Bill would let counties levy a dedicated 5¢ per $1,000 property tax for public health clinics

House Bill 18‑70 would allow counties to levy a separate regular property tax of up to five cents per $1,000 of assessed value to fund public health clinics, according to a staff briefing and testimony at the House Finance Committee on Feb. 24.

Committee staff explained the levy would be a separate regular levy that is exempt from the 1% growth limit in its first year and exempt from the $5.90 aggregate levy rate limit (but still subject to the state constitutional $10 per $1,000 limit and proration rules). Staff offered a preliminary estimate that if every county imposed the full 5¢ rate, the new levy could raise about $157 million in the first biennium, although staff and witnesses noted it is unlikely every county would adopt the full levy.

Representative Janice Zahn, prime sponsor, described the measure as a tool counties could use to support clinics that serve vulnerable populations and noted her experience on the King County Board of Health. King County officials, UW Medicine and public‑health stakeholders testified in support, stressing that clinics provide primary care, WIC nutrition services, infectious‑disease testing, opioid-use disorder treatment and other services that reduce hospitalizations and emergency-room use.

Witnesses said much of clinic funding already comes from Medicaid and grants but cited local budget pressures. King County told the committee a substantial portion of its clinic funding is not covered by existing revenue streams and that the county general fund faces multi‑million dollar deficits, putting clinics at risk of reductions or closure without new options.

Supporters included local public-health directors, unions representing clinic staff and disease-intervention specialists who described preventing congenital syphilis and other infectious diseases through outreach and treatment as a cost‑effective public health investment.

Ending: Committee staff and witnesses said the levy would give counties an optional tool to sustain public-health clinic services but cautioned that adoption will vary by county and the fiscal impact depends on take‑up; staff expected a formal fiscal note to be prepared.