are slated to “sunset” on December 31, 2025; this means that they will cease to exist if no action is taken to extend them.

Source: https://www.seattle.gov/documents/Departments/FinanceDepartment/23Adopted24Endorsed/FAS_2023Adopted_2024Endorsed.pdf


The Foster Care Coordinator position is critical. The Foster Care Coordinator works on training and onboarding new volunteers, liaising with care and veterinary staff, and overall communications regarding the program. The only reason SAS is able to accept as many animals as they do is because of their foster care volunteers. The only reason SAS has been able to avoid the “euthanize for space” quandary is because of their foster care volunteers who take in animals during shelter overload.


The Behaviorist position is also critical. Animals who come to the shelter may suffer from trauma and anxiety, even if they come from stable homes. Shelters are incredibly stressful for animals, particularly dogs, but all animals can suffer whether they be cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, or any of the other species accepted at SAS. Behaviorists work with animals to improve their mental wellbeing and behavior. This improves their chances at a successful adoption and promotes volunteer safety when handling the animal.


Neither of these positions should be funded on such a short-term basis. They need to be permanent positions with reliable funding, not donations.



SAS Relies on Donations for Supplies


As the graph below shows, most of the SAS budget is spent on labor costs. While non-labor costs have slightly increased, SAS must still rely on donations to supplement their supply needs. They have an Amazon wishlist and rely on funding from the Foundation. In October, SAS itself held a Halloween fund-raiser because they had run out of dog-treats.


We do not know if this is a failure to budget for animal enrichment, a failure to anticipate needs or simply the City’s refusal to fund. However, we ask whether such expenses by a government entity should be funded by donations.

Source: openbudget.seattle.gov



Source: Seattle Animal Shelter



Using the Parks Levy to Fund SAS Field Enforcement Officers


The original adoption of the City of Seattle’s 2023-2024 Biennial Budget included two new field enforcement officers at SAS. While this appears to be an investment in SAS, this is not quite the case. The two positions are being funded by the Parks Levy, not by the General Fund. This is a clear indication of how the City of Seattle views the work of SAS field enforcement officers.


Reviews of SAS complaint data shows that approximately one quarter of field enforcement officer work involves park patrols. According to the budget document itself, the City added the two positions to “meet increasing demand for security services and Park Code compliance support in Seattle Parks and Recreation (SPR) property.”


If approximately one quarter of all field enforcement officer work involves parks patrols, it makes sense that the levy would fund additional positions. Having said that, parks patrols lead to less time for field officers to conduct important animal welfare work which involves investigations of animal cruelty and neglect, education of pet owners, and follow up visits on general welfare complaints. Considering that there are only about 15 field officers for a city of approximately 750,000, this is indeed concerning.


It also raises a more fundamental question of what is the role of animal services in Seattle. Should it be so focused on parks? Should we consider a separation of duties?

Source: Seattle Animal Shelter



So Many Questions


Seattle Animal Watch believes there must be a fundamental reevaluation of animal services in Seattle, possibly even a renaming and reimagining of the Seattle Animal Shelter. Currently the City of Seattle’s message is clear as far as funding: they do not understand nor do they particularly care about animal services in the city. Suffice to say, they are barely throwing Seattle’s animals a bone.


bottom of page