My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-04-08-minutes-public-works-study-session
>
Meetings
>
2024
>
04. April
>
2024-04-16 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
2024-04-08-minutes-public-works-study-session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2024 11:58:52 AM
Creation date
4/11/2024 1:08:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
4/16/2024
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Dept
PW
Item
Approve Minutes
Order
1
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
116716
Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
PF— <br />Audif Results <br />Beyond the state law requirements, sharing permit review times with applicants <br />helps ensure predictability, a key Growth Management Act goal. Governments can <br />also use this information internally to identify areas where process improvements <br />may be needed. Therefore, although not a requirement for all governments, this is a <br />leading practice for all governments. <br />For this portion of our audit work, we surveyed other local governments that are <br />required to post these reports, so that we could measure statewide compliance <br />with this requirement. Our survey population included 45 required governments: <br />42 responded, for a 93 percent response rate. For more details on our survey <br />methodology, see Appendix B. <br />c ���► one-third of local governments publicly <br />included all information requireLJ by state law <br />Of the six audited governments, four are required to publish permit performance <br />reports. Two - Bellingham and Snohomish County - did not publicly post this <br />information. When asked why they did not do so, staff said other matters had <br />taken precedence. Officials at Bellingham said that they had published permit <br />performance metrics under a previous mayor but had stopped for unknown <br />reasons; the planning director said the city intended to resume publishing this <br />information but had not yet done so. <br />Another 29 governments also failed to publish annual permit timeliness reports, <br />which means only one-third of required local governments did post them. <br />The surveyed governments that said they did not post permit performance reports <br />offered three main reasons for not complying with state law: <br />Most governments mentioned limitations in their IT systems, including <br />having older systems that Iacked the functionality necessary to track the data <br />or produce the reports, as well as working to develop and implement new <br />systems. <br />Thirteen governments said they had concerns about the quality of the data <br />they would report. <br />Seven governments said they were not aware of the requirement or believed <br />the requirement did not apply to them. <br />Growth Management Act Audit Results 33 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.