The Forum

[mpallamary]

I had a dream last night that someone was compiling a list of all the issues that are of importance to the surveying community, as evidenced from the forum posts. I submit, as a general rule, that many people on the forum are thinking of important things. In this dream, CLSA mines these posts to focus direction for the association to take.

Perchance to Dream....

[JoshPLS]

I'll bite.

The following are some common concerns I have heard brought up at various Chapter CLSA meetings that affect our profession and the public more so than a new definition of cadastral, accuracy statements being required, etc. (sorry not trying to offend, just sayin!):

1. Educating Planning Departments to understand the PLSA and to understand what acceptable practices are for various disciplines (Architects establishing property lines, two monument tangos/balloon on a string, etc.).

2. Private Sector and Public Sector. There's a growing divide and bitterness on here, RPLStoday, etc. between private and public sector land surveyors. I work in the private sector myself, but I do map checking as a consultant for agencies and have witnessed and experienced both sides of the coin. Both have valid points. This divide is not necessary. We can work together and share points of view. Listen to each other.

3. Unrecorded Surveys in private holdings. How can these maps be accessible to more surveyors and the public? What is a "reasonable" charge for pulling maps in private holdings when we do not even know if they have anything useful and will get charged just to look? How does this protect the public? What is an appropriate length of search? Do you knock on each surveyors door and just start writing blank checks? Define "reasonable".

4. Copyright law vs. PLSA. Can someone just ignore PLSA obligations because they added a copyright symbol or note on their map saying it cannot be reproduced or used by anyone, so you cannot reference it on your Record of Survey or review that the work was done in compliance with the PLSA? (this is complete madness).

5. County Surveyor review set price or cost recovery or not at all? Whichever side you are sympathetic to on this one, I am happy to see efforts moving forward on this discussion.

6. Map availability varies from County to County. Some Counties charge a lot of money for these maps and will not release map CDs or thumb drives. How does that protect the public? Access to maps and documents needs to be as simple as possible to promote proper due diligence. This is not an area that is monetized to make up for budget cuts.

7. What is considered a "material discrepancy"? Is it a tenth is it three tenths does it depend where you are? Some states have quantified this number. Some say it should be up to the Professional to determine this. Both sides make valid points.

8. Monument preservation. Great improvements have occurred on this front, but this is still an ongoing issue especially at City or Utility district jurisdictions that do not have a City Surveyor. The valves always get lifted, but the monuments get paved over. Who fixes this? The private home owners who get stuck paying for Record of Surveys and increased costs to chisle out a foot of AC to access a railroad spike.

9. Professional Practice Committees - Whats the PPCs role?

10. Toxicity within the Survey Community - I have witnessed work in violation of the PLSA, but people are too scared to act on it as they are in fear of "blow back".

11. Unlicensed Practice - There are companies that produce Topographic mapping for "Landscaping Purposes Only" without a license. It has been going on for years and it appears to be acceptable practice. You can watch some youtube videos, buy a cheap drone, and boom your mapping! That is Land Surveying per 8726(b).

12. As far as I know there is only one College you can receive a 4 year degree in Land Surveying. Why? Most students are not even aware what a Land surveyor is or does. No, I don't mow your lawn or ask people questions for a living (besides the occasional parole evidence).

13. How can we get more licensed professionals into CLSA? Why doesn't every licensed professional want to be in CLSA? Are we promoting a healthy environment for new surveyors to join?

14. Assessor Office Procedures. In Marin County the Recorders office came up with this odd procedure that only Record of Surveys that have set all 4 corners of a parcel (there head must spin when they see a lot with over 4 lines) are shown on the assessor map. Our Chapter created a CLSA Recordmap index to index all the maps in a specific area. These types of policies make it extremely difficult to work in places like this unless you know the details of the County.

15. Lot Line Adjustment standardization.

16. Modify Language in the PLSA to show that County Surveyor review is not a "sign off" or "approved by the County" boundary. This is how the Public interprets it. In fact, in a matter I am currently involved with the surveyor on the other side used that in one of his arguments that it was "signed off by the County Surveyor" and that he agreed with his resolution...This is beyond the understanding of the Public. Lets fix it.

Ok, I have to stop and get back to work...apologies in advance for any typos or grammar issues.

[mpallamary]

Wow! This is all excellent stuff! Wow! This is exactly what I am referring to.

This is absolutely incredibly important stuff!

[mpallamary]

If there are many members of the Executive Board on the forum, would you consider responding to Josh's outline? I, for one, find it incredibly thoughtful and insightful. He has invested a considerable amount of time and effort in sharing his thoughts and concerns.

Thank you

[MikeT]

Great list!

[mpallamary]

It is an incredible list! Who is going to pick up the ball and run with it?

[DWoolley]

Ideally, the Marin County chapter would bring the issues forward, via their director, to the CLSA Board of Directors. Alternatively, as a member, the items could be submitted to CLSA before next week to get on the July agenda. Once on the agenda the Board may vote to assign the issue to a committee.

A few issues are being worked on i.e. items 6, 8, 11 and 15.

Survey work product "copyright" is actually meant to scare the unsuspecting traveler. Architects enjoy some copyright protections, engineers even less, but some, surveyors? Let someone try to sue you for copyright protection of survey work product, complete nonsense.

Many of the privately held survey records, although valuable to retracement surveyors, document violations of the PLSA and more so, locals carving up practice areas and making it prohibitive for "outsiders" to come into the geographic region. There is stench on some, not all, of those private records. The shady aspect is reinforced by those that would try to fake out professionals with a false claim of copyright protection.

If nobody from Marin steps up the Orange County Directors will look at the list and decide whether or not to move them forward in the November meeting.

