Must Read

[BoundaryMan]

My colleague surveyed & prepared a subdivision parcel map in 2009 and submitted for 2 map checks at the County. He retired in 2011 and moved out of country. I took over and resurveyed said job in Oct 2011.
County Land Development Section forced me to put the following wording on the Surveyor’s Statement:
SURVEYOR’S STATEMENT: THIS MAP WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION AND IS BASED UPON A TRUE AND COMPLETE FIELD SURVEY PERFORMED BY ME OR UNDER THE DIRECTION OF MY COLLEAGUE IN NOVEMBER 2009 AND UNDER MY DIRECTION IN OCTOBER 2011, IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT AND LOCAL ORDINANCE AT THE REQUEST OF (NAME OF PERSON AUTHORIZING MAP) ON MM/YYYY…..
I disagree to add my colleague's name on said statement.

My question to all competent California Land Surveyors is that: Can County force me to include my colleague’s name on the SURVEYOR’S STATEMENT as I am taking over, signing said map & have performed a complete field survey in Oct 2011?

County Land Development Section even mentioned that the 2009 survey by my colleague is in violation of LS Act Section 8762 as my colleague did not file a Corner Record or RS Map.
I also disagree.

He even threaten me to bring this case to County Council for guidance if I do not comply.

Any input?

[Debbie Naves]

If you are finishing the map then it should only have your name on it. You have either resurveyed it for yourself or satisfied yourself that it was properly surveyed when you reviewed and completed it. It has become your map and you are responsible for it as you have signed and sealed it. The agency cannot ask you to put another surveyor's name on it.

[Brian Christensen]

Never heard of such a thing. So if something goes South with the survey, your colleague gets named along with you in a suit? Sounds like there is more to this story than just the ridiculous statement.

Technically, he is in violation of the PLS Act and should be on the hook for a RS. Maybe he T'ed-off the county, maybe more than once.

I disagree with the statement as well, but there has to be more to it than Surveyor A performs a survey in 2009, never files map then Surveyor B performs same survey in 2011 and county beats him up over it.

The Surveyor's Statement is taken directly from California Government Code and I don't think there is any leeway for ad-libbing by the county.

[Stephen Johnson]

Tell the County Land development section that they are welcome to sign such a statement. You will not.

If they insist, you will file a complaint with the state board and will bring suit for defamation of character. They are accusing you of lying to them by insisting on such a statement on the plat.

Actually try nice first. If that doesn't work, time for nasty.

[BoundaryMan]

I love my fellow competent Land Surveyors.
I ask for more comments on this. Come on, CLSA should have more than this.

[RetiredCalLS]

I have run into the same kind of things with County's wanting me to put things on maps or even change my boundary resolution to illegally close gaps, etc. The Firm I was with working with one County would not let me make waves, so I had to do some strange certificates. On one that I refused to close a gap between parcels of lands, they had me put another certificate on the map called "Boundary Certificate". It stated that I except my own work. I thought the Surveyor's Certificate did that, but I guess not. Anyway, I would not put the other Surveyor on the map and what I would do, was what I wanted to do with this County. I would submit it the way you want to and do it as, "Timely Filing". They have I think 30 days or less to file the map and the County Surveyor has to place a note on the map stating His objections. You will find that the County Surveyors do not want to put anything on the map as they think they are liable for your survey in some manner.
I made a tie to an iron pipe on a map and the County Surveyor wanted to to state that is was the NE corner of Section 36. I wrote on the map, "NE Corner of Section 36 per County Surveyor. He had me take it off the map and write, "Tie point only".
Don't back down, they will.

S. Davis Retired L.S. 4968

[scarpa]

Did you ask the CLDS for their reasoning behind this “enforcementâ€￾? Was it somehow related to 404.2(c) of the Board Rules (see below)? Is this their way of not relieving the original licensee of any responsibility?

With 2 map checks at the County in his name, I could see why they might think your colleague is in responsible charge. Does Map Check #1, Map Check #2 and your version look similar enough that they believe your colleague did most of the work and you are coming in just to clean up? Do they know you re-surveyed the job?

2012 PE &PLS Board Rules (16 CCR §§400-476)
404.2. Responsible Charge– Professional Land Surveying.
(c) Successor Licensee. In situations when the professional land surveyor or legally authorized civil engineer in responsible charge of a land surveying project is unavailable to complete the project, a professional land surveyor…may assume responsible charge of the project as long as the successor licensee exercises the extent of control and assumes responsibility for the surveying decisions as required by subdivision (a) and meets the criteria described in subdivision (b), as well as meeting the requirements of the Professional Land Surveyors’ Act and Sections 411 and 415. Except as provided in Section 8761.2 of the Code, the original licensee is not relieved of any responsibility arising from the land surveying services of which he or she was in responsible charge.

[land butcher]

What County, so i don't take a job there.

If you are in the process of filing a Parcel or Tract map why file a CR or RS. If the PM process fails I still do not understand the CR RS requirement if he did not set or tag any monuments. ALTA's are done all the time without RSs filed.

