Common Professional Practice Problems - What Do We Need To Fix?

[Sunburned_Surveyor]

One of my duties as the Continuing Education Committee Chair is to work with our state PPC on common professional practice shortfalls. The idea is to help educate members on common problem areas. While I wait to work with our state PPC, I'd like to reach out to chapter level PPCs. Are you guys finding patterns in the problems reported to your committees? What topics do our members need to be educated on?

Please reach out to me if you are (or have been) involved in a chapter PPC and have professional practices topics we need to educate our members on.

Thanks!

Landon

[mpallamary]

Yes, Cities, counties and public agencies should be held to the same standard as private sector companies. I have sent complaints to the local JPPC and the members would not pursue it because they are fearful of retaliation from the city and others as they have seen it happen to me. Why cannot the same standards apply to everyone as required under the law?

[David Kendall]

Let’s start with an easy one....

What is the purpose of the PPC in your community?

[dharri]

San Diego JPPC History



San Diego County first started reviewing and recording parcel maps in February of 1973. During that first five years, San Diego County recorded a large amount of parcel maps. Louis Hall, San Diego County Surveyor, observed that a lot of “no record” survey monuments were showing up on the parcel maps. Mr. Hall was aware that San Luis Obispo County was having the same “no record” survey monument problem. Up there, the county surveyor was perusing the land surveyors that were setting the “no record” survey monuments. Mr. Hall took the problem to San Diego CLSA and the California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyor’s and asked if they wanted him to start pursuing the land surveyor’s that were setting the “no record” survey monuments in San Diego County. Both organizations responded that government was interfering in their business too much already and that they wanted to address the problem themselves. In early 1980, a joint committee was formed comprised of members from both CLSA and the California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyor’s together with a representative from the San Diego County Surveyor’s Office. Thus the committee was called the “Joint Professional Practices Committee”. In June of 1980, a letter was sent to all land surveying firms and government entities practicing land surveying within San Diego County that the committee would pursue all “no record” survey monuments set after October 1, 1980. The October 1 date was chosen to allow existing survey contracts to be completed and allow the firms and entities the opportunity to include the cost of filing public records in future contracts. In late 1980, the San Diego County Surveyor’s Office began referring all “no record” survey monuments to the committee where the monuments appeared on a survey performed after October 1, 1980. The committee as been addressing “no record” survey monuments in San Diego County ever since.

[mpallamary]

It is hard to believe but it has been 40 years since San Diego started its JPPC. I have attached copies of the material all surveyors were provided with, at that time. It was a brave effort for many! In the end, it proved very educational and it did a wonderful job at bringing the surveying community into compliance with the law.

Many of us took the time, after making a proposal for survey work, and losing the work to low bidders and others, we used to follow up to make sure whomever got the job, filed the proper records. We would go back to the site and look at the tags and then send in a complaint for the JPPC to follow up on. It was difficult and there were a lot of hard feelings, but after great perseverance, these other surveyors came around and started filing. In addition to elevating the quality of the work, we all started playing on a level field; when a proposal was made, it included filing the proper records and the quoted fees included this additional work. I recall it took about three years before everybody was on the same page.

As I noted, one of the first things that happened, for me, was seeing how others did their work. I was surprised at how many surveyors were doing the "two-point tango" and other unacceptable procedures. After these procedures were made more public, the quality of land surveying in San Diego increased considerably.

Indeed, the entire surveying community owes a debt of gratitude to the first members of the San Diego County JPPC. They have done a wonderful job and they have made a huge difference!

Happy Anniversary!

[David Kendall]

Ok I’ll start a list to help facilitate this discussion.

In these stories I hear examples of:

- community supervision and support regarding practice issues

- education

- conflict resolution

Any other ideas?

[Sunburned_Surveyor]

Thanks for the responses so far. Does anyone have a contact at the San Diego JPPC that I reach out to about teaching a webinar. It would be great to hear about how they work.

David: Do you want to talk about how a PPC should work? Things that make a PPC successful?

Mike: Can you be more specific? Where are cities and counties falling short? Can we develop a topic that will help people understand the problems in that area in a tactful way? Are you willing to teach a webinar?

Landon

[mpallamary]

Yes, I would be glad to.

Contact Dan Harrison about a webinar. He posted in already. He is a wealth of knowledge.

It would be important to first, identify what the JPPC does and what they are concerned with. If they are concerned with filing of records and monument destruction by surveyors, there is a huge problem that should be addressed.

[Elias French]

Great topic. I submit that a topic that needs addressing is how we should address situations where there is an "apparent" gap created by metes and bounds deeds, which would appear to meet based on the record, but when laid out upon the ground do not meet due to an overage being found in the overall measurement, such as was described in this thread http://clsaforum.californiasurveyors.or ... php?t=8079 from earlier this year, and as apparently debated by Mr. Evan Page and Mr. Dave Woolley at the Fresno conference this year.

The reason I believe this is an issue worth addressing is that it is a fundamentally simple concept at its essence, but one that divides the profession seemingly in half. Each side has their own positions (junior gets the excess, gap in title, prorate, etc.), each with their merits, but it seems that never the twain shall meet. This seems a case where practitioners, educators, and future surveyors would be aided by well-informed, researched, and agreed-upon guidance from CLSA on how they should handle this situation. I see no reason why the present divide should exist, given that the basic question is no more complex than many other boundary surveying questions where, in the abstract, surveyors can provide much more uniform answers as a profession. Of course the facts of any give specific situation will control, but I think it is possible for us to be at least on the same page on the fundamental issue.

