When Pennsylvania’s governor pushed agencies to speed up permitting, the idea was straightforward: set clear expectations, measure performance, and make government more responsive to the people it serves.
Pennsylvania has made a concerted effort to reduce backlogs, clarify timelines, and improve coordination across agencies involved in business licensing and environmental review. Reports from the state indicate that processing times have improved in several areas and that agencies have worked through significant permit backlogs. Just as important, the reforms reframed applicants as customers, emphasizing predictability and communication rather than opacity and delay.
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection cleared a 2,400-permit backlog in under two years. Only a handful of refunds have been issued, because the mere threat of paying customers back focused agency minds
Washington can take note.
Washington already has baseline timelines for project permits under the Growth Management Act, the legislation that controls growth planning in Washington. Recent legislation added modest fee refund provisions when deadlines are missed. Yet in practice, performance is uneven. Some jurisdictions meet their targets most of the time, while others fall far short. For small businesses, homebuilders, and families, delays still translate into higher costs, stalled projects, and lost opportunities.
Local governments don’t need to wait for new mandates to improve this. There are practical steps cities and counties can take right now.
First, conduct a comprehensive audit of all permits and licenses issued locally. Many jurisdictions already process thousands of applications each year, but the timelines and requirements are not always clearly communicated. Publishing firm, accessible timelines for each permit type would give applicants a clear understanding of what to expect before they begin.
Second, strengthen accountability in a meaningful, but workable, way. Refund policies can be part of that. Even partial refunds or internal performance consequences tied to missed deadlines can sharpen focus without creating unintended budget risks. The goal is not to penalize staff, but to align incentives with timely service.
Third, invest in transparency tools that improve the applicant’s experience. Online dashboards that allow real-time tracking of permit status can reduce uncertainty and cut down on back-and-forth communication. Centralized intake or “one-stop” service desks can help applicants navigate complex processes without being shuffled between departments. Expanding the use of qualified third-party reviewers for technical checks, while retaining final approval authority, can also help manage workload without requiring significant new public spending.
The benefits of these changes are tangible. Faster, more predictable permitting lowers the cost of housing, supports small business growth, and makes communities more competitive for investment. Importantly, none of this requires weakening environmental or safety standards. It simply means delivering decisions more efficiently and transparently.
A handful of Washington jurisdictions taking the lead on these reforms could quickly demonstrate what’s possible. By focusing on clear timelines, consistent performance, and better customer experience, local governments can make meaningful progress, without waiting for sweeping changes from the state level.
The lesson is not that any one state has found a perfect model, but that incremental, practical reforms can add up. Washington has the tools. The next step is using them more consistently and effectively.
