Five-second answer

Claim we investigated

Most of the money opposing I-645 comes from unions whose members' pay is set in contracts funded largely from the general fund this tax would feed; the state refused one of them 2027-29 raises, citing a shortfall, and proposed a wage freeze for another.

True. WEA, WFSE, SEIU 775 and SEIU 925 gave 58% of the $12.8 million; the Legislature largely funds their members' pay. Public Disclosure Commission filings, state bargaining law and OFM's contract costs, the tax law's deposit clause and the budget outlook, and reporting on 2027-29 pay talks all point the same way.

Quote or cite this fact-check

FactHub rates the claim “Most of the money opposing I-645 comes from unions whose members' pay is set in contracts funded largely from the general fund this tax would feed; the state refused one of them 2027-29 raises, citing a shortfall, and proposed a wage freeze for another” True (high confidence): WEA, WFSE, SEIU 775 and SEIU 925 gave 58% of the $12.8 million; the Legislature largely funds their members' pay. Reviewed October 21, 2026. https://facthub.org/n/article/i645-no-campaign-union-funding/5

One-minute summary

What the evidence establishes

  • Established. Unions supplied $11.4 million (89%) of the $12.8 million raised by No on 645 as of October 21, 2026; Washington public-sector unions alone gave $7.4 million (58%).
  • Established. The four largest Washington union donors (WEA, WFSE, SEIU 775 and SEIU 925) gave $7.37 million, 58%; their members' pay is set in contracts or rates the Legislature funds, largely from the general fund.
  • Established. ESSB 6346 deposits its revenue in the state general fund, and the 2027-29 budget outlook already counts on it; the first payments arrive in April 2029.
  • Established. In 2026 the state refused general raises for 2027-29 to WFSE, citing a shortfall, and proposed a wage freeze for SEIU 775 home-care workers.
  • Not shown. The records do not show bought votes: Democrats who voted against the tax got about as much union money as those who voted for it.
  • Context. The tax earmarks nothing for pay, and $3.8 million of the union money doesn't fit the state-budget frame: $2.7 million from national unions (NEA, SEIU's national fund, AFSCME, AFT) and $1.1 million from unions of mostly privately employed workers (SEIU 1199NW, WSNA, UFCW 3000, the Carpenters, the Teamsters and others).
Important context: Initiative 645 on the November 3, 2026 ballot would repeal ESSB 6346, Washington's 9.9% tax on household income over $1 million, which starts with 2028 income and would first be paid in April 2029. The No campaign calls I-645 a tax cut sought by a hedge-fund manager; this article looks at who is paying for the No campaign and what stake those donors have in the outcome. It reports financial interests from public records. It does not claim that any union, legislator or official acted improperly, and lawful advocacy is treated as advocacy.

The evidence

The conclusion rests on the combined record. Expand each item to see its role and limitations.