[Peter Ehlert]

admirable, but I don't see it happening.
CLSA should encourage education on the subject, but taking an official position would not be in the best interest of the public. That position could be used by attys to influence a decision that would/could be damaging the the legitimate property rights of the individual.
It is what it is, the facts should determine the outcome, despite the complications.

[mpallamary]

Somethings to consider.

Does the attached document regarding steps to take in performing a boundary survey make sense? Is there any consensus out there on those topics?

Also, see:

http://www.op.nysed.gov/prof/pels/lsurvguide.htm

https://www.flrules.org/gateway/RuleNo. ... =5J-17.052

[Steve Martin]

In response to the original post, I would say that generally PPCs do not get involved in complicated technical matters. Most of their work is in writing letters to get compliance in failure to file cases where it is pretty cut and dried. I don't think you will find much mediation in technical matters such as: Is plotting record from any two monuments sufficient or not. Some PPCs may refer the more technical matters to the Board and others will leave Board referrals to the complainant.

The State PPC generally does not get involved in enforcement activities. They are advisory to the local PPCs.

I would like to see more outreach similar to the "Balloon-on-a-stick" presentation Ric & Ray gave at the CLSA conference several years ago. I'll venture that the worst offenders do not attend CLSA conferences, so local presentations in local Chapter areas would be good to see.

[mpallamary]

I kind of agree. It should be like two branches. Why not create a new committee? Several of us tried that when we organized LSACTS several years ago. If you take a look at other states, it is an eye opener. Surely there has to be some common ground to start from.

[David Kendall]

In response to the original post, I would say that generally PPCs do not get involved in complicated technical matters

In that case the chapter PPC is a waste of everyone's time. The chapter PPC ought to be a panel of some of the most experienced surveyors around delivering reasoned discussion on any topic brought to their attention in order to educate and mentor the community regarding PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES.

This situation you describe is the kind of stuff that makes me think that CLSA is a lost cause. Please take every opportunity to enlighten the membership about something that is going to enhance the level of professional practice

Mr Martin I appreciate you bringing this to our attention. This is definitely something that we need to fix.

[Peter Ehlert]

personally, I have always had a different view David

the purpose and intent of the State and Local PPCs are to
1. mediate issues that involve suspected violation of laws and regulations.
2. assist with evidence gathering to make formal complaints to the BOR.
3. send nastygrams (like lawyer letters) to the presumed violators to help them get in line.
perhaps that is all that they do, I have not had any direct involvement.


Very Separate from that CLSA does out basic PR and outreach to the public, and it provides education to the members as well as non-member surveyors.
The rats nest of boundary opinions and positions are highly important, and all surveyors need to be aware if not conversant, especially those that rarely practice boundary and are mostly involved in construction and control.

"CLSA is a lost cause"? if true, not for this

[David Kendall]

Keep em coming!

Ok I’ll start a list to help facilitate this discussion.

In these stories I hear examples of:

- community supervision and support regarding practice issues

- education

- conflict resolution

Any other ideas?

the purpose and intent of the State and Local PPCs are to
1. mediate issues that involve suspected violation of laws and regulations.
2. assist with evidence gathering to make formal complaints to the BOR.
3. send nastygrams (like lawyer letters) to the presumed violators to help them get in line.
perhaps that is all that they do, I have not had any direct involvement.

Most of their work is in writing letters to get compliance in failure to file cases where it is pretty cut and dried. I don't think you will find much mediation in technical matters such as: Is plotting record from any two monuments sufficient or not. Some PPCs may refer the more technical matters to the Board and others will leave Board referrals to the complainant.

[Sunburned_Surveyor]

Thanks for all the suggestions.

Elias: I agree the presentation by Dave and Evan on gaps and overlaps was excellent. I'm not sure how we cram into 45 minutes, but let me think about it. I've already reached out to Dave and Evan about teaching webinars this year.

Mike: Thanks for posting those links! That is awesome! I can use them for another project. I'd think many of us would benefit from a short talk on "what are standards of practice" that also goes over examples from other states. What do you think?

Thanks again for all the support.

[mpallamary]

I would be delighted. Are you familiar with the Land Court procedures in Massachusetts? They are interesting. I testified in my first Land Court Trial when I was 19 years old.

As an aside, as you may know, I have lectured across the country on many of these topics and before I am admitted to speak, the various state agencies have to approve my curriculum to make sure the licensees get proper credit. Consequently, I have to do a lot of research into state laws and then have the presentations approved.

The one common theme for virtually every other state is Ethics.

Over the last two months, I presented two legal seminars for MCLE credits and an integral part of every MCLE presentation is Ethics.

[mpallamary]

Another interesting topic is Standard of Care. It is grossly misunderstood.

[mpallamary]

As best I can tell, the attached is current. It is about 30 years old. Does it make sense to update it?

[mpallamary]

Curt Brown spent considerable time discussing Ethics. Perhaps this is a topic that should be considered.

[SPMPLS]

As an aside, as you may know, .

How could we NOT know? We are reminded of it frequently, virtually daily.

[mpallamary]

Thanks SMPLS. As you probably know, there are a lot of new folks on the forum and context is important. I am sorry this offends you. You simply have no idea how many people reach out to me, through the forum, to ask questions. In all the haze, and anger, and ire, of so many members, it is difficult for many folks to follow all of this.

You have no idea whatsoever as to what this all means.

[mpallamary]

Are you able to share any of your thoughts in a constructive way such as articles, lectures and books instead of this approach?

[mpallamary]

One last thing at the risk of offending your sensibilities SPMLS. I responded to a direct request from the originator of this post and I tried to be responsive to him. he asked me to elaborate.

It is unfortunate you have such great difficulty with such a thing.