The Budget and Fiscal Management Committee of the Metropolitan King County Council on May 28 advanced two related measures to the full council: a proposed property‑tax levy to fund the Medic 1 emergency medical services system and an ordinance accepting the Medic 1 strategic plan.

Proposed ordinance 2025‑0119 would place a six‑year property‑tax levy on the Nov. 4 ballot authorizing up to 25 cents per $1,000 of assessed value; Gene Paul, council staff, told the committee the levy “would generate approximately $1,400,000,000 during the levy period to support the Medic 1 EMS system.” Proposed ordinance 2025‑0118 would accept and approve the Medic 1 strategic plan, the primary policy and financial document intended to guide the system for the next levy period. Committee members enacted technical amendments to both ordinances before voting to advance them.

Why it matters: The levy is the primary local revenue vehicle to fund Medic 1 operations and capital needs. Council staff reported that eight of the 11 cities in the system with populations over 50,000 have approved resolutions endorsing placing the levy on the ballot; staff corrected an earlier report that had said nine of 11. Burien, Renton and Seattle had not completed action at the time of the briefing; Burien was expected to act the following Monday. Staff said meeting a 75% threshold of participating cities is required by state law for a portion of the ballot placement process.

Committee action and next steps: The committee adopted a striking amendment (S.1) to the levy ordinance to make technical corrections (for example, terminology updates such as replacing “citizen” with “resident”) and a line amendment to the strategic plan ordinance to correct punctuation and replace a repeated page in the attachment. Both amendments carried unanimously. The roll call on the levy ordinance as amended was recorded as 6 ayes, 0 noes, with Councilmember Perry excused; the committee advanced the measures for the required dual referral to the Regional Water Quality Committee (RPC) and onward to the full council and calendar deadlines noted in staff materials (staff said the committee could move for final action at RPC on June 11).

Discussion points and acknowledgments: Multiple councilmembers thanked staff and executive personnel for preparing the plan and package. Councilmember Brown (committee member) and Vice Chair Barone both expressed appreciation for staff work; Brown praised the “very good package” and Barone said the work is a “fitting tribute” to Medic 1’s founder. Executive staff in the room included Michelle Plourd from the EMS division and Dwight Dively, director of PSB, who were available to answer questions.

What the committee did not decide: The committee did not adopt a final levy rate beyond the ordinance language authorizing up to 25¢ per $1,000; nor did it act to place the measure on the ballot without the procedural referrals required by code. Staff noted that city endorsements and procedural steps must be completed before the full‑council vote; the committee’s vote advances the ordinance along the required path but is not final adoption of the levy itself.

What to expect next: Staff told the committee the levy ordinance will proceed through the dual referral process (RPC and then full council) and that the legislative calendar and approval deadlines are in the committee packet. The full council will consider final adoption consistent with the referral schedule and statutory deadlines for placing measures on the November ballot.