Independence note: This check uses 6 methods across 7 institutions and 1 country or international grouping.
Evidence map
Method Institution / country Year(s) What it shows Key limitation Primary links
Itemized campaign contributions reported to the state Public Disclosure Commission, grouped by donor type Washington Public Disclosure Commission United States 2026 As of October 21, 2026, No on 645 had raised $12,796,413. Unions and labor federations gave $11.43 million (89.3%). Washington public-sector unions gave $7.38 million (57.7%): WEA $3.02 million, WFSE $2.50 million, SEIU 775 $1.51 million and SEIU 925 $330,000, plus two smaller unions. National unions whose members are mostly public employees (NEA, AFSCME, AFT) gave $1.7 million; with them the share is 70.9%. Individuals gave 8.9%. By comparison, Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax raised $2.21 million and Let's Go Washington $4.00 million for three measures, none of it from unions. The No campaign's pamphlet statement was written by, among others, the presidents of WEA and the Washington State Labor Council, and asks voters to 'Join Washington nurses, teachers, and small business owners.' A snapshot: committees keep filing until after the election, and No on 645 took in $250,000 on October 21 alone. Donor types are our classification. WEA, WFSE and SEIU 775 also represent some workers who are not paid by the state, and national union money comes from members nationwide. FactHub FactHub Washington Secretary of State
State bargaining law, OFM contract-cost estimates and K-12 finance data Washington State Legislature, Washington Office of Financial Management United States 2024, 2025, 2026 Under RCW 41.80.010, the Governor negotiates state employee contracts, submits a request for funds, and 'The legislature shall approve or reject the submission of the request for funds as a whole.' Similar take-it-or-leave-it rules cover home-care and family child-care providers. OFM estimated the added 2025-27 cost of WFSE's general-government contract at $463.6 million, $304.0 million of it from the near general fund, and SEIU 925's family child-care contract at $183.5 million, all from the near general fund. Washington school districts got 73% of their 2022-23 revenue from the state, mostly from the general fund. WFSE itself says: 'The Legislature has control over our wages, benefits, and pensions.' OFM's figures are the added cost of new agreements, not total payroll, and NGF-O includes three accounts besides the general fund. WEA members are school-district employees, not state employees; districts bargain their contracts and get about 73% of revenue from the state. Home-care pay is Medicaid, roughly half federal. Washington State Legislature FactHub Washington Office of Financial Management Washington State Legislature (Senate Committee Services) Washington Federation of State Employees
Text of the enacted law and the Legislature's budget notes Washington State Legislature, Legislative Evaluation and Accountability Program Committee United States 2026, 2029 Section 202 of ESSB 6346 says taxes collected 'must be deposited in the state general fund' to pay for its tax relief and public investments in K-12 education, health care, human services and higher education; from July 2029, 5% goes to the Fair Start for Kids child-care account. The 2026 supplemental budget notes say the budget outlook assumes a net increase of $2.2 billion from revenue legislation in 2027-29, 'including from' ESSB 6346, and that its revenues 'do not begin until FY 2029.' The law's purposes (K-12, health care, human services, higher education) are stated intent; nothing is earmarked for pay. No revenue arrives until fiscal 2029, so no current budget is paid for by the tax. Washington State Legislature Washington Legislature (fiscal committees, via fiscal.wa.gov)
News reporting on 2027-29 contract talks Washington State Standard United States 2026 WFSE ratified a 2027-29 contract for about 42,000 state workers with no general pay raise after Gov. Bob Ferguson's negotiators 'cited a looming budget shortfall'; the union won a requirement to meet next August about a raise for the contract's second year. In August 2026 the state proposed a wage freeze for about 80,000 home-care workers; SEIU 775 first sought 6% raises in each year (about $367 million) and then 3% and 5% (about $224 million). WFSE's March statement on the tax said: 'the revenue from the Millionaires Tax won't arrive until 2029.' News reports, not the contracts themselves. SEIU 775's 2027-29 rate had not been published as of October 21, 2026. The Governor's offers reflect his administration's budget forecast, which the unions dispute. Washington State Standard Washington State Standard Washington Federation of State Employees
Legislative hearing record and the unions' own statements Washington State Senate, Washington Federation of State Employees United States 2026 At the Senate Ways and Means hearing on SB 6346, witnesses for WFSE, the American Federation of Teachers, WEA's higher-education association and the Washington State Labor Council testified in favor, and SEIU 775 signed in as a supporter. No union testified against. WFSE's 2026 session summary called the tax 'the most significant step in state history to balance Washington State's upside-down tax code.' Testimony and lobbying are lawful advocacy and were public. The hearing list shows who spoke, not what each said. Washington State Senate Committee Services Washington Federation of State Employees
PDC contributions matched to the roll call on ESSB 6346 Washington Public Disclosure Commission, Washington State Legislature United States 2020, 2022, 2024, 2026 All 78 yes votes on ESSB 6346 came from Democrats, who received a median of $26,375 from WEA, WFSE, SEIU, AFSCME, UFCW and AFT entities over the 2020-2026 election years. The 11 Democrats who voted no received a median of $24,500, and every one of them got some. The 56 Republicans, all no votes, received a median of $2,300. Descriptive comparison of a small group (11 Democrats voted no). It covers direct contributions only, not union money to caucus committees or independent spending. FactHub
1. PDC filings: unions gave 89% of No on 645's money Itemized campaign contributions reported to the state Public Disclosure Commission, grouped by donor type

As of October 21, 2026, No on 645 had raised $12,796,413. Unions and labor federations gave $11.43 million (89.3%). Washington public-sector unions gave $7.38 million (57.7%): WEA $3.02 million, WFSE $2.50 million, SEIU 775 $1.51 million and SEIU 925 $330,000, plus two smaller unions. National unions whose members are mostly public employees (NEA, AFSCME, AFT) gave $1.7 million; with them the share is 70.9%. Individuals gave 8.9%. By comparison, Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax raised $2.21 million and Let's Go Washington $4.00 million for three measures, none of it from unions. The No campaign's pamphlet statement was written by, among others, the presidents of WEA and the Washington State Labor Council, and asks voters to 'Join Washington nurses, teachers, and small business owners.'

Limit: A snapshot: committees keep filing until after the election, and No on 645 took in $250,000 on October 21 alone. Donor types are our classification. WEA, WFSE and SEIU 775 also represent some workers who are not paid by the state, and national union money comes from members nationwide.

Verify: Union shares of No on 645's money (saved analysis) Money raised by committee and donor group (saved analysis) 2026 Voters' Pamphlet: Initiative Measure IP26-645, arguments for and against

