Which Proposition 1 is this?

Proposition 1 on the 2025 ballot in King County, Washington. Several different measures can carry the same number on one county ballot, so the year, the county and the body asking are all needed to identify one.

Where do these results come from?

The Washington Secretary of State’s certified election results. We publish the certified canvass, not election-night returns.

Why is there no argument for or against here?

Washington publishes committee-written for and against statements for most local measures. We have not ingested them. Showing one side without the other would be worse than showing neither.

Ballot measure · Washington State

City of Lake Forest Park Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025

City of Lake Forest Park Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025 was on the 2025 ballot in King County, Washington. It passed with 49.8% voting yes, on 5,699 votes cast.

2025
King County
City Measure
Proposition 1
Passed

Source WA Secretary of State official election results · as of 2026-08-07

The result

49.8%

voted yes

Passed

certified outcome

5,699

votes cast on this measure

Yes 49.8% · No 50.2%

Source WA Secretary of State certified election results · as of 2026-08-07

What it costs you

We cannot calculate what this measure costs a household. That figure needs the levy rate per thousand dollars of assessed value, and the result export does not carry it — it records how people voted, not what they were voting on. We will not estimate it: a wrong number on a household tax bill is worse than no number. The rate is published in the county assessor’s levy certification and in the voters’ pamphlet for the election.

Last checked 2026-08-07

The case for and against

Printed in the county voters’ pamphlet and mailed to every voter in the jurisdiction. Written by committees the jurisdiction appointed, and reproduced here exactly as they wrote them.

Statement in favor

Written by Peter Eglick, Fiaz Mir, David Hammond www.yesonlfpprop1.com

Vote yes for Prop 1! LFP is not immune from inflation. We face a growing budget gap despite cuts to staffing, operations, and services. Over the last two years, City expenses for core public safety and other services have increased over $700,000. The law limits LFP to a 1% property tax revenue increase per year, which in 2025 is only $34,500 in additional revenue. Yes on Prop 1 will help close the gap to fund our vital safety services. More than 90% of property taxes goes to the State, County, and School District. Today, LFP receives roughly 8 cents for every property tax dollar. Prop 1 would make it about 10 cents, costing the average LFP homeowner about $18/month. The funds would directly support safety needs: police, 911, municipal court, jail, emergency management, and more. This levy lid lift expires after 6 years. Qualifying seniors and veterans are exempt. The alternative is drastic reductions in services that keep our community safe and resilient. Other cities that delayed closing budget gaps faced deeper reductions later. Now, it’s time to act – voting yes invests in our community, maintaining an effective level of vital police and public safety services. Rebuttal of statement in opposition Vote Yes. Funds from the Proposition will be legally dedicated to public safety no matter the state of general revenue. The anti-Prop 1 view is make- believe: no inflation, no unexpected costs through 2028. City reserves will soon dry up, without new revenue. Prop 1 naysayers say let’s take the risk. In contrast, Prop 1 maintains healthy reserves ensuring stable essential services come what may. Vote Yes to support LFP police and public safety services!

Statement in opposition

Written by Jack Tonkin, Hannah Blackbourn, Beth Chapple

Vote No! The Police and Public Safety are fully funded through 2028 by the General Fund. The levy funds would go into the General Fund, allowing the transfer of Police and Public Safety funds outside of the general fund. This increases the General Fund by the amount of the levy, available for any type of future city spending. Lake Forest Park has more than enough money to fund the services that are important to residents. A concerned Council voted 3-4 against this levy. Do not be misled. A no vote will not cut public safety services or other citizen benefits. The city may need a levy lift in the future, but not at this time. Even with increased spending, the general fund balance is projected to be $8.9 million at the end of 2026—more than four times the required $2.1 million reserve. City projections show reserves growing from $8.9 million to nearly $10 million with this tax increase. Voters have wisely rejected levies before. Before raising taxes, the City should use existing funds responsibly, reduce unnecessary spending, consider less regressive revenue sources, and invite community input through a Citizen Fiscal Sustainability Committee. Do not be misled. Vote No! Rebuttal of statement in favor While all agree that public safety costs have increased, the backers of this levy-lid lift are not recognizing that the city has nearly $7 million in unallocated funds—enough to support essential services without raising taxes. Prop 1 will cost the average homeowner an additional $1,300 in six years beyond the other taxes due. Do you want your hard-earned dollars to create a super- reserve for the city? Let’s manage existing funds responsibly. Vote No.