Thank you for taking the time to write up your thoughts.

DWoolley

[DWoolley]

Survey work product "copyright" is actually meant to scare the unsuspecting traveler. Architects enjoy some copyright protections, engineers even less, but some, surveyors? Let someone try to sue you for copyright protection of survey work product, complete nonsense.

Many of the privately held survey records, although valuable to retracement surveyors, document violations of the PLSA and more so, locals carving up practice areas and making it prohibitive for "outsiders" to come into the geographic region. There is stench on some, not all, of those private records. The shady aspect is reinforced by those that would try to fake out professionals with a false claim of copyright protection.

DWoolley

Continuing to stew on the private records. There was a reason records of survey were required to be filed and made available to the public. Any given property line effects at least one other party. Land surveying in California has third party liability outside of privity of contract. Records made available to the public prevent disputes and litigation. These records contribute to the public good and civil harmony.

Ask yourselves, why didn't they file? There are legal opinions, originated at BPELSG, going back to the 1960s expressing the requirements and triggers to file. I proffer the folks knew well what they were doing and the motivations were not pure. For the unacquainted, these private records were bought and sold amongst the locals. What monetary value is information that was made available to the public via a filed record of survey? On the contrary, if a land surveyor held private records in Grandview, USA and served as the gatekeeper of the practice in Grandview the records take on a value. The market is captured and the public has fewer alternatives outside of the record holder. In Orange County we had this very situation in the city of Laguna Beach and it functioned precisely as I have described until the land surveyor's death. Now the record keeper is more generous with sharing the records, but he will not give them to the county for free publication because he believes the records to be worth money, approximately $75,000 in 2015. Isn't this a hostage situation?

The original record holder told me if he filed maps anyone could work in Laguna Beach and he would have to compete with other land surveyors. He was honest about his motivations. Side note, he was a good surveyor too, thankfully, no two monument tangos.

The other side of the coin was Jack Raub surveying records which were held by RBF. These records were surveys performed between 1945 and 1960 in Orange County - the gold standard of Orange County land surveying in his time. RBF made the indexed records available to the public free of charge. When the County of Orange offered to provide the records to the public on their website RBF gave the records to the county. These records are now available to everyone for free.

DWoolley

[JoshPLS]

Thank you for your response Mr. Woolley. I am currently talking with Marin Chapters Director/Alternate Director on these matters to be brought up at a future BOD meeting.

Also, I agree with your post regarding unrecorded surveys. Some unrecorded records "custodians" are reasonable and charge minimal fees while others it is more or less an open check. The reason for inflated fees? Time dedicated to organizing, indexing, storage, etc. in addition to what they paid to acquire said records. With that said, they were initially purchased for monetary gain/competitive edge, which I find unfortunate. The Public does not gain from this behavior and frankly it tarnishes our status as Professionals when we play these games, IMO. This information needs to be available to all. Marin has made major improvements on this front with the creation of the Marin Free Library, but we have much more work to do!

[mpallamary]

I need to weigh in on private records. I own the files of two surveyors, one set of records I purchased back in 1980 and the others were given to me because the owner knows I care about such things. I spent nearly $10,000.00 databasing and indexing them. As I no longer have a larger office, they have been in storage. I pay $800 a month to keep them stored. I have since then, invested another $12,000 having these files scanned and slowly GIS databased. I am in my home office with a box of another 300 survey exhibits that, when I have some extra time at five in the morning, I scan them. What is this time worth?

Years ago I worked extremely hard with the County Surveyor to get him to file Private Survey records. That was a very intense endeavor and a successful one. Whenever I came across any that were important, I would file them. Unfortunately, the County stopped allowing us to do that. I offered to pay to file them and they were not interested. I offered to buy the county a scanner and they would not accept it. I offered to make a digital submission and they said no.

I created the website www.tiepoints.com as a research site for folks but no one was interested. (check the site out)

If a surveyor needs some of these records, I have a basic research fee as I have to go to an offsite storage site to retrieve them. If it is a "hardship" case, I will not charge the surveyor. Under any circumstance, they are always available. I have made every human effort to let folks know the records are out there. Still, people rarely call for them. Why is that?

As a basic business question, am I not entitled to recompense for the basic cost of storing these records?

[mpallamary]

And by the way, there is, as a general rule no copyright privilege for survey maps. Maybe a good webinar topic.

[DWoolley]

Michael Pallamary:

Thank you for the attached articles with the citations. Specifically, the copyright does not apply to a land surveyor's work:

"The Supreme Court further explained that copyright protection can extend only to original authorship, and that the publication of facts, regardless how much
effort was expended in discovering them, is not original authorship. The facts set forth in an author's writing were not created by an author's act of authorship, and are therefore not protected by copyright.

To the extent that the site plan sets forth the existing
physical characteristics of the site, including its shape and dimensions, the grade contours, and the location of existing elements, it sets forth facts; copyright does not bar the copying of such facts."

That ruling is my understanding of why a land surveyor's work cannot be copyrighted and yet, to this day I occassionally see "copyright" written on land surveying work. Again, I suspect it is only an attempt to fool unsuspecting travelers - although lowbrow, probably no harm done.

More later.

DWoolley

[mpallamary]

Yes, in reading the cases, because maps are generally made of things that are out there, that is not intellectual property. Yes, and I agree with why people do it!

[Peter Ehlert]

Dave Wolley: please check your private messages on this BB. (different topic)

[hellsangle]

If you purchase or are given survey records . . . a copyright transfer document should be notarized and kept in a safe place. Before 1978 . . . things might be iffy on copyright. (Long winded story previous proposed legislation regarding recording a "reference sheet" on Record of Survey of previous survey.)

Yep, crazy Phil again - Surveyor to Recorder