Unions supplied most of the money opposing I-6452026 contributions to No on 645, Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax, and Let's Go Washington (which backs I-645 and two other measures), by donor group, as reported to the Washington Public Disclosure Commission through October 21, 2026.{"width":960,"height":540,"plot":{"left":90,"top":90,"right":926,"bottom":482},"yDomain":[0,15000000],"series":[{"name":"WA public-sector unions","color":"#176b87"},{"name":"National public-employee unions","color":"#b6542c"},{"name":"Other unions and labor federations","color":"#684b9b"},{"name":"Individuals","color":"#2f7d4a"},{"name":"Businesses, groups and small donors","color":"#9a6b16"}],"points":[{"series":0,"x":229.33,"y":289.16,"xLabel":"No on 645","yLabel":"$7,378,894"},{"series":1,"x":229.33,"y":244.74,"xLabel":"No on 645","yLabel":"$1,700,000"},{"series":2,"x":229.33,"y":183.27,"xLabel":"No on 645","yLabel":"$2,352,103"},{"series":3,"x":229.33,"y":153.67,"xLabel":"No on 645","yLabel":"$1,132,658"},{"series":4,"x":229.33,"y":147.59,"xLabel":"No on 645","yLabel":"$232,758"},{"series":0,"x":508,"y":482,"xLabel":"Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax","yLabel":"$0"},{"series":1,"x":508,"y":482,"xLabel":"Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax","yLabel":"$0"},{"series":2,"x":508,"y":482,"xLabel":"Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax","yLabel":"$0"},{"series":3,"x":508,"y":449.01,"xLabel":"Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax","yLabel":"$1,262,515"},{"series":4,"x":508,"y":424.37,"xLabel":"Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax","yLabel":"$942,570"},{"series":0,"x":786.67,"y":482,"xLabel":"Let\u0027s Go Washington (3 measures)","yLabel":"$0"},{"series":1,"x":786.67,"y":482,"xLabel":"Let\u0027s Go Washington (3 measures)","yLabel":"$0"},{"series":2,"x":786.67,"y":482,"xLabel":"Let\u0027s Go Washington (3 measures)","yLabel":"$0"},{"series":3,"x":786.67,"y":396.04,"xLabel":"Let\u0027s Go Washington (3 measures)","yLabel":"$3,289,310"},{"series":4,"x":786.67,"y":377.36,"xLabel":"Let\u0027s Go Washington (3 measures)","yLabel":"$714,583"}]}Unions supplied most of the money opposing I-645$0$5,000,000$10,000,000$15,000,000No on 645Vote Yes Repeal the Income TaxLet's Go Washington (3 measures)CommitteeWA public-sector unionsNational public-employee unionsOther unions and labor federationsIndividualsBusinesses, groups and small donorsFactHub · Raised in 2026 (US dollars)
2026 contributions as of October 21, 2026. Unions gave 89% of No on 645's $12.8 million; Let's Go Washington's total also funds two other measures. View source chart
2. The Legislature funds these unions' pay, mostly from the general fund State bargaining law, OFM contract-cost estimates and K-12 finance data

Under RCW 41.80.010, the Governor negotiates state employee contracts, submits a request for funds, and 'The legislature shall approve or reject the submission of the request for funds as a whole.' Similar take-it-or-leave-it rules cover home-care and family child-care providers. OFM estimated the added 2025-27 cost of WFSE's general-government contract at $463.6 million, $304.0 million of it from the near general fund, and SEIU 925's family child-care contract at $183.5 million, all from the near general fund. Washington school districts got 73% of their 2022-23 revenue from the state, mostly from the general fund. WFSE itself says: 'The Legislature has control over our wages, benefits, and pensions.'

Limit: OFM's figures are the added cost of new agreements, not total payroll, and NGF-O includes three accounts besides the general fund. WEA members are school-district employees, not state employees; districts bargain their contracts and get about 73% of revenue from the state. Home-care pay is Medicaid, roughly half federal.

Verify: RCW 41.80.010: Negotiation and approval of collective bargaining agreements Near-general-fund cost of 2025-27 contracts for No on 645 donor unions (saved analysis) Costs of 2025-27 Collective Bargaining Agreements A Citizen's Guide to Washington State K-12 Finance (2024) 2026 WFSE Legislative Victories (March 22, 2026)

The Legislature has control over our wages, benefits, and pensions. They adopt a state budget that determines the funding level for the services we provide.

Washington Federation of State Employees, Union representing Washington state employees; second-largest donor to No on 645 WFSE website, "2026 WFSE Legislative Victories" · · Assertion

Context: Part of the union's summary of the 2026 session, after it says its members "proved, yet again, that no workforce has more at stake in the decisions made by elected officials than public employees." The first win it lists is passing SB 6346, the millionaires tax.

Source: Washington Federation of State Employees: 2026 WFSE Legislative Victories (March 22, 2026) · View in the dataset

3. The tax would feed the same general fund, and the outlook counts on it Text of the enacted law and the Legislature's budget notes

Section 202 of ESSB 6346 says taxes collected 'must be deposited in the state general fund' to pay for its tax relief and public investments in K-12 education, health care, human services and higher education; from July 2029, 5% goes to the Fair Start for Kids child-care account. The 2026 supplemental budget notes say the budget outlook assumes a net increase of $2.2 billion from revenue legislation in 2027-29, 'including from' ESSB 6346, and that its revenues 'do not begin until FY 2029.'

Limit: The law's purposes (K-12, health care, human services, higher education) are stated intent; nothing is earmarked for pay. No revenue arrives until fiscal 2029, so no current budget is paid for by the tax.

