Good Practice

• the resource consent pre-application phase

• information needed at the application phase

• assessments of environmental effects and notification

• monitoring processing timeframes

• monitoring customer satisfaction.

Both the number and percentage of local authorities that follow good practice are provided in this section to allow for a more accurate comparison between survey periods. This is because the number of local authorities responding to each question can vary between surveys, which influences the results when they are presented as percentages.

Assistance at the pre-application phase

Local authorities were asked about what checklists they provide to help people in the pre-application phase of the consent process. In particular, they were asked whether any checklists specifically define the environmental effects that need to be addressed in consent applications for controlled and restricted discretionary activities (appendix 6, question 6.1).

In 2007/2008, the percentage of local authorities using checklists that specifically define environmental effects was similar to the previous survey: 90 per cent (76 out of 84) used them, compared to 89 per cent (76 out of 85) in 2005/2006. Figure 19 shows that this plateau follows a period of increase between 1998/1999 and 2003/2004.

Figure 19: Percentage of local authorities that define environmental effects to be addressed by applicants, 1998/1999–2007/2008

 

Survey period	Percentage of local authorities that define environmental effects (%)
1998/1999	73
1999/2000	81
2001/2002	81
2003/2004	90
2005/2006	89
2007/2008	90

Source: 2007/2008 RMA survey data and published survey reports for the periods indicated.

Information needed at the consent application phase

Local authorities were asked whether, before commissioning specialist reports, they provided applicants with the opportunity to discuss or dispute the need for such further information and/or whether the applicant could provide it. This could save the applicant the costs of a specialist report (appendix 6, question 6.2).

In 2007/2008, 96 per cent (81 out of 84) of local authorities provided applicants with an opportunity to discuss or dispute the requirements for such information. This was very similar to the 95 per cent (81 out of 85 local authorities) in 2005/2006.

Figure 20 shows that initially (between the 1998/1999 and 1999/2000 surveys) a steep increase occurred in the proportion of local authorities providing applicants with the opportunity to discuss or dispute the need for specialist reports – from 42 per cent to 85 per cent. This was followed by another, smaller, increase between 2001/2002 and 2003/2004, but since then the proportion of local authorities providing applicants with this opportunity has remained relatively stable.

Figure 20: Percentage of local authorities that provide applicants with the opportunity to discuss or dispute requirements before commissioning specialist reports, 1998/1999–2007/2008

 

Survey period	Percentage of local authorities providing applicants the opportunity to discuss or dispute requirements (%)
1998/1999	42
1999/2000	85
2001/2002	84
2003/2004	91
2005/2006	95
2007/2008	96

Source: 2007/2008 RMA survey data and published survey reports for the periods indicated.

Assessments of environmental effects and notification

Local authorities were asked (appendix 6, questions 6.3–6.5) to identify internal mechanisms they use to ensure that:

• any environmental effects associated with applications for resource consent are adequately identified and assessed

• applications are notified appropriately

• affected parties are correctly identified.

The following results were found for 2007/2008.

• Seventy-six per cent (64 out of 84) of local authorities followed a structured process to check that environmental effects are adequately identified and addressed. This is the same proportion as in 2005/2006 (65 out of 85).

• Sixty-five per cent (55 out of 84) of local authorities have internal notes or checklists to guide staff on when to notify an application, compared with 61 per cent (52 out of 85) in 2005/2006. Figure 21 reveals some fluctuation in the application of this good practice over the past seven surveys.

• Sixty-two per cent (52 out of 84) of local authorities had internal notes or checklists to guide staff on how to identify potentially affected parties. This is a slight increase on the 59 per cent (50 out of 85) in 2005/2006. This continues an upward trend evident since 1999/2000, as shown in figure 21.

Figure 21: Percentage of local authorities that employ good practice in assessment of environmental effects and notification, 1997/1998–2007/2008

 

Survey period	Internal guidance notes or checklists available to staff on how to identify affected parties (%)	Internal guidance notes or checklists available to staff on when to notify an application (%)	Staff follow a set structure to check that environmental effects are adequately identified and addressed (%)
2007/2008	62	65	76
2005/2006	59	61	76
2003/2004	57	65	69
2001/2002	57	73	64
1999/2000	43	56	64
1998/1999	44	58	63
1997/1998	47	53	53

Source: 2007/2008 RMA survey data and published survey reports for the periods indicated.

Monitoring processing timeframes

Local authorities were asked if they actively monitored and reported on whether resource consent applications are processed within statutory timeframes (appendix 6, questions 6.10, 6.11).

In 2007/2008 a very high proportion of local authorities – 99 per cent (83 out of 84 local authorities) – actively monitored whether consent applications are processed on time. This is similar to results in 2005/2006, when 100 per cent (all 85 local authorities) did so.

How often they did so varied: 16 local authorities reported they monitored daily, 28 monitored weekly and 30 monitored monthly. The remainder used other methods (such as quarterly or annual checks, or a combination of various timeframes).

In 2007/2008, the proportion of local authorities that undertook formal monitoring and reporting of consent application processing performance, and made the results available to ratepayers, was 85 per cent (71 out of 84). This is an increase from the 2005/2006 result, when the proportion was 79 per cent (67 out of 85).

Figure 22 shows there have been fluctuations in the proportion of local authorities that have adopted good monitoring and reporting practices over the past 10 years – from less than 75 per cent in 1997/1998, to a peak of 85 per cent in both 2001/2002 and 2007/2008.

Figure 22: Percentage of local authorities that undertook formal monitoring and reporting of consent application processing performance,1997/1998–2007/2008

 

Survey period	Percentage of local authorities that undertook formal monitoring (%)
1997/1998	74
1998/1999	79
1999/2000	84
2001/2002	85
2003/2004	79
2005/2006	79
2007/2008	85

Source: 2007/2008 RMA survey data and published survey reports for the periods indicated.

Customer satisfaction

Local authorities were asked whether they used satisfaction surveys to monitor their resource consent processes (appendix 6, questions 6.12, 6.13). There is no statutory duty to do so, but it is considered good practice to obtain feedback on customer perceptions.

In 2007/2008, 38 per cent (32 out of 84) of local authorities ran customer satisfaction surveys, up from 29 per cent (25 out of 85) in 2005/2006.

Of the 32 local authorities that surveyed customer satisfaction in 2007/2008, 23 reported that customers were ‘satisfied’ while six reported ‘very satisfied’ customers. This equates to 91 per cent of these local authorities reporting that most customers were either ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’. None reported that most of their customers were ‘very dissatisfied’, one reported most customers were ‘dissatisfied’ and two reported most customers were ‘neutral’.

Figure 23 shows the overall level of customer satisfaction for the local authorities that ran customer satisfaction surveys. Although there have been fluctuations in customer satisfaction ratings over the past three surveys, there are consistently more ‘satisfied’ and ‘very satisfied’ customers than any other grouping. No satisfaction surveys have found that the overall level of customer satisfaction was ‘very dissatisfied’.

Figure 23: Overall level of customer satisfaction with resource consent processing, 2003/2004–2007/2008

 

Survey period	Very dissatisfied  (%)	Dissatisfied (%)	Neutral  (%)	Satisfied (%)	Very satisfied  (%)
2007/2008	0	3	6	72	19
2005/2006	0	4	4	76	16
2003/2004	0	0	11	68	21

Source: 2007/2008 RMA survey data and published survey reports for the periods indicated.

Note: This figure provides the overall level of customer satisfaction for the local authorities that ran customer satisfaction surveys.