Request for Waiver of Atkins fees for Certificates of Correction

[mpallamary]

Do you support asking CLSA to seek a waiver of Atkins SB2 fees for Certificates of Corrections for ROS Maps, Parcel Maps, and Subdivision Maps?

See: https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/bu ... story.html

[Scott]

At the very least waivers for Certificate of Corrections and Record of Surveys

[mpallamary]

Yes, In my case, I did a survey 26 years ago and I just found out, the survey crew replaced an old lead and tack with one of my discs. It is going to cost me $75 plus recording fees to file a COC. It is so unjust that because of a very simple mistake/oversight made a quarter of a century ago that I have to pay to subsidize someone's housing in 2020.

[Anthony Maffia]

Can you file a corner record to disclose it?

[mpallamary]

County Survey suggested that would not be preferable. I ended up biting the bullet and paying the extortion so I can subsidize someone else's purchase of their home.

[Ian Wilson]

Michael,

For what it's worth, I have a similar situation in Alameda. I ran an experiment with the County Recorder to see if the original map had any notice of the Cert of Cor. It did not. The chances of picking up the significant information in a title report is pretty much nil. The chances of picking up the Corner Record in our County GIS when performing survey research, 100% for the competent surveyor.

Based on that, I'm accepting the Corner Record, at least until the County Recorder and I can change the system together.

Not SB2 fees for a CR. Just a whopping $18 that the Recorder charges for recording deeds.

[Anthony Maffia]

Ian,

Have someone video your meeting with the Alameda County Recorder, then submit it to America's Funniest Videos.

[Ian Wilson]

Anthony Maffia,

You, Sir, are a very bad person...VERY bad. :^)

[Ric7308]

County Survey suggested that would not be preferable. I ended up biting the bullet and paying the extortion so I can subsidize someone else's purchase of their home.

I still believe you should have just filed a Corner Record under 8765(d) like I suggested previously. County Surveyor does not have the authority to reject it and from my standpoint you would have satisfied your professional obligations under the PLS Act in this specific situation. Collecting the fees in accordance with SB 2 doesn't really add significant revenue to the County, so there should be no reason to argue it. Paying the normal CR fee at least adds revenue to the County. Licensed land surveyors having a perfectly valid and reasonable alternative already at their disposal may negate any reasoning to support an exemption for this specific purpose.

[mpallamary]

I hear you Ric,

Many thanks for your comments. Murphy's Law, I had a second one, similar, wherein the field crew set the monument at an offset to the corner instead of on the corner. I learned of this after the map recorded. Do you think a CR have worked there?

[Ric7308]

I hear you Ric,

Many thanks for your comments. Murphy's Law, I had a second one, similar, wherein the field crew set the monument at an offset to the corner instead of on the corner. I learned of this after the map recorded. Do you think a CR have worked there?

If the position of the property corner does not differ from the position as mapped on the recorded map, then based on what you've stated, I believe that filing of a Corner Record pursuant to 8765(d) to document that reference monument and its relationship to the property corner would satisfy that provision.

[mpallamary]

Thanks Ric! I like it! Let me play with this some more.

Have a great weekend!

[Ian Wilson]

With all due respect, the enforcement of the Subdivision Map Act does not fall under the purview of the Board. Section 66469 of the SMA is fairly clear as to the remedy for such ills.

Having said that, and for the reasons stated above, Mike, I would actually prefer using the Corner Record to prevent potential problems in the future.

Perhaps I'll start coming to work with a toothbrush in case some one wants to enforce he issue and invoke §66499.31.

[Ric7308]

With all due respect Ian, once the map has progressed properly through the subdivision process pursuant to the SMA and local development ordinances and has recorded, the monumenting of any property corners or retracement of any property lines depicted on that map is the practice of land surveying which falls under the purview of the PLS Act.

The SMA regulates the orderly subdivision of lands. The PLS Act regulates all aspects of land surveying regardless of Act or code.

[Ric7308]

(Still wide awake). I’ll take this one step further. Look at 66469 which describes certificates of correction. The opening paragraph is very clear this is a permissive action, not a “shall”. (d) and (e) are pertinent to this discussion.

If a subdivision map is properly recorded pursuant to the SMA and local ordinances, what law(s) prohibit a land surveyor...ANY land surveyor...from setting monuments at any of the property corners depicted on the map and filing of a Corner Record pursuant to Section 8765(d) of the PLS Act?

And what law(s) give a County Surveyor the authority to reject the Corner Record?

And what law(s) give the County Surveyor the authority to demand a Certificate of Correction?

Tying back to the original point of this thread...why would there be a need to 1) prepare and record a Certificate of Correction related to monument character or placement; and 2) seek legislative remedy to exempt a a Certificate of Correction from the SB 2 recording fee for the purposes related to monument character or placement? Especially when the same Legislature has already provided a perfectly valid and reasonable means to accomplish this without causing additional and unnecessary costs to the public?

[Scott]

I think there should be waivers from SB2 Atkins fee for ROSs & CRs, I don’t believe we should make either more difficult, at all, for a Surveyor to file them. I personally think SB2 should not even apply to them, regardless of the AG opinion.
Now a small thread hijack, sorry:
Ric,
What about the situation I brought up from the other thread about the mon wells?
Would a corner record work for the LS?
Would the LS have to file anything or just affix a tag to the 2” IPs already in the wells?

[mpallamary]

I really appreciate this exchange. Thank you very much!

[hellsangle]

Better yet . . .

A Ballot Initiative to rescind SB-2!

AG Becerra's AGO 18-303 was as partisan as Attorney General Barr's was of the Mueller Report! Ultimately dancing around the question in his last paragraph and footnote #21!

Did you know the funds collected don't stay in the County that they were collected in? I suspect they will be used for housing in the "mayor's" old haunt . . . .and of course not the Counties where the funds were collected!

Crazy Surveyor-to-Recorder Phil - Sonoma

[marchenko]

I am the no vote but came in late and had read that the concept of handling issues with a corner record is available.

Even then, I don't think we should ask for a waiver because we don't agree with the law. I do think that an RS deserves a waiver more than a subdivision map since the subdivision map gets looked at more times by the City or County and is more uniform or generic. Also monuments set after the subdivision map records are covered by the monument security.

George Marchenko