Verify: Chapter 238, Laws of 2026 (ESSB 6346), as enacted 2026 Supplemental Operating Budget, Chapter 268, Laws of 2026: Legislative Budget Notes

4. The state refused WFSE raises and proposed a wage freeze for SEIU 775 News reporting on 2027-29 contract talks

WFSE ratified a 2027-29 contract for about 42,000 state workers with no general pay raise after Gov. Bob Ferguson's negotiators 'cited a looming budget shortfall'; the union won a requirement to meet next August about a raise for the contract's second year. In August 2026 the state proposed a wage freeze for about 80,000 home-care workers; SEIU 775 first sought 6% raises in each year (about $367 million) and then 3% and 5% (about $224 million). WFSE's March statement on the tax said: 'the revenue from the Millionaires Tax won't arrive until 2029.'

Limit: News reports, not the contracts themselves. SEIU 775's 2027-29 rate had not been published as of October 21, 2026. The Governor's offers reflect his administration's budget forecast, which the unions dispute.

Verify: WA state worker union OKs new contract with no pay hike (Sept. 28, 2026) As WA caregiver union pushes for pay hike, state seeks wage freeze (Aug. 17, 2026) 2026 WFSE Legislative Victories (March 22, 2026)

But the revenue from the Millionaires Tax won’t arrive until 2029, and we’ll have to fend off court challenges and an initiative this November run by the super-rich who want to keep Washington state a tax haven.

Washington Federation of State Employees, Union representing Washington state employees; second-largest donor to No on 645 WFSE website, "2026 WFSE Legislative Victories" · · Prediction

Context: From the section "What's Next? Bargaining Our Union Contracts," which goes on: "Most of our members enter contract negotiations this spring." Earlier the page says that by passing the tax, "we took the most significant step in state history to balance Washington State’s upside-down tax code."

Source: Washington Federation of State Employees: 2026 WFSE Legislative Victories (March 22, 2026) · View in the dataset

5. The same unions testified for the tax Legislative hearing record and the unions' own statements

At the Senate Ways and Means hearing on SB 6346, witnesses for WFSE, the American Federation of Teachers, WEA's higher-education association and the Washington State Labor Council testified in favor, and SEIU 775 signed in as a supporter. No union testified against. WFSE's 2026 session summary called the tax 'the most significant step in state history to balance Washington State's upside-down tax code.'

Limit: Testimony and lobbying are lawful advocacy and were public. The hearing list shows who spoke, not what each said.

Verify: Senate Bill Report, SB 6346, Ways and Means (2026) 2026 WFSE Legislative Victories (March 22, 2026)

6. Union giving to legislators tracks party, not the vote PDC contributions matched to the roll call on ESSB 6346

All 78 yes votes on ESSB 6346 came from Democrats, who received a median of $26,375 from WEA, WFSE, SEIU, AFSCME, UFCW and AFT entities over the 2020-2026 election years. The 11 Democrats who voted no received a median of $24,500, and every one of them got some. The 56 Republicans, all no votes, received a median of $2,300.

Limit: Descriptive comparison of a small group (11 Democrats voted no). It covers direct contributions only, not union money to caucus committees or independent spending.

Verify: Union contributions to legislators by party and vote on ESSB 6346 (saved analysis)

Common questions

“Hedge fund mogul Brian Heywood has spent millions backing I-645 because he wants a tax cut for the top 1%, while sticking working and middle class families and small businesses with higher costs.”

Our rating: Misleading

The committee named for and sponsored by Heywood, Let's Go Washington, did spend about $2.48 million in 2026 on items it described as supporting I-645, mostly signature gathering. But Heywood's own 2026 contributions were $657,136, 16% of LGW's $4.0 million, and he gave nothing directly to Vote Yes. Most of the money came from other donors. His earlier loans and gifts to LGW funded 2024 and 2025 measures, before the tax existed. The sentence's second half, that he backs I-645 'because he wants a tax cut for the top 1%,' is a claim about motive that the records can't settle, and his income is not public. A fair version: Heywood's committee spent millions to put I-645 on the ballot, and he personally gave about $660,000 this year.

“The Yes side is funded by wealthy people who would save on the tax.”

Short answer: Likely, yes

That is the mirror image of the No side's interest, and it is fair to say. Vote Yes's largest donors include Steve Gordon and members of his family, Lawrence Hughes, Madrona Venture Group and Kemper Holdings. Their incomes are not public, so we can't confirm who would owe the tax, but several are plausibly among the roughly 30,000 taxpayers the state's fiscal impact statement for I-645 expects the tax to cover. A financial interest on either side is not wrongdoing.

“The unions are fighting for schools, health care and child care, not their own pay.”

Short answer: Both can be true

The unions' stated reason is services, and the law's stated purposes are K-12, health care, human services and higher education, including free school meals and child care that serve people who are not union members. That advocacy is real and lawful. It is also true that these unions' pay comes from the same general fund, and WFSE's own summary of the 2026 session puts the tax alongside the Legislature's 'control over our wages, benefits, and pensions.' We report the interest; we can't measure motive.

“The tax is needed to fund Washington's schools.”

