Voters in the City of Des Moines are rejecting Proposition No. 1 in Tuesday’s (Aug. 6, 2024) Primary Election.

The ballot measure – which aimed to implement changes affecting local policies by raising property taxes – is being turned down by a narrow margin of 6.48 percent in the first round of returns.

Proposition No. 1: 

  • Rejected 2,211 votes (53.24%)
  • Approved 1,942 votes (46.76%)

The proposition’s defeat indicates that a majority of Des Moines residents did not support the proposed changes, which would increase property taxes to support public safety services, including police staffing.

According to Proposition No. 1’s ballot measure listing on the King County Elections website:

“The City of Des Moines proposes a levy lid lift to increase its maximum total regular levy rate in 2025 to maintain and increase existing public safety service levels, retain police officer positions, and to pay for other increased costs related to public safety and police staffing. More specifically, the City Council anticipates that in 2025, the increase would fund retaining four existing police officer positions, a mental health crisis response specialist position, a crime analyst position; would fund adding four additional police officer positions and a code enforcement officer position; and would fund additional public safety expenses.

“If approved by voters, this proposition would authorize the City to levy property taxes in 2025 at a maximum rate of $1.40 per $1,000 of assessed value, an increase of approximately $0.50 per $1,000 over the 2024 levy rate. This would be an increase of approximately $20 per month (about $250 per year) on a $500,000 home. 

“The levy lid lift would reset the levy limit under the 101% lid and increases in future years would be based on the maximum levy amount for 2025. Future levies would be limited by applicable statutory limits, including the 101% levy lid.”

Proposition No. 1 had garnered significant attention in the lead-up to the election, with supporters arguing that it would bring necessary improvements to the city, and opponents raising concerns about its potential impacts. The rejection of the proposition reflects the community’s decision to maintain the status quo.

City officials will now need to consider alternative approaches to address the issues that Proposition No. 1 sought to resolve. The close vote highlights the divided opinion among residents and may prompt further discussions and revisions in future proposals.