surface & stormwater management performance audit final report

Surface & Storm Water Management Performance Audit
Kitsap County, Washington
Final Report
III. FEE COMPARISONS
This performance audit was initiated partly because the SSWM Program’s proposed 2005 fee
increase raised questions concerning the fee amount and the need for additional revenue. As part
of the specific tasks identified for this audit by the Board of Commissioners, the scope of work
included an analysis of the County’s SSWM fee compared to inflation and other comparable
SSWM programs.
Observation: The SSWM fee has not kept pace with an inflation rate of 28% over the past ten
years. In 2005 the SSWM fee was increased by 5.6%, which was the first fee increase since the
program’s inception in 1995. The comparison counties have also had few changes in their fees
over the past ten years, but except for Pierce County, their increases during the same period
have been much greater than inflation.
For 2005 Kitsap County increased its SSWM fee by $2.50 per year for a 5.6% increase. The
increase was the first in the SSWM program’s history and raised the fee from $45 to $47.50 per
year. In contrast, the Seattle Consumer Price Index as of April 2005 had increased by a
cumulative 27.8% since 1996 and by 8.5% since 2001. Because the fee has not kept pace with
inflation, there is a significant difference between the current fee and the fee level needed to keep
pace with inflation. If the original $45 fee were adjusted for inflation, the current fee would be
about $57.50. Although the fee remained unchanged until 2005, total fee revenues as reported in
the County’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report did, however, increase 8% from 1996
through 2003. The current fee only has 83% of the buying power that it had when the program
initially started, and because the fee revenues are the primary source of funding for the SSWM
program, the real value of program expenditures have also been reduced over time.
Pierce, Clark, and Snohomish Counties have also changed their fees infrequently during the past
ten years. Clark County has adjusted its Clean Water Fee only once in the past 10 years when it
also expanded to a countywide fee. Pierce County increased its fees with a revised rate structure
in 1998 and reduced those fees after 8 years by $5. Snohomish County has not adjusted its Rural
Surface Water Management fee for four years, but had annual increases for the five previous
years. Snohomish County’s Urban Growth Area fee has been adjusted six times in the past nine
years, but has not had a fee increase in the past two years.
Compared to Kitsap County’s 2005 fee increase, the fee increases implemented by Clark and
Snohomish Counties have substantially exceeded the inflation rate over the past ten years.
Kitsap County’s fee has increased only 5.6% over the past 10 years. In contrast Snohomish
County’s Rural fee has increased 50% and its Urban Growth Area fee has increased 196%, both
from an initial $22. Comparing as a whole Clark County’s Burnt Bridge Creek fee of $15 and its
more recent countywide fee of $33 shows a ten-year cumulative increase of 120%. Finally, a
ten-year comparison is not available for Pierce County given a substantial change in its fee
structure. Over the past five years, Pierce County’s individual fees have decreased from a range
of -4% to -16%. Snohomish County’s Rural fee has not changed, while its Urban Growth Area
fee has increased 97% in the past five years.
Page 11