Short answer: Not dedicated to schools

The law deposits the revenue in the general fund; K-12 is named only as an intended use. FactHub's earlier check found that Washington's inflation-adjusted spending per student rose 30% from 2010-11 to 2018-19 while eighth-grade NAEP math fell from 290 in 2013 to 274 in 2024. Washington still scores near or above the national average on most NAEP tests, scores fell nationwide after 2019, and research finds sustained spending usually helps modestly, so this pairing does not show that money doesn't matter.

Related claim: Washington's school spending outpaced inflation as test results slipped. — Inflation-adjusted spending per student rose 30% in eight years while math scores and Washington's education ranking fell; Washington still scores near or above the national average. This links to the version that was current when this fact check was written. Read the latest version.

“Unions bought the votes that passed the millionaires tax.”

Short answer: Not shown

The records don't support this. Union giving follows party: Democrats who voted against ESSB 6346 received about as much from these unions ($24,500 median) as Democrats who voted for it ($26,375). Direct gifts are capped by contribution limits, and all were disclosed. We do not use 'bought' or 'conflict of interest', which the records do not show.

“The millionaires tax would pay for union raises.”

Short answer: Not directly

Nothing in ESSB 6346 sets wages or sets aside money for contracts, and no revenue arrives until fiscal 2029. Every raise still needs a negotiated contract, OFM's certification and a legislative vote. What the tax would do is add to the general fund that pays these contracts, at a time when the state has refused WFSE a general raise, citing a budget shortfall, and proposed a wage freeze for SEIU 775.

“All of the union money comes from government workers.”

Short answer: No

National unions gave $2.7 million (NEA, AFSCME, AFT and the SEIU national fund), paid from members' dues nationwide. SEIU 1199NW and the Washington State Nurses Association mostly represent workers at private hospitals, and UFCW 3000, the Carpenters and the Teamsters represent private-sector workers. SEIU 775 home-care aides and SEIU 925 child-care providers are public employees only for bargaining; their pay comes from Medicaid (about half federal) and state child-care subsidies.

Conclusion

The finding rests on two documented facts. First, money: as of October 21, 2026, unions supplied $11.4 million (89%) of the $12.8 million raised by No on 645. Four of them, the Washington Education Association, the Washington Federation of State Employees, SEIU 775 and SEIU 925, gave $7.37 million, 58% of the total. Second, pay: WFSE members are state employees whose contracts the Governor's office negotiates and the Legislature must fund or reject as a whole; OFM put the added cost of WFSE's 2025-27 general-government contract at $463.6 million, $304.0 million of it from the near general fund. SEIU 925's family child-care contract cost $183.5 million, all from the near general fund. SEIU 775's home-care rates are set by a state rate board and then approved, or not, in the budget. WEA members are school employees whose contracts are bargained locally, but about 73% of school district revenue comes from the state. ESSB 6346 deposits its revenue in that same general fund, and the state's budget outlook already counts on it in 2027-29. In 2026, the Governor's negotiators refused WFSE a general raise for 2027-29, citing a looming budget shortfall, and the state proposed a wage freeze for SEIU 775's home-care workers; WFSE accepted a contract with no general raise and a promise to reopen wage talks in August 2027. Our analysis: that reopener covers the fiscal year that begins July 2028, the same fiscal year in which the first millionaires-tax payments arrive. For these unions, the tax is the largest new source of general-fund money the state is counting on in that period, so they have a concrete financial interest in I-645's defeat. That is a statement about interest, not motive. The same unions also argue, consistently and for decades, for more spending on schools, health care and child care that serves people who are not their members, and teachers and caregivers advocating for those services is ordinary, lawful advocacy. Several things the records do not show deserve equal weight. The tax earmarks nothing for pay, raises no money until fiscal 2029, and every raise still needs a bargained contract and a legislative vote. National unions ($2.7 million) and privately employed unions' members do not fit the frame. Union giving to legislators follows party: the 78 Democrats who voted for the tax received a median of $26,375 from these union families over four election cycles, but the 11 Democrats who voted against it received a similar $24,500, so the records do not support a claim that the vote was bought. The Yes side has interested funders too: its largest donors are wealthy individuals and investment firms whose owners plausibly would owe the tax, though their incomes are not public. We rate the claim True with high confidence because the money figures come straight from PDC filings and the funding mechanism from statute and OFM documents. The main sensitivity is the four-union share: at 58%, it would fall below half only if roughly $2 million more arrived from other sources before the election.

Hedge fund mogul Brian Heywood has spent millions backing I-645 because he wants a tax cut for the top 1%, while sticking working and middle class families and small businesses with higher costs.

No on 645 committee (statement authors include Janie White, WEA President, and April Sims, Washington State Labor Council President), Authors of the official statement against Initiative 645 2026 Washington voters' pamphlet · · Assertion

Context: First sentence under the heading "Vote No: Stop a Tax Break for the Wealthiest" in the argument against I-645. The statement ends by inviting voters to "Join Washington nurses, teachers, and small business owners."

