Retirement

[Peter Ehlert]

Retirement

there comes a time, and there are choices to make.
I am no longer working as a LS in California, not even a little, for the last couple years. I have no plan to return to work, but things change, and I may wish to tackle some special project or help a family member.

currently we have few choices:
1. Pay the dues.
2. Not pay, status would go to Delinquent. Three years of nonpayment and it goes to Canceled.
3. Pay a one time fee and change my status to Retired.
the big catch is "The only way to return a retired license to active status is by re-taking and passing the licensing examination". obviously arduous.

There is currently no "inactive" status for engineering or land surveying licenses...
This is Not about competence, dues payment could go on for many years after leaving the work force with no change in legal status.

What I would like to see is a way to go Inactive for a significant amount of time and Not have to take the exam to be reinstated. Paying past dues, OK, I can go with that.
Can somebody initiate a change?

I guess someone would need to notify the board to get the status to be shown as Deceased... but if a survivor wanted to pay the fee a license could go on and on after death. (are the dead competent? maybe.)

This is not about competence, it is about paying a fee that serves no real purpose. I just paid my dues yesterday (6/12/2015), I did not want Delinquent or Canceled on my record. not too happy with the current state of affairs.

[rpost]

I disagree. One can be "inactive" and still pay dues. That is a bummer but a fact. However, if one were to actually have an inactive license, he would be admitting that he is inactive. That is actually a good thing, since now the Board knows he should be retested prior to practicing again. A retired license says the same thing. If you want to be out of the game, you must be retested to play again.

I would be open to an inactive license with a mandatory and fairly demanding continuing education requirement. It would actually be cool to find the folks who have an active license but who have not practiced in years.......and retest them too!

Just my 2 pennies.

R. Post

[rpost]

My wife just suggested a reinstatement exam with new laws, regulations and technology rather than the full LS exam.

[Peter Ehlert]

is it all about collecting money? does it cost More to be listed as Retired, Delinquent, or Canceled? Nope!
Having an inactive status available is highly desired. I just do not want a Delinquent or Canceled status.

this works for me: https://btr.az.gov/licensing-exams/reac ... gistration
I retired in Arizona (shown as inactive) a while back because I did not anticipate doing any more work there.

I do not anticipate doing any more work in California, but continue to work in Mexico.
I continue to keep up with the laws and technology that apply to my field.
If you want to retest everyone periodically, ok. why single out the rest of us?

[land butcher]

I like the AZ thing. Since my son got his license I don't sign a thing anymore and have been reduced to "surveyor's ass't", but since CA needs money more than water I will probably keep my license active. Maybe I should have my son pay the dues after I'm dead and gone. He could even make some educational posts here, as I do, in my name. LOL.

[bruce hall]

"I have no plan to return to work, but things change, and I may wish to tackle some special project or help a family member."

Peter: Just pay the dues every two years. Just the way it is. And after all, if what you said in your earlier post really is a possibility, if you lived another twenty years the total cost would be about two thousand bucks unless I don't remember the renewal fee correct.

"If you want to retest everyone periodically, ok. why single out the rest of us?"

I think the reasoning is that you ARE "out of practice" and it may take some testing to see if you are still proficient at land surveying. The surveyors who are "in practice" are assumed to be proficient unless some weird stuff happens. But that is a guess on my part and is just off the top of my head without a whole lot of mulling and mumbling. And take this with a grain or two of salt. I am sure that if you hadn't performed a survey in California in 5 or ten years (without practicing anywhere else) and came back and did one, that you would do a fine job.

[pls5528]

I do agree with you Peter. In California, this is one which needs to be revised!

Good comment.

[Edward M Reading]

Peter, I agree. I am licensed in two other states, they both allow an inactive status that only requires CEU requirements to reactivate. I probably won't practice there again but I worked damn hard to get those licenses and I'm not ready to give them up yet. It's a good system.

[hellsangle]

Get your rotten tomatoes 'n eggs ready . . . to throw at Crazy Phil

I recall one of the best seminars that I attended was put on by the Northern California Section of ACSM. The presenters were Bud Uzes and Steve Parrish and it was a boundary dispute in Napa County (Dry Creek area if my mind serves me well). Bud was on one side. Steve the other.

Steve had a surveyor who was not licensed but knew how to find field evidence. He was considered an Expert Witness just by his years of experience and knowledge/testified as an expert witness in that trial. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Steve.)

After surveying for a lifetime . . . with a body of evidence such as successful court appearances/copious recorded surveys/etc., does one have to "licensed" to be an expert (as presented)?

Would one consider some of the notable and respected "posting surveyors" on this discussion page, (Peter being one of 'em), NOT experts because they were retired and didn't pay their renewal fee?!

