California Surveyors Forums

Is the practice of Planners employed by Counties or Cities preparing Tentative Maps for Lot Line Adjustments or Subdivisions common in the state? Is there any potential conflict of interest if the planner is not the one to review the submission package (or if they are)? Though in theory a planner would know best what the planning department wants on a Tentative Map, and maybe would make the submission more efficient, it just strikes me as somewhat unethical.

Does it make a difference whether the Planner is paid for this service "on the side" by the applicant?

No, I haven't heard of that before so I do not think it is common. I'm not too bothered by the conflict of interest, but I am troubled by the possibility that this planner is making field measurements that locate improvements relative to lot lines. There are others on this board more qualified than myself to opine on this, but it seems to me that any such "measuring" should be done by, or under, a surveyor.

I think it could give the appearance of unethical practices. I also think it creates a situation where there is the potential for a big conflict of interest. Below is what applies to licensed surveyors. I don't see why it couldn't be similarly applied to planners also.

Board Rule 476 (b)(4) A licensee, while engaged by a governmental agency as an officer, employee, appointee, agent, or consultant of that agency shall not engage in a professional land surveying business or activity that may be subject to that licensee’s direct or indirect control, inspection, review, audit, or enforcement on behalf of that agency, unless the circumstances are disclosed to and approved by that agency in writing prior to such engagement.

It seems like a government agency would be opening itself up to the potential for litigation by granting permission to staff to "work both sides of the counter".

Board Rule 476 applies specifically to surveyors, so it doesn't affect a planner (unless by coincidence, he happens to be a LS). But it would not surprise me that somewhere else in the B&P code or perhaps the Government Code that there would be a similar code which would be applicable.

If a planner was, in his official capacity to help a person at the counter ensure that their package was put together in a way to expedite review and approval, I think he's then just doing his job a little better than most. If an LLA is such that no measurements are required (i.e. no survey), then I likewise have no problem with the planner helping the applicants with a sketch.

There is nothing in the law preventing a planner from creating a TM. In fact, in many organizations, it is the planners that performe this function. They apply an aesthetic eye to create the concept, then give it to the engineers who then create a workable design, who then give it to the surveyors to fix the design in the field. ;-)

If the local government planner is doing this work on the side as a consultant, I don't have a problem IF it is only for projects outside of the jurisdiction he works for. Otherwise it is a conflict of interest. Even if he is not the governement planner reviewing his own private work, it is a reasonable presumption that he might have some innapropriate influence over the project through his coworkers.

Likewise, if he is basing any of these maps upon measurements, he is practicing surveying without a license.

I agree with your take on it Evan, as well as yours Steve. I did not mean to imply that Board Rule 476 applies to planners. Only that it would be reasonable to assume that the same type of ethical considerations would/could/should apply to planners, even if not specifically stated in a statute or code.

I am doing a boundary survey where I found a Corner Record where the Deputy County surveyor was doing private surveying. He was signing and stamping his own Corner Records. He is currently working for another government agency and is still doing private stuff on the side. I received some field notes from him on the boundary with the government agency's title on the field notes. Tisk,tisk...

Mojavegreen wrote:I am doing a boundary survey where I found a Corner Record where the Deputy County surveyor was doing private surveying. He was signing and stamping his own Corner Records. He is currently working for another government agency and is still doing private stuff on the side. I received some field notes from him on the boundary with the government agency's title on the field notes. Tisk,tisk...

I would send copies to the State Board and the JPPC's of where he was and is now.

Of course, there is always the County Surveyor signing record maps surveyed by the county. They are doing one near me right now.

The guy was doing it for small residential lots. He also set all the subdivision monumentation that he has not done a R/S for. It is funny cause on the Corner Records he states: Found 1" IP L.S. #### No Reference accepted as Corner of lot ###. And the found IP was his own number, so he finds his own pipe and accepts it but doesn't state the reference of why he set it. He did 4 Corner records like that.

I did a survey here in San Diego a while back and found a map done by the most honest surveyor ever. On his map: FD 3/4"IP RCE XXXX No Record, Not Accepted. It was his own pipe! Ha Ha.

I have contacted him. He gave me all his notes on another government agencies field note sheets that says what he set on all the corners. He showed what he found out in the field as such. (4) 2 x 2 for the whole tract that was done in 1930's. But if you set corners on a 100+ tract wouldn't you file something on what you did. Not just note you found your own pipe with no reference on why it was set on a corner record. If you could that would make boundary waaayyy eassier. Just set my pipe on the corners and just accept them with now reference to what I did to set them and why they we there in the first place.

rpost wrote:I did a survey here in San Diego a while back and found a map done by the most honest surveyor ever. On his map: FD 3/4"IP RCE XXXX No Record, Not Accepted. It was his own pipe! Ha Ha.

LOL That's a RCE for you ;)

Mojovegreen

With the info you gave us here, I would definitely contact the board and JPPC and let them make the decision.

Mojave,

Those CRs - Did that Deputy CS do them while he was Deputy? And if so, did he do them in his official capacity with the County or as private side work?

If he did them as side work while he was Deputy, then it's a potential problem.

The other issues about whether CRs were sufficient rather than RSs can't be answered without knowing additional facts and seeing copies of the CRs and any other records in each vicinity.

This sounds like it is potentially a serious breach of ethics and the PLSA, but I think that those saying to take it to the Board based only upon what you've posted here are jumping the gun. Too many unanswered questions to make that recommendation.

But taking it to the JPPC for an opinion is probably the best thing to do if you are unsure, or think you may be looking at violations. There is a lot of experience and knowledge represented on your local JPPC, and they will be able to sort the issues out and take appropriate action, whether that leads to finding a reasonable explanation for the situation or forwarding the matter to BPELSG.

Evan....he did it for a single 60 x 100 personal lot for a house to be built. When sitting down and talking with the CS we noticed that he was signing and stamping them while he was deputy surveyor. The CS now is handling the whole issue and I am letting him take the lead. As for the CR...he got them kicked back from the county for reasons I do not know why and he has not corrected the corner record and resubmitted it. That was back in '09.

And for the forum member I contacted last week about some monuments I found with nothing filed at the county. I will be submitting that record of survey this week. Hurry up and get that information to me on how you set them or you also will be contacted by the CS.


Sorry for hijacking this thread.

That's funny. More posts on the side topic than the original post...

In the case I bring up there are no measurements done, just "interpretation" of aerial imagery and record information. Tentative Maps or Plot Plans need not be surveyed in this jurisdiction, and I'm not concerned much about how the Map was prepared, just about the specific role the Planner should play when employed by/for the public.

Thanks for the comments. I don't have more details than I mentioned, just was curious about whether this is common.

Most government employees above a certain level are required to file a statement of economic interest - Form 700:

http://www.fppc.ca.gov/index.php?id=500

In addition, my public agency requires that I document and certify any outside employment each year and it must be approved by management

rpost wrote:I did a survey here in San Diego a while back and found a map done by the most honest surveyor ever. On his map: FD 3/4"IP RCE XXXX No Record, Not Accepted. It was his own pipe! Ha Ha.

That's not honest, that' stoopid. I know of the Young man of whom you speak