Source: Washington Secretary of State: 2026 Voters' Pamphlet, Initiative Measure IP26-645 statements · View in the dataset

How we checked

  1. Defined the claim: whether most No on 645 money comes from unions whose members' pay is set in contracts the Legislature funds largely from the general fund, and what the state offered those unions for 2027-29.
  2. Downloaded every 2026 contribution to No on 645, Vote Yes Repeal the Income Tax and Let's Go Washington from the PDC's open data on October 21, 2026, and classified donors by type; the script and tables are in the FactHub dataset.
  3. Checked how each union's members are paid against bargaining statutes, OFM's 2025-27 contract costs and the Legislature's K-12 finance guide, and how the tax's revenue is deposited against the enacted law and the 2026 budget notes.
  4. Matched union contributions to every legislator who voted on ESSB 6346, and read reporting on 2027-29 pay talks and the Senate hearing record.
  5. Recorded the limits of each source and the facts that cut against the finding, including the Yes side's funders and the absence of an earmark.

Editorial note: Scope: this article rates who funds the No on 645 campaign and how their members are paid. It does not rate the merits of the tax, and it reports motives only as labeled analysis. Campaign totals are a snapshot as of October 21, 2026 and will change before November 3. 'Conflict of interest' is a legal and ethics term that applies mainly to officials; nothing here shows one, and we do not use it. The No pamphlet's sentence about Brian Heywood is rated separately, as an objection below. The SEIU 775 home-care rate for 2027-29 had not been published as of this review.

Expert-review status

No external specialist review has been recorded.

Funding and conflicts

Funding: No external funding for this piece.

Ownership: Published by the FactHub Research Team.

Conflicts: None known.

Sources

Sources are labeled by kind, with what this fact check takes from each, so readers can check the evidence independently.

  1. FactHub record FactHub. Union shares of No on 645's money (saved analysis)

    PDC contributions to No on 645 grouped by donor type, as of October 21, 2026.

    • Unions gave 89.3% of No on 645's $12.80 million; WA public-sector unions 57.7%; WEA, WFSE, SEIU 775 and SEIU 925 together 57.6%; national public-employee unions bring the public-sector share to 70.9%.

  2. FactHub record FactHub. Money raised by committee and donor group (saved analysis)

    2026 contributions to the No and Yes committees by donor group.

    • Qualifies: Vote Yes raised $2.21 million and Let's Go Washington $4.00 million (three measures), all from individuals, businesses and groups, none from unions.

  3. FactHub record FactHub. Union contributions to legislators by party and vote on ESSB 6346 (saved analysis)

    PDC contributions from the donor unions' families to each legislator who voted on final passage.

    • Qualifies: Democrats voting yes received a median $26,375 from these unions over 2020-2026; Democrats voting no a median $24,500; Republicans a median $2,300.

  4. FactHub record FactHub. Let's Go Washington's I-645 spending and Brian Heywood's own 2026 money (saved analysis)

    LGW's 2026 expenditures by measure and Heywood's 2026 contributions.

    • Qualifies: LGW spent about $2.48 million in 2026 on items described as supporting I-645; Heywood personally gave LGW $657,136 in 2026 (16% of its receipts) and nothing directly to Vote Yes.

  5. FactHub record FactHub. Near-general-fund cost of 2025-27 contracts for No on 645 donor unions (saved analysis)

    OFM's cost estimates for four 2025-27 union agreements, by fund.

    • WFSE general government: $304.0 million NGF-O of $463.6 million; SEIU 925 family child care: $183.5 million, all NGF-O.

  6. Party to the dispute Washington Secretary of State. 2026 Voters' Pamphlet: Initiative Measure IP26-645, arguments for and against

    The official campaign statements printed in the state voters' pamphlet.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Each statement is written by the campaign's own committee and printed unedited. The No statement's listed authors include the presidents of WEA and the Washington State Labor Council.

    • Qualifies: The No statement says Heywood has spent millions backing I-645.

      What the source says
      Hedge fund mogul Brian Heywood has spent millions backing I-645 because he wants a tax cut for the top 1%
      Argument against, 'Vote No: Stop a Tax Break for the Wealthiest'

    • The No statement was written by, among others, WEA's president and the State Labor Council's president, and presents its coalition as nurses, teachers and small business owners.

      What the source says
      Join Washington nurses, teachers, and small business owners. Vote No on I-645.
      Argument against, final paragraph; 'Written by' list
  7. Government Washington State Legislature. RCW 41.80.010: Negotiation and approval of collective bargaining agreements

    State law governing bargaining with state employees and how the Legislature funds the agreements.

    Reliability: Official code of Washington state law.

    • The Governor requests funds for each state employee contract, and the Legislature must approve or reject the request as a whole.

      What the source says
      The legislature shall approve or reject the submission of the request for funds as a whole.
      Subsection (3)
  8. Government Washington Office of Financial Management. Costs of 2025-27 Collective Bargaining Agreements

    OFM's estimate of the added cost of each 2025-27 union agreement, by fund.

    Reliability: OFM negotiates these contracts for the Governor and prepares the cost estimates submitted to the Legislature.

    • WFSE's 2025-27 general-government contract costs $304.0 million from the near general fund and $159.6 million from other funds, $463.6 million in total.

