Also, can't two different study methodologies (both reasonable in their own right) just produce different results? Below the author of the Berkley study critiques the UW methodology. Though I'm sure both could agree to disagree.
http://irle.berkeley.edu/files/2017/Reich-letter-to-Robert-Feldstein.pdf
I think I once remember reading a quote that was something like "You can get an economist to find any conclusion you like". I'm sure there are so many conservative groups out there that could sponsor a study that shows Seattle is doomed.
University academic studies produce conflicting results all the time. It's kind of hard to make clear cut determinations of which one is "right" and which is "wrong".
I don't know the details of either of these studies, but in general in economics a great deal of the equations depend on the assumptions behind the numbers. I've linked here before to the CBC Radio program Ideas' It's the Economists, Stupid which discussed this with left leaning Australian economist Richard Denniss and he said something like "Many times when an economist - especially one with an ideological agenda - tells you that his the numbers in the equations are 'best guesses' what they really mean is 'we made the numbers up.'"
Edit: CBC usually takes episodes of their radio programs down after awhile, so I assumed it was no longer available, but here it is:
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/it-s-the-economists-stupid-1.3219471It says the episode first aired in September of 2015 and I heard it sometimes in early 2016, so this was, at least, the third airing of this program.
