Who's Changing per AB 645?

[mpallamary]

Please note that this law does not apply to all Licensed Land Surveyors. If you are a City Surveyor or County Surveyour you must continue to show your license number AND expiration date. According to the Map Act (Govt. Code 66442.)

"(a) If a subdivision for which a final map is required lies
within an unincorporated area, a certificate or statement by the
county surveyor is required. If a subdivision lies within a city, a
certificate or statement by the city engineer or city surveyor is
required. The appropriate official shall sign, date, and, below or
immediately adjacent to the signature, indicate his or her
registration or license number with expiration date and the stamp of
his or her seal . . ."

Also 66450: "(a) If a subdivision for which a parcel map is required lies
within an unincorporated area, a certificate or statement by the
county surveyor is required. If a subdivision lies within a city, a
certificate or statement by the city engineer or city surveyor is
required. The appropriate official shall sign, date, and, below or
immediately adjacent to the signature, indicate his or her
registration or license number with expiration date and the stamp of
his or her seal . . . "

The law as currently adopted is in conflict with the California Code of Regulations and two provisions of the Map Act.

[torgsurv]

The law does apply to all surveyors in that Section 8750 used to require that "the stamp or seal shall contain the expiration date" as part of the stamp design. The map act requires that the county or city surveyor shall "immediately adjacent to the signature, indicate his or her registration or license number with expiration date". This doesn't mean that it has to be part of the stamp like section 8750 used to require, just printed next to the signature.

It's true that the board rules regarding the design of the stamp do still conflict with section 8750, but I'm sure they will be updated soon.

[mpallamary]

Thanks!

Obviously they should have taken an omnibus approach to the change.
Onward and upward.

[mpallamary]

Bravo! Great statement. I do know why the law was changed. I was there and I remember asking the same questions.

Answer: Follow the money! Always follow the money.

Several years ago when the state was in dire financial straits, they did two very absurd things that directly relate to our business and profession. (PS we are in dire straits again).

1) A lot of surveyors and engineers were delinquent in paying their dues which were due every 4 years. The legislature in its infinite wisdom realized that unpaid dues equated into lost revenue or "revenue not realized." They therefore raised license fees and changed the renewall process to every two years. To assure that everyone was aware that they had to pay their dues on September 30, 2010 or whatever, they imposed the expiration requirement. In other words, the obligation to pay your dues was now in your face. Consequently, the revenue streamed increased and dues were paid on time (for the most part.)

2) It was also at this time that the legislature imposed the future taxes due on subdivision requirement. That is the one wherein in order to record a map, the subdivider was required to bring ball taxes current AND pay future taxes due. The theory was that there was a lot of land contemplated for subdivision and this would be a great source of income for the state - get people to pay their taxes in advance! What a novel idea. Death and taxes.

Follow the money, follow the money, follow the money.

We are not out of the financial woods yet.

Follow the money.

[marchenko]

Expiration Date is still required. See Board Rules section 411(b)(3)(C) first sentence says

" Expiration date or space within which the expiration date shall be written"

Source: CLSA publication of 2010 PLS ,PE Act, Board Rules, Misc. Statutes

[PLS7393]

Well I'm back from the 2010 Conference and there was lots of good info on this at the BPELS Session with Pat Tami and Ric Moore. They were ready for this when it was brought up and made it very clear why the Board Rule was not changed at the same time.

Simply put; the Board Rules are Administrative Codes and they get revised a lot easier after a Business and Profession Code is revised.

Revisions are being drafted to Board Rule 411 to coincide with the recent revisions per AB645, and we all knew it was coming.

If you missed the conference, you missed out on a lot of good stuff.

[E_Page]

Also along those lines, the Board Rules CANNOT be changed in anticipation of legislation, but only in reaction to it.

[PLS7393]

Just topping in attempt to get more participation in the poll.

Come on, don't be afraid, lol.