      What the source says
      Total $304,038,000 $159,583,000 $463,621,000
      Section 1, WA Federation of State Employees (WFSE) - General Government, Total row
  9. Government Washington State Legislature (Senate Committee Services). A Citizen's Guide to Washington State K-12 Finance (2024)

    Legislative staff guide to how Washington schools are funded.

    Reliability: Nonpartisan legislative staff summary, using OSPI's 2022-23 district revenue data.

    • About 73% of Washington school district revenue in 2022-23 came from the state, mostly from the general fund and the Education Legacy Trust Account.

      What the source says
      State -- Approximately 73 percent of revenue is from state sources.
      Where do school districts get their money? (revenue sources, 2022-23)
  10. Party to the dispute Washington Federation of State Employees. 2026 WFSE Legislative Victories (March 22, 2026)

    The state employees' union's summary of the 2026 legislative session.

    Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Published by WFSE, the second-largest donor to No on 645, describing its own goals.

    • WFSE says the Legislature controls its members' pay and benefits.

      What the source says
      The Legislature has control over our wages, benefits, and pensions.
      2026 Legislative Victories section

    • WFSE calls passing the millionaires tax its biggest win of the session.

      What the source says
      By passing the Millionaires Tax, we took the most significant step in state history to balance Washington State’s upside-down tax code.
      Introduction

    • WFSE notes the tax's revenue arrives in 2029 and that its members were entering contract talks.

      What the source says
      But the revenue from the Millionaires Tax won’t arrive until 2029
      What's Next? Bargaining Our Union Contracts
  11. Government Washington State Legislature. Chapter 238, Laws of 2026 (ESSB 6346), as enacted

    The enacted text of the millionaires tax.

    Reliability: Official session law text.

    • The tax's revenue goes into the state general fund, for its tax relief and for public investments in K-12, health care, human services and higher education; nothing is earmarked for pay.

      What the source says
      Taxes collected under this chapter must be deposited in the state general fund to fund the sales and use tax relief
      Section 202(1)
  12. Government Washington Legislature (fiscal committees, via fiscal.wa.gov). 2026 Supplemental Operating Budget, Chapter 268, Laws of 2026: Legislative Budget Notes

    Legislative staff's summary of the enacted 2026 supplemental budget and the four-year outlook.

    Reliability: Prepared by nonpartisan and caucus fiscal staff of the Legislature; the outlook is adopted by the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council.

    • The budget outlook assumes about $2.2 billion of net new 2027-29 revenue from tax legislation, including ESSB 6346.

      What the source says
      a net increase of $2.2 billion NGF-O from revenue legislation in the 2027-29 biennium, including from Chapter 238, Laws of 2026 (ESSB 6346).
      Revenue Legislation Impacting the Balance Sheet and Outlook, p. O-3

    • Qualifies: The tax raises no money before fiscal 2029, so no current budget is paid for by it.

      What the source says
      New revenues from Chapter 238, Laws of 2026 (ESSB 6346) do not begin until FY 2029
      Balance sheet note 3, p. O-6
  13. News report Washington State Standard. WA state worker union OKs new contract with no pay hike (Sept. 28, 2026)

    Report on WFSE's ratification of its 2027-29 general-government contract.

    Reliability: Nonprofit statehouse news outlet (States Newsroom).

    • WFSE ratified a 2027-29 contract with no general raise after the Governor's negotiators cited a budget shortfall.

      What the source says
      closing the book on a frustrating monthslong negotiation with representatives of Gov. Bob Ferguson who cited a looming budget shortfall for their steadfast refusal to offer a general wage hike.
      Paragraph 2

    • The contract covers about 42,000 workers and requires talks next August on a raise for its second year.

      What the source says
      Union negotiators did secure language requiring the two sides to meet next August to discuss a potential pay raise for the second year of the contract.
      Paragraph 3
  14. News report Washington State Standard. As WA caregiver union pushes for pay hike, state seeks wage freeze (Aug. 17, 2026)

    Report on 2027-29 home-care rate talks between SEIU 775 and the Governor's office.

    Reliability: Nonprofit statehouse news outlet (States Newsroom). OFM declined to comment on the talks.

    • The state proposed a wage freeze for about 80,000 home-care workers in 2027-29 talks.

      What the source says
      A powerful labor union and the governor’s office are at odds in contract negotiations for thousands of Washington caregivers, with the state proposing a wage freeze and the workers pressing for higher pay.
      Paragraph 1

    • SEIU 775 first asked for 6% a year (about $367 million) and then 3% and 5%.

      What the source says
      This position would’ve reportedly cost the state around $367 million. Since the state balked, the union dropped its request to a 3% increase next year and 5% the year after.
      Paragraph 2
  15. Government Washington State Senate Committee Services. Senate Bill Report, SB 6346, Ways and Means (2026)

    Official bill report listing who testified at the committee hearing.

    Reliability: Nonpartisan Senate staff report; lists persons testifying as recorded at the hearing.

    • WFSE, AFT, WEA's higher-education association and the State Labor Council testified in favor of SB 6346.

      What the source says
      Nicole Gomez, AFSCME Council 28/Washington Federation of State Employees (WFSE)
      Persons Testifying, PRO

    • SEIU 775 signed in to support the bill without testifying.