Crazy Phil - Sonoma
Surveyor to Recorder

[DWoolley]

....Steve had a surveyor who was not licensed but knew how to find field evidence. He was considered an Expert Witness just by his years of experience and knowledge/testified as an expert witness in that trial. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Steve.)

After surveying for a lifetime . . . with a body of evidence such as successful court appearances/copious recorded surveys/etc., does one have to "licensed" to be an expert (as presented)?

Crazy Phil - Sonoma
Surveyor to Recorder

This "expert discussion" was recently on another thread. I commented on that thread as to my experience with "experts".

I believe a license does not make a practitioner an expert. Equally, I believe there are bonafide land surveying experts, although rare, that are not licensed. I further believe this is more likely to be true concerning the federal land surveyor that is not required to be licensed.

DWoolley

[mpallamary]

No,

See the attached.

The Board is of the opinion, in a court of law, anyone can testify about surveying if they want to.

In the case I was involved in, a Civil Engineer (not authorized to survey) placed survey markers on a piece of property and guided construction work. he named them "property corners." They were open pipes. He testified as a "survey expert." I sent his testimony to the Board and they said "no problem." Anyone can testify as a survey "expert" if the court lets them. Needless to say, this was very depressing.

[DWoolley]

...The Board is of the opinion, in a court of law, anyone can testify about surveying if they want to...

In the Pallamary example above, I believe circa 2011 the board staff advice was much more measured and in this instance, correct.

Ever progressively, the professional land surveying community has realized, ultimately to their detriment, over the last 9 years there has been a shift in the board staff function from performing marginal enforcement of the respective practice acts, testing and community outreach to that of being a practice oracle. I find it odd that folks call on the board staff for practice advise and more peculiarly, inexplicably, they get practice advise that stretches beyond their enforcement program and testing. Apparently, seeking advise without much consideration of the source or the source's background experience. There are few questions, no matter how esoteric, that will go unanswered by board staff. Clearly, the board staff is not bound by and familiar with the Latin phrase primum non nocere.

I understand a fringe player wanting to get reassurances that his dicey practices are acceptable. Sure, why not call the board staff in search of a pass? However, why would any practicing land surveyor call for record of survey technicalities, monumentation standards not defined in the law or boundary establishment advise from any licensee that has practically zero experience outside of offering advise on such matters? Relying a the same peer group for guidance is a surefire recipe for confirmation bias.

Recently, I heard second hand, at a QBS shortlist interview the interviewers asked the licensees how many records of survey and corner records each had filed in the last six months and in which jurisdictions. Excellent question. The project included filing records of survey. I want to believe a person that answered "none" or "one" would quickly be removed from consideration.

The next time someone is inclined to seek an oracle's advice, stop, and ask the question - how many records of survey has this person filed? How many different jurisdictions? When was the last record of survey filed? How many professional teams have they successfully managed? Contracts negotiated? Heavy construction projects completed? Complex legal descriptions written? Served as an expert in civil litigation? Each and all fair questions. A retiree or elder statesperson, after a prolific career, may have plenty of sage advice. The experience of filing several hundred records of survey, writing legal descriptions, building rail, tunnels, highrise structures, building [insert here], testifying in court, successfully managing multi-discipline professional teams and/or performing large scale geodetic adjustments cannot be discounted in the slightest. Expertise in land surveying has many forms. However, the questioning licensee needs the context for the validity or lack thereof, for the forthcoming answers. As discussed in another thread, untested self proclaimed experts seldom recognize their own limitations. Ref: Dunning-Kruger effect.

Equally, would anyone be content if asking someone for similar advise and receiving a reply to experience "I have looked at some records of survey [or construction plans or legal descriptions or contracts [insert here]" etc (haven't we all?) or "I know people that have filed a lot of records of survey, built tunnels, negotiated professional service contracts"? [Insert grain of salt].

Substitute record of survey advice for highrise layout advice, same principle. As with any expert, an inquirer has an obligation to ask qualifying questions before seeking an opinion - or of what value is the opinion? Would any of you seek advise from anyone that hasn't practiced in over a decade with no published materials or something of substance that similarly qualifies their opinion? Me neither, unless it was nothing more than lemonade sipping porch talk to pass the time.

As for the law, I can read and understand it. There are published guides available that are the result of several licensees, from multiple jurisdictions, peer reviews and adopted that reflect a uniform practice standard. There are published ALTA minimum mapping standards, jurisdictional standards, developed over the course of several years, that went through several iterations of peer reviews, for the professional community to reference and rely on for guidance and worse case, a defense. Why would any professional cling to a flimsy email (as opposed to a signed letter on letterhead with citations) offered from board staff with no citation to authority? If the board staff is all knowing, does anyone else question why there are so few precedent setting cases (or policy guides) published by BPELSG? Think about it.

