Fees for filing private survey records

[mpallamary]

Here is another poll on paying to file a private survey.

[Warren Smith]

The caveat here is that they are not those records from a currently practicing surveyor, of course.

[Peter Ehlert]

what is a private survey record?
define that first.

then: what do you consider nominal?

...and what if the CS is inland?

[E_Page]

Based on having discussed this subject with Mike in depth several times in the past, I think we share the definition of private records as being those that
1) either should have been, or arguably should have been reflected in a filed map many years prior,

2) were not reflected on a filed map either because the Board had a different view at that time of filing requirements relative to material change/evidence or material discrepancy, the surveyor specifically, or significant portions of the profession generally held misunderstandings about recording requirements, the surveyor who should have filed declined to do so in order to have a body of exclusive records in an area for competitive advantage, or one of several less common reasons,

3) have evidentiary value to the locations of existing boundaries, and

4) are currently held and maintained by private individuals who may be those who obtained them to preserve them, may be surviving family members of a deceased surveyor who created the records, may be successor licensee(s) in a company that created such records in years past under the direction of a now retired or deceased surveyor, or may be a property owner who has a copy of a map provided to that landowner or a predecessor in title.

Mike may chime in and modify that definition a bit.

IMO, nominal would be roughly the same as the recording fee (not the review fee) of a RS.


"What if the CS is inland?"

I don't understand why that would make a difference. What am I missing?

[mpallamary]

Yes Evan, I agree. Your definition is excellent. I raised the question because we are having a problem here in San Diego County. Whereas we used to file private unrecorded surveys, our CS refuses to accept any for filing. I own the records of a private surveyor who passed away in 1983. He practiced nearly exclusively in La Jolla and Del Mar. Back in the 1950's, when he was working in an old neighborhood, he often found original redwood hubs in poor condition. When that happened, he replaced them with 3/4 inch monumented pipes. I have come across some of his maps and records and whenever this used to happen, I used to file these maps to put others on notice. In some instances, because of poor map mathematics, you could stumble on five or ten feet of misclosure. Today, I cannot file any of these because the CS will not accept them. He feels they have no value.

Every now and then, I am called upon after litigation ensues. This is dreadful work. I have repeatedly explained to the CS that surveys such as these should be made available to the surveying community and he disagrees. Thus, the seeds of litigation are sown on a daily basis.

As an aside, I offered to pay to have these filed, I offered to scan them and send them in and I offered to purchase a scanner for the county and donate it, all to no avail. If you have a minute, take a look at the attached private surveys. The homes in these neighborhoods run from $3M to $20M. What makes this real sad is the fact that it is for this reason that families and companies are throwing these notes out. I was approached yesterday by an engineer who is retiring and he asked me if I would take the company's survey records off his hand. I don't have the room but plan to figure something out.

The point of my inquiry has to do with the fact that if there is no requirement under the law to do something with these records, they will be lost. The thrust of my inquiries is to see if we can address this problem as I am sure it is an issue across the state.

Thank you all for your thoughtful comments!

[scarpa]

Evan:
See Option 3 of the poll,...then you will see Pete's humor.

[RAM]

nice catch Peter, as a County that used to have a Coast and now does not, I do not know where the funded would come from to gain the Coast back, and why would we want it? Maybe the day that big quake hits and everything west of I-5 will be an island.

[E_Page]

Today, I cannot file any of these because the CS will not accept them. He feels they have no value.

Evidence that not all County Surveyors are hired for their advanced survey knowledge. If this is this CS's attitude toward unfiled survey records, he demonstrates incompetence in the area of practice that includes boundary surveying. Of all the areas of practice for a CS to be weak in, that would be about the worst one.

Hopefully he makes up for it by being a good administrator. Oh, wait. If that were so, he would give some consideration as to why it was a past practice of his office to accept such records and why currently practicing professionals might wish to provide such records for filing.

[Dave Ryan]

Mike,
I'm assuming you're talking about filing something to remain on file at the County Surveyor's office in some kind of collection already in place at that office that is accessible to all, and NOT trying to file something that is for eventual submittal to the County Recorder.

Working on that assumption, how about scanning the relevant record, enlarging or reducing it to some standard scale and place it on an 18" x 26" sheet of mylar as an additional sheet, but with a caveat somewhere on an earlier sheet that is has not been checked by the County Surveyor pursuant to PLS Act, sec. 8766 and is being filed for informational purposes.

Of course, it needs to meet some minimal legibility standard, otherwise the Recorder might justifiably reject it. But we've done that up here for several RS's that used non-record sources in the boundary determination and were critical enough that the surveyor and County Surveyor agreed it would be best to somehow get it out there. This seemed a practical way to do it, and as County Surveyor, I was entirely comfortable with this method, i.e. was not nervous about any laws being violated.

Obviously, getting an entire collection in the hands of the County Surveyor for all to have access to is preferred, but this case by case method may be a feasible alternative until someone comes around to your larger proposal.

If I'm correct in my assumptions about your scenario, good luck with pursuing this.