      What the source says
      Demas Nesterenko, SEIU775
      Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying, PRO
  16. Government Washington Office of Financial Management. Fiscal Impact Statement for Initiative 645 (2026)

    OFM's official estimate of I-645's fiscal effects, published by the Secretary of State.

    Reliability: Prepared by OFM with the Department of Revenue under the state's initiative fiscal-impact process; it uses a static revenue estimate.

    • Qualifies: OFM estimates the tax would cover about 30,000 taxpayers, whose tax administration would end if I-645 passes.

      What the source says
      Savings are assumed for tax administration duties for approximately 30,000 taxpayers that will no longer be required.
      Department of Revenue, p. 4
  17. FactHub dataset Washington I-645 campaign money by side and donor type (2026)

    • Tables: donors, by-donor-type

      Saved analysis no-on-645-labor-shares

    • Tables: legislators

      Saved analysis legislator-union-giving-by-vote

    • Tables: heywood-lgw

      Saved analysis heywood-own-money-vs-lgw-i645

    • Tables: contract-costs

      Saved analysis contract-costs-ngf-o

    • The Legislature has control over our wages, benefits, and pensions. They adopt a state budget that determines the funding level for the services we provide.
      Washington Federation of State Employees, Union representing Washington state employees; second-largest donor to No on 645, · In the dataset
    • But the revenue from the Millionaires Tax won’t arrive until 2029, and we’ll have to fend off court challenges and an initiative this November run by the super-rich who want to keep Washington state a tax haven.
      Washington Federation of State Employees, Union representing Washington state employees; second-largest donor to No on 645, · In the dataset
    • Hedge fund mogul Brian Heywood has spent millions backing I-645 because he wants a tax cut for the top 1%, while sticking working and middle class families and small businesses with higher costs.
      No on 645 committee (statement authors include Janie White, WEA President, and April Sims, Washington State Labor Council President), Authors of the official statement against Initiative 645, · In the dataset
  18. FactHub dataset Initiative 645: the campaigns' claims in their own words
    • Hedge fund mogul Brian Heywood has spent millions backing I-645 because he wants a tax cut for the top 1%, while sticking working and middle class families and small businesses with higher costs.
      Committee for the argument against Initiative 645 (WEA President Janie White and five co-authors), Authors of the official voters' pamphlet argument against I-645, · In the dataset
  19. FactHub chart i645-campaign-money-by-donor-type

Update history

  1. Version 2: new main image (original illustration); disclosure now reads 'Published by the FactHub Research Team.' Campaign figures unchanged: PDC filings as of October 21, 2026.
  2. Version 3: the No pamphlet's sentence about Brian Heywood is now a rated objection (Misleading) citing the quote in FactHub's I-645 campaign statements dataset, and the response addresses the sentence's claim about motive. Removed the deprecated social title. Campaign figures unchanged: PDC filings as of October 21, 2026.
  3. Version 4: broke down the $3.8 million in union money that doesn't fit the state-budget frame, and sourced the number of taxpayers to OFM's fiscal impact statement (about 30,000). Campaign figures unchanged: PDC filings as of October 21, 2026.
  4. Version 5: addressed First Look feedback 2516095946047642299-6238dfb9aee9dc5a47975559a7000a5f (title-matches-evidence). The claim, description, an evidence title, the conclusion, the method and one objection no longer say the state told two unions it can't afford raises; they now say the state refused WFSE a 2027-29 raise, citing a shortfall, and proposed a wage freeze for SEIU 775. Figures and rating unchanged.
  5. First draft.

Cited by

Version details

The exact citing versions, and the version of this article each cites.

  • Article wa-i638-campaign-funding — version 5 (published) cites version 5
  • Briefing wa-i-645 — version 6 (published) cites version 5
  • Briefing wa-i-645 — version 4 (published) cites version 4

For search, research, and AI systems

Machine-readable fact-check

This page includes standardized ClaimReview metadata describing the exact claim, FactHub's finding, publisher, and review dates. You can inspect the record below and confirm that it matches the article you just read.

View ClaimReview JSON 
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ClaimReview","url":"https://facthub.org/n/article/i645-no-campaign-union-funding/5","datePublished":"2026-10-21","dateModified":"2026-10-21","author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"FactHub","url":"https://facthub.org/"},"claimReviewed":"Most of the money opposing I-645 comes from unions whose members\u0027 pay is set in contracts funded largely from the general fund this tax would feed; the state refused one of them 2027-29 raises, citing a shortfall, and proposed a wage freeze for another.","reviewRating":{"@type":"Rating","alternateName":"True"},"image":"https://facthub.org/node-assets-v2/article/i645-no-campaign-union-funding/5/money-illustration/social-1200x630.jpg"}

This metadata helps machines discover the fact-check. It does not prove the conclusion or guarantee special treatment by a search engine.

Challenge this fact-check

Every source above is linked so you can check it yourself. Identify the specific conclusion you dispute and provide verifiable evidence that could change it. Credible challenges deserve review and a visible response.

Submit evidence Send general feedback instead

Technical details: node handle article:i645-no-campaign-union-funding:5