Lastly, if a licensee is doing something marginal and wanted an assurance the board staff wouldn't issue a citation, well, then it might be best to shop the answer. Yes, if the shady keep asking around someone somewhere will say a record of survey is not required (regardless of PLSA 8762) or that any boundary in the state can be established using only two monuments or that a "record boundary" in connection to a field survey is a real thing and acceptable practice - that advise and a quarter will get you a newspaper.

Again, think about it. It is quite likely a nearly perfect example of Hanlin's razor. There may very well be an absence of malice.

I believe it may be a further indication of a lack of knowledge of the resource materials available to the professional community.

DWoolley

[William Magee]

What a couple of negative Nellies. Definitely glass half empty people..

[Man of Chain]

It's laughable to me that someone who has just passed their exam is even in the same room, so to speak, as someone who has actually been practicing for 20 plus years. Although to the issue at hand, I don't think it is one, anyone with that much real experience would probably have a good time taking the new multiple choice test!

[dedkad]

Holy resurrected thread! Someone's been self-quarantined with too much time on their hands.

[mpallamary]

I admit I do not know everything. I am constantly learning. I am in Wisconsin today where I filmed a one-day legal seminar on land surveying and boundary determination for broadcast across the country on April 14. I was selected as a panel member based upon my credentials which, I realize may not count to some.

I have testified in excess of 120 trials in various superior courts and in federal court several times. I recognize this does not make me an expert but the one thing it gives me is experience..

I have been surveying since the day out of high school in 1971, and others have surveyed longer. I continue working because I love the art of surveying as most of us do.

Best of all I have been married for nearly 47 years and have two wonderful sons and two incredible grandchildren. That speaks for something I think.

I believe with such an extensive background, I am entitled to opinions as everyone else is.

Professionalism and common courtesy constrain me in many ways as it does in our society. To some, that means nothing and that is fine with me.

As a general rules, as one matures, they tend to have a better perspective and all perspectives should be considered.

[Edward M Reading]

I find it fascinating that you constantly state your credentials.

[mpallamary]

Yes, oftentimes I hear from other surveyors who are new to the site and reach out to me for a number of reasons. I find it important to establish credibility, particularly when you are dealing with them and oftentimes with trolls. A lot of people monitor the forum and do not participate. You would not beleive how many have contacted me and continue to do so.

In the technical and legal arena, credentials are important. That is the point I have tried to make about voire dire. When you are in a court of law, you must proclaim your credentials and qualifications. When you do so, the other side can attack your credentials. If you cannot sustain a challenge, you cannot testify. And too, I will acknowledge I am proud of my background over nearly 50 years as it is worth something. I work very hard to promote and advance land surveying and take extraordinary pride in my work. That may not be an attractive attribute to some but to me, it is everything.

Out of curiosity, would you share your background? It would help place your comments in context.

[mpallamary]

Passion will move men beyond themselves, beyond their shortcomings, beyond their failures.

- Joseph Campbell, American Mythologist, Writer, and Lecturer

[mpallamary]

Be still when you have nothing to say; when genuine passion moves you, say what you've got to say, and say it hot.

- D.H. Lawrence, English Novelist (1885-1930)

[mpallamary]

“When I hear another express an opinion which is not mine, I say to myself, he has a right to his opinion, as I to mine. Why should I question it? His error does me no injury, and shall I become a Don Quixote, to bring all men by force of argument to one opinion? ...Be a listener only, keep within yourself, and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially in politics.”

― Thomas Jefferson

[mpallamary]

Hi Edward,

Do you agree with my opinions set forth in the attached article?

[dharri]

Humorist Will Rodgers once commented “I never learned anything from anyone that agreed with me”.

[Peter Ehlert]

sorry to bring up an Old thread and continuing to beat a dead horse.
my current Expiration Date: June 30, 2023 and I am processing my annual budget

1. I no longer care about being listed as either Delinquent or Canceled.

2. I will not be paying a fee that serves no real purpose... instead I will doing nothing
it does not cost bpelsg a single penny more to list anyone as Retired vs. Delinquent, or Canceled, or whatever.

$75.00 to process a form https://www.bpelsg.ca.gov/pubs/forms/retired.pdf

BTW: I misstated my activity above.
I have consulted on several projects in California over the last several years, but not trigger the requirement for a License to practice.

[CBarrett]

If I pay the $75 for you, can we put this to rest?