California Surveyors Forums

And as I always ask those that ask of me - what are you doing?

http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/TheAmerica ... ay2014.pdf

MP - valuable input in the article... am concerned that not everyone will read the entire article, so I hope you don't mind if I quote a particular passage, (my apology for not being a qualified copy & paste guy.) Hopefully there can be legislation to improve the way our Borpelsg, including the Enforcement section goes about their business. (our business). I could go on and on about poorly handled cases within the Enforcement department; thankfully, the Borpelsg, in my opinion, does a better job overall.

"Similarly, it is not uncommon for land surveyors to find themselves subjected to practice scrutiny. Unlike doctors, their evaluation can be done by one person as opposed to a number of peers. This is an unhealthy paradigm and is one used by many licensing boards, to the detriment of the profession.

One important way to integrate peer review in the surveying profession is in
the area of complaints and enforcement cases. If a complaint is filed against a land surveyor, instead of issuing a citation decided by one or two people, the surveyor should have his/her actions reviewed by a council of peers."

On occasion, I receive confidential input from fellow land surveyors who have been investigated, cited, were taken through a very lengthy process and seen their citations dismissed or affirmed, or were "processed" in a less formal way via phone call by our state servants. In fact, I receive the same job file that is given to the state and often do a similar review to what the state "expert" does, the only difference being, no one pays me.

My humble conclusion is that our public "servants" err on the side of the public. I think this is an inevitable result of protecting the safety and welfare of the general public, combined with what can be expected from a large modern bureaucracy; our state government.

You are right; it is a flaw in the system that one consultant, whom the state calls their "expert", and who concludes his/her review with a recommendation, is the primary source of input for the two "servants" on Borpelsg, who then make the decision to issue or not issue a citation.

The two guys "make mistakes sometimes". One of them told me this face to face. That could not be said during a recorded hearing, nor in response to a CLSA convention workshop question. There was the absolute honesty from the guy.

The only saving grace is that during the informal hearing, these two guys are open-minded and reasonable. Wrongly issued citations can go away. I know this from my own personal experience.

Hopefully, when a citation is reversed or dismissed, feedback is given to the "expert". Otherwise, how can this non-peer review process that is in place at the present improve ?

Yes and this is a universal problem. And in the meantime, how does the profession advance?

Mike,
Very good article. Your points are well made as usual. I heartily agree that mentoring in boundary determination is vital to our profession's survival. It seems to be an area of testing that needs to be emphasized more as well.