Performance Measures - 2006 Archive
Related Information
Rates and Fees
About this measure: DNRP seeks for minimize rates and fees while maximizing value of service. Major programs track rates and fee against the level of inflation and benchmark against similar service providers. For inflation, we look at changes in the consumer price index over a 10 year time horizon.
Because benchmarking against similar service providers and jurisdictions is time intensive, this is done only every other year for most of our programs. Comparative programs are selected for proximity, range of services, and relative cost of doing business.
Wastewater Treatment Division (WTD)
Monthly residential wastewater service fee increases vs. Consumer Price Index increases
2006 Wastewater Rate: $25.60
2006 target: Rate if it had risen by the rate of inflation from the 1996 rate: $25.18
Difference: 1.66 percent
Influencing factors: WTD is in a period of major construction activity as it invests in future service, including construction of the Brightwater treatment plant and conveyance system.
Strategy going forward: WTD has been implementing a productivity initiative to reduce operating costs and reduce future rate pressure. The rate was held at $25.60 for 2005 and 2006. The rate for 2007 and 2008 will be $27.95.
Rate vs. comparable agencies
Rate comparisons provide qualitative information. There are no targets established for this measure. The wastewater service rate in 2005 was greater than average fees from other jurisdictions.
There are significant differences among these utilities in the extent and level of services they provide. For example, some may not provide full secondary treatment or recycle biosolids as extensively as King County does. Additionally, the division is in a period of major construction activity as it invests in future service, including construction of the Brightwater treatment plant and its conveyance system.
WTD has implemented a productivity initiative program aimed at reducing operating costs and increasing savings to ratepayers. The productivity initiative allows employee flexibility to apply business practices used in private industry to cut operating costs, increase productivity, and continue a high level of service and environmental protection for county residents. A joint effort supported by labor, management and employees, the program has saved ratepayers $33 million in five years.
Solid Waste Division (SWD)
Tip fee compared to rate of inflation
2006 results: The SWD tip fee in 2006 was lower than if it had risen at the rate of inflation over the past 10 years.
Influencing factors: Many factors drive the level of rates and fees, including changes in the economy, demand for services, regulatory requirements and changes to the rate base.
Strategy going forward: Solid waste tip fees will not be raised in 2007.
Rate vs. comparable agencies
2006 results: As of March 2007, the King County solid waste tip fee of $82.50 per ton was below the mean ($96.95) and the median ($98.36) of the tip fees of seven comparable jurisdictions, including King County.
Influencing factors: SWD rates did not change, while rates for other jurisdictions either remained steady or increased slightly.
Strategy going forward: Solid waste tip fees will not be raised in 2007.
Water and Land Resources Division (WLRD)
Comparison of surface water management fees with inflation
2006 Results: King County's Surface Water Management Fee is not linked to inflation. Since 2002 inflation, based on CPI has increased by an estimated 9%. King County Office of Management and Budget projections suggest that inflation will rise by another 7% through 2009. The King County Council approved an increase to the surface water management fee in 2007 to meet rising costs from inflation and other regulatory demands.
Influencing factors: Many factors drive the level of rates and fees, including storm events that induce flooding and other natural disasters, changes in the economy, additional development, demands for natural resource management services, increased regulatory requirements and changes to the rate base.
Strategy going forward: Surface Water Management Fees were raised in 2007 to meet impacts of inflation however regulatory costs related to compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit are increasing while Surface Water Fee revenue is decreasing due to annexations and incorporations. Prioritizing how surface water revenues are spent will be an important task for the Water and Land Resources Division over the next several years.
Rate vs. comparable agencies
2006 Results: King County's surface water management fees were just under the mean of what other jurisdictions charge.
Influencing factors: King County offers one of the most robust surface water management programs in the region. As a large jurisdiction it is governed by Phase I of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit by the State Department of Ecology to comply with the federal, Clean Water Act. Permit requirements this and for the next six years are more stringent as the state is grappling with declines in the health of its surface waters and the Puget Sound.
Strategy going forward: Much work is being done to determine how to comply with regulatory requirements amidst dramatic declines in revenue. Stormwater services will look to making its operations more efficient and King County managers, the Executive and the Metropolitan King County Council will be faced with finding alternative funding sources or eliminating programs previously funded by the surface water management revenues.