Neither statement is fact-checked, by the county or by us. King County Elections prints these as the committees submit them and does not correct punctuation, grammar, or accuracy. They are arguments, not findings. We reproduce them because they are what voters were sent, and we take no position on the claims in either one.

Last checked 2026-08-07

Source King County voters’ pamphlet · as of 2026-08-07 · page 87 of the pamphlet

The pamphlet as published · archived copy, which is what we read

Who is funding each side

Political committees registered with the Public Disclosure Commission that named this proposition number when they formed.

No committee named this proposition number. We searched PDC committee filings for proposition 1 in 2025 and found none. That can mean no committee formed, or that one formed without naming the number — the filings do not distinguish the two.

Last checked 2026-08-07

What this county has asked before

Other city measures put to King County voters. Matched on county and measure kind — the results export carries no jurisdiction key, so these are comparable measures rather than provably the same body asking again.

Comparable earlier measures
Year	Measure	Yes	Result
2025	City of Bothell Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025	69.1%	passed
2025	City of Burien Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025	47.2%	passed
2025	City of Mercer Island Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025	54.6%	passed
2025	City of Seattle Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025	80%	passed
2025	City of Seattle Proposition No. 2 — King County 2025	71%	passed
2024	City of Des Moines Proposition No. 1 — King County 2024	40.2%	passed
2024	City of Seattle Proposition No. 1 — King County 2024	66.5%	passed
2023	City of Maple Valley Proposition No. 1 — King County 2023	65.7%	passed

Source WA Secretary of State certified election results · as of 2026-08-07 · 8 of 8 passed

What this page will not compute

Each of these is a number a reader might reasonably expect. None of them follow from the records we hold, so we do not publish them.

What it costs a household: Requires the levy rate per thousand of assessed value, which the results export does not carry. Stated above rather than estimated.
Whether the money decided it: We can show what each side raised and what the vote was. Connecting the two would be an inference about cause from two numbers, and campaign spending is not the only thing that moves a local levy.
Whether this is the same body asking again: Earlier measures are matched on county and kind, not on jurisdiction — the export has no jurisdiction key. A school district and its neighbour both appear as school measures in the same county.
What the measure would have done: The ballot title and the full text are not loaded. We hold the result, not the proposal.

Common questions

Did City of Lake Forest Park Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025 pass?: Yes, it passed. 49.8% voted yes on 5,699 votes cast.
Which Proposition 1 is this?: Proposition 1 on the 2025 ballot in King County, Washington. Several different measures can carry the same number on one county ballot, so the year, the county and the body asking are all needed to identify one.
Where do these results come from?: The Washington Secretary of State’s certified election results. We publish the certified canvass, not election-night returns.
Why is there no argument for or against here?: Washington publishes committee-written for and against statements for most local measures. We have not ingested them. Showing one side without the other would be worse than showing neither.

Cite this page

This is public-records reporting. Use it, and say where it came from.

“City of Lake Forest Park Proposition No. 1 — King County 2025,” WashingtonIndependents.org, data as of 2026-08-07, accessed 2026-08-09. https://washingtonindependents.org/measure/2025-king-prop-1-city-of-lake-forest-park-proposition-no-1/

Where this page comes from

Every figure above is read from a primary source and rebuilt on a schedule. Nothing here is modelled or inferred; where a source is silent the page says so rather than filling the gap.

WA Secretary of State certified election results: The vote totals, the yes share and the outcome. Certified canvass, not election-night returns.
Public Disclosure Commission committee registrations: Committees formed for or against the measure, matched by the proposition number they registered. Committees that did not name a number are not linked here.
Not loaded: Ballot title and full text, the voters’ pamphlet for and against statements, and the levy rate. Each is named where the page would otherwise use it.