[E_Page]

Are there any of your colleagues caps or tags in the field relative to this survey?

If so, I would think that a note on the face of the map (or cover sheet if there is a separate cover sheet) would be in order explaining that you are a successor licensee on this project as authorized under §404.2(c). But I would not alter the statutory surveyor's statement to include the information there.

You are now the licensee in responsible charge and are accepting/have accepted that responsibility. It sounds as if you have performed adequate work to satisfy yourself that the work performed under your colleague's direction is correct.

Placing the name of another surveyor (even one previously in responsible charge) in the surveyor's statement as an attempt to assure some apportionment of the responsibility is wrong unless each surveyor named or indicated in the statement signs the map.

I don't recall any stautory provision for altering the surveyor's statement to indicate a portion of responsibility to a surveyor not signatory to the map or statement.

If the County LDS is concerned that the previous surveyor did not meet his obligations, they have the option of filing a complaint against him with BPELSG. There probably is more to this story, but I can't think of circumstances which would justify the County insisting that a surveyor alter a statutory statement from its statutorily prescribed form.

Nor can I envision circumstances where they would be justified in making you include a statement that your colleague was in violation of any code sections. Without a court ruling or the result of a Board investigation coming to that conclusion, a statement that the other surveyor was in violation may be considered libelous (published slander). It being your map and your note, you would be the one technically committing the libel.

If the County Surveyor wants to add such a note after you have submitted your final mylars, he or she should consider the liabilities that such an action would expose the County to and expose him or her personally to. That would be the type of thing that Wheeler would apply to.

My question to the County would be, if they think there was a violation, what are they hoping to accomplish beyond attempting to shame your retired colleague by publishing their unreviewed opinion of the violation?

If they honestly feel there is an actionable violation, and there concern is protection of the public and perhaps appropriate censure (under the law) for your retired colleauge, why not just file the complaint with BPELSG? Putting a note of alleged violation on a permanently filed public record seems both vindictive and professionally irresponsible due to the potential civil liabilities it exposes them to.

[Ian Wilson]

The Surveyor's Statement is taken directly from California Government Code and I don't think there is any leeway for ad-libbing by the county.

Actually, this is one of my pet peeves and a bit of a "Green M&M Clause". Boundary Man stated that this was for a subdivision PARCEL map. If it is for a Parcal Map, then the certificate is not valid. That is the wording for a Final Map statement.

SMA 66442.5 for the Final Map Certification language and 66449 for the Parcel Map Certification.

What in the world is that jumbo jumbo about a "true and complete field survey"?
First, what does a true survey look like? How about a complete one?

True has too many meanings to be worth anything in a certification.

Complete is rather like showing all utilities both under upon and over the ground. How will you ever be certain the survey is complete?

[hellsangle]

Meaningful legislation should be omitting any County Surveyor involvement. When is the last time a County Surveyor was sued? And for how much?
Such legislation has been long overdue, but let's face it gov't too big 'n powerful. Record of survey fees and standards are all over the charts in California.
That's my nickel . . .
Respectfully (towards the County Surveyor's I've dealt with) submitted,
Phil - Sonoma

[Paul Goebel]

Evan makes a good point that there is no provision in the SMA to change the statements. Don't they need to match the statements provided in the SMA?

[land butcher]

Meaningful legislation should be omitting any County Surveyor involvement. When is the last time a County Surveyor was sued? And for how much?
Such legislation has been long overdue, but let's face it gov't too big 'n powerful. Record of survey fees and standards are all over the charts in California.
That's my nickel . . .
Respectfully (towards the County Surveyor's I've dealt with) submitted,
Phil - Sonoma

Government agency's and it's employee's are pretty much sue proof.
In the 80' and 90's condo projects came to a halt in CA due to construction defect lawsuits. Some of the recurring issues were no fireblocks and none or the wrong insulation/fire barrier between units. NEVER were the local agency building inspectors brought into the suits. Building depts charge vast amounts of money for permits and inspection fees TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC. Obviously these inspectors did not do their jobs. I asked a construct defect attorney why the inspectors and agencies were not included in the suits. his reply - "They are protected, cannot be sued.". If govt is not going to do it's job then I recommend defunding Govt.

[BoundaryMan]

Thank you for all the quality comments.

OLD SAYING: "We shall never let the kangaroo court to rule this country".

I need comments from competent Land Surveyors on the attached recorded parcel map (PM 70575, PMB 371/90-91, Los Angeles County).
1) Is the statutory Surveyor’s Statement correct for parcel map?
2) Is the RCE No. 39479 authorized to say parcel map is technically correct? IMO, bearings, distances, monument establishment are all city records.
3) Is Engineer equivalent to Surveyor.
IMO the attached map needs serious Certificate of Correction. AND THIS IS NOT THE ONLY MAP; THERE ARE HUNDREDS & THOUSANDS OF THEM IN THIS COUNTY WITH SIMILAR FASHION. WHAT DO WE DO?

Any input?

[BoundaryMan]

OR this is a Benson Syndicate of the 21st Century.

[land butcher]