Dave Ryan,
Humboldt County (former County Surveyor)

[MFORD]

Evan,
I will chime in later when I have time to put together a cogent post. As some of you may know I am the chairman of the CLSA adhoc Unrecorded Maps Committee.

Dave,
Other counties have also implemented your solution with success. As you pointed out the Recorder has to accept the map, which has been a challenge in some jurisdictions.

[bruce hall]

Here in the OC the CS acquired the private survey notes of a prominent surveyor in Newport beach, LS 2312. These notes/surveys/plats were acquired from this surveyors heirs by a very large surveying/engineering firm that is local to the area. They had possession of them for many years, don't know how many. Anyway, It has to have been THOUSANDS of survey plats. Somehow the CS was able to fund the acquisition (which was probably zero bucks), index and file them into the land records website (a cost to the county taxpayer I assume).
These survey plats are invaluable to pretty much any survey in any block in Newport Beach. I suggest that whoever is interested in this scenario to call Kevin Hills LS here in the OC. He is our present CS.

Love old survey plats. At least I will know if one guy was here where I am now.

[mpallamary]

When I developed www.tiepoints.com my intent was to create a site where people can go to learn more about where records are stored. Needless to say if these documents are scanned, they can be retrieved. Where I was headed was to make some statewide provisions for storing these with the CS. space is no longer an issue in an electronic world.

Everyone's comments are very good and helpful!

[MFORD]

Bruce,
Thank you for the info. I will contact Mr. Hills.

FYI, Marin County Public Works recently used their monument preservation fund to purchase the archives of a retiring surveyor and will be making those records available for free through the Public Library. That was the county's solution to keeping copies of all the un-recorded documents submitted to their office from this surveyor's archives. Would this scenario work for every county? The question that comes to my mind is determining the value of the records. Would encouraging counties to purchase the records of retired or deceased surveyors for their unrecorded maps be creating an environment where it's more profitable not to record maps? In my area of practice there are surveyors (most of who are retired and are still with us today) that didn't file maps into the early 1990's. They incorrectly interpreted the PLS Act to read that maps weren't required if you didn't set any corners or there weren't any material discrepancies with the deed description.

As a part of my research into unfiled maps I found that a lot of CS offices, probably a majority in the state, have a system in place where copies of the unrecorded maps/documents submitted to their office are kept in a separate file, indexed and copies made available to the public upon request. A few counties resist this type of system citing that the cost of storage and manpower is not in their budgets. Those same counties don't like the idea of including the maps as a separate page because of the push back from their county recorder or the fear of a claim of copyright infringement, which is a sedge way into the next question.

Do unrecorded maps that should have been filed under the provisions PLS Act at the time the maps were created enjoy greater copyright protection than field maps? There are those who own the archives of deceased or retired surveyors that claim copyright protection to the unrecorded maps in their archives. If they are correct the value of those archives is greater than the value of the records of those of us who follow the rules and file maps when required.

Still another question is the applicability to the Public Records Act (PRA) when unrecorded documents are submitted to the CS with map review packages. We have to determine if those maps/documents/field notes fall within the provisions of the PRA. If so the CS can't refuse to keep copies or make them available to anyone who files a PRA request. Our CLSA committee ask for a Board opinion on the subject. They declined to respond saying that the Board didn't have authority to rule because the subject wasn't addressed in the PLS Act or Board Rules. There is an AG Opinion (attached) that indirectly address the question. It says that any document submitted to a public agency in support of an application or permit falls under the provision of the PRA and is considered to be public document. Are map reviews by the CS considered the public's business?

For all these reasons our committee hasn't made a lot of headway in solving the unrecorded maps issues. In my mind the crux of the conversation centers around the PRA and the applicability to unrecorded documents used for resolving boundary disputes.

[mpallamary]

If it is in possession of the CS, it is a public record. The attached should be informative I hope.

[MFORD]

Michael,
You and I are on the same page and share the same opinion with regards to the PRA. However, two CS offices I have spoken with have said if the unrecorded documents have a copyright stamp attached they have been instructed by their respective county councils to not keep copies. With regard to the AG Opinion 05-004 it addresses entitlement permits when the jurisdiction requires copies of the various reports to be submitted to the county agency(ies) as a condition of approve for a building permit or subdivision.

Every CS I spoken with requires that copies of the unfiled documents referenced on the map be submitted with the map review package. If I may pose a rhetorical question, "is the CS review of a record of survey the public's business". The obvious answer is YES. The hurdle we have to clear is getting all of the CS offices to recognize that the unfiled documents submitted to them are entered into the public record with the map submittal under the provisions of the PRA. When we accomplish that we can move forward.

[mpallamary]

The way I solve problems with recalcitrant agencies is to file a complaint with the Grand Jury. It is amazing what kind of results you get. I also will file a complaint with the Board of Supervisors. This is taxpayer money and that means it is taxpayer owned. These are not fiefdoms.

https://archive.org/stream/205140-encin ... t_djvu.txt

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/new ... s-lawsuit/