4-8-2024_PW SS Briefings (3) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Audited governments all used leading practices 1 through 3, related to education and outreach The first three leading practices address education and outreach to applicants.All six audited governments used a variety of techniques to achieve the goals of these practices.Often,any given activity or technique encompassed more than one practice,as the examples below illustrate. • Designated staff to assist applicants. Governments generally designated staff such as permit technicians to be the primary contact with applicants by phone,email and public counter.State law requires governments to designate such staff. • Informed applicants about application requirements.Governments provided information on their websites,such as application submittal checklists,to define complete applications and help ensure applicants submit all required documentation.State law requires governments to specify the contents of a complete permit application. • Held pre-application meetings.Governments required a pre-application meeting for at least one permit type,and made the meeting optional or recommended for other types.Reviewers used these meetings to learn more about proposed projects and advise applicants if they noticed unusual complexities. Managers from four audited governments said they bring technical staff,such as planners,into the review process early to ensure application completeness.Their expertise may help catch issues that would likely result in rework during full application review. Snohomish County and Vancouver also published informational videos on their websites to explain the permit process. Governments used IT systems to manage aspects of permitting, but two could improve communication tools Local governments can apply IT solutions to many steps in permitting,including permit tracking systems to manage workflow and online portals to facilitate application submissions and correspondence.All six audited governments had some form of information systems in place to aid applicant communication, process permits and maintain accurate permit records.Some governments'systems allowed staff to track electronic application submissions;these systems typically also allowed applicants to view the status of their application.Some systems could send messages to applicants requesting additional information or corrections. Nonetheless,there are opportunities to use IT systems to further improve communications—internally and with applicants—and maintain accurate permit records.For example,Kittitas had a public portal to communicate with applicants, although it only worked for civil and building permits. Similarly,Richland used an IT system to track civil and building permits,but did not use the system for Growth Management Act Audit Results 29