James Fleming, post: 425877, member: 136 wrote: Two words...Finnegan's Wake
https://www.amazon.com/Wake-Rites-Ancient-Rituals-Finnegans/dp/0813028701
http://www.flashpointmag.com/gibson .
This was written by an old friend. His phd thesis at LSU. It took a few years to complete. Mostly written at a river swampcamp only accessible by boat in Tangipahoa Parish La. no distractions except gator, bugs and snakes. He did become fluent in ancient Celt language
and Gaelic in addition to occult practices
How's that for "communication"?
Dave Karoly, post: 425885, member: 94 wrote: See page 4 of the linked document for more detailed discussion:
https://www.oregon.gov/Osbeels/docs/Committees/LEC/Minutes/201608_LECMinutes.pdfAnd it is a civil penalty.
Thanks Dave. Poked the bear (repeatedly) indeed. He would have likely received a Cease and Desist order in Colorado.
Gene Kooper, post: 425889, member: 9850 wrote: Thanks Dave. Poked the bear (repeatedly) indeed. He would have likely received a Cease and Desist order in Colorado.
I don't know what an NOI is, Notice of Intent? They use acronyms which are not explained. I figured out the random last names are Law Enforcement Committee members.
Jp7191, post: 425771, member: 1617 wrote: They have been wrong before, the following was taken from Law enforcement minutes published on-line:
Informal Conferences
2894 - Theodore Baker
Theodore Baker, PLS, met in an informal conference with the LEC in attempt to reach a settlement agreement. Baker explained that the monument he uncovered was in the public right of way. Chair Boyd explained that based on the information provided, it seemed to be more ofan easement between the two properties than a public right of way. Baker explained the series of events leading up to compliant. He believed he was not obligated to provide notice since he
Law Enforcement Committee February 11, 2016
Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveyingnever left the public roadway. Van Dyke asked if Baker practiced surveying the day he went out to the property. Baker stated he was there to assess what needed to be done before surveying and found, and uncovered a monument. Chair Boyd wondered if digging up a monument is considered surveying. Van Dyke inquired if Baker used a shovel. Baker answered yes. Kent asked Baker if he had any suggestions to reach a settlement agreement. Baker requested that no penalty be assessed. Singh provided his input as a professional surveyor and asked who dug up the monument. Baker confirmed that it was he who did the digging. Van Dyke then asked
Baker how he knew where to dig the hole. Baker answered that he had a metal detector.
The Committee exited its public meeting pursuant to Oregon Revised Statute (ORS)
192.690(1) for private deliberation on a contested case. All members of the audience were asked to leave the room for these deliberations and were invited to return upon resumption of the public meeting. Upon returning to public meeting, it was announced that no decisions were made and no votes were taken.
Upon returning to public meeting, it was moved and seconded (Singh/Kent) to withdraw the NOI and to issue a letter of concern. Singh also requested that an article be drafted clarifying that public easements are typically held in private ownership, requiring notice of right of entry before surveying. The motion passed unanimously. There was no further discussion.I believe this was overridden by the full board latter but the fact that members of the committee could come to this conclusion amazes me, could you imagine starting your day by informing the public that you were going to be commuting over public r/w in order to do a survey? Where does it end? Jp
Oregon's Right of Entry is a moving target. True, there are a number of people who violate the word of the law, but the Board (probably upon advice of state lawyers) have come up with fining a Surveyor for walking across private property to deliver Notice, and worse.
The law said "personal notice", The state lawyers said that a telephone call, letter or face-to-face contace didn't constitute "personal notice" despite Black's law dictionary. It had to be written notice personally delivered or placed on the property in such place as to be reasonably seen. So we got the law revised to allow a letter, but the legislative committee amended our simple change to require 7 days before entry (after mulling a 10 day delay). We still have to notify the owner and occupant IN WRITING, but so far, they have allowed a door hanger. But, sometimes the owner is not easily discovered, and you find out that there is a tenant only when you get there.
Other issues are that if one is surveying or even tying to a single monument of a property, you have to notice the owner and the occupant/tenant if they are not the owner. If the property is an apartment building or condominium, that means the owner of the property/building and all residents (not just the manager) and the owner of the condominium and all unit owners, individually.
Advice of the Board/state lawyers is to send letters Certified (which means that often people have to go the the post office to pick them up if they are not home to take delivery initially), and to take pictures of the door hanger posted on the property, on the door, or in the hands of the person you handed it to. (Has anyone actually done the last?)
Many are all for revision to simplify or even repeal of our Right of Entry, but the very act of going to the Oregon Legislature is fraught with danger as there is no telling what changes they will make. It could get even worse - and I've seen it happen first hand.
Dave Karoly, post: 425894, member: 94 wrote: I don't know what an NOI is, Notice of Intent? They use acronyms which are not explained. I figured out the random last names are Law Enforcement Committee members.
https://www.oregon.gov/osbeels/pages/law_enforcement.aspx
[USER=7154]@Scott Ellis[/USER]
The error comes with people assuming (and we know all about that) that one must have a current license from some State in order to be a (whatever profession you choose). Wrong. If one wishes to provide consulting services to the public they need to obtain the license first. Otherwise, they do much of the exact same work but under someone else who is licensed or employed in a situation where no license is required. They are by definition a (whatever profession you choose) but they are not a Professional/Registered/Certified (whatever profession you choose). Basically it's the difference between using the lower case letter versus the upper case letter.
It took thousands of engineers to put Neil Armstrong on the moon. Maybe 20 held a license as a Professional Engineer in some State, but not necessarily the State where they were working.
Dave Karoly, post: 425894, member: 94 wrote: I don't know what an NOI is, Notice of Intent? They use acronyms which are not explained. I figured out the random last names are Law Enforcement Committee members.
From this Oregon Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying web page
If the LEC determines there is sufficient evidence and legal grounds to support a violation of statute or rule, it will direct the investigator to prepare a Notice of Intent (NOI). A NOI is a formal document sent to the subject of the complaint (now, the ÛÏrespondentÛ.) The NOI sets forth the facts of the case, the alleged violations of statute and rule, and the proposed disciplinary action. It also informs respondents of their administrative hearing rights. NOIs are governed by the Oregon Administrative Procedures Act, under ORS Chapter 183.
edit: Ninja'd by Mr. Fleming
Tyler Parsons, post: 425895, member: 139 wrote: Oregon's Right of Entry is a moving target. True, there are a number of people who violate the word of the law, but the Board (probably upon advice of state lawyers) have come up with fining a Surveyor for walking across private property to deliver Notice, and worse.
The law said "personal notice", The state lawyers said that a telephone call, letter or face-to-face contace didn't constitute "personal notice" despite Black's law dictionary. It had to be written notice personally delivered or placed on the property in such place as to be reasonably seen. So we got the law revised to allow a letter, but the legislative committee amended our simple change to require 7 days before entry (after mulling a 10 day delay). We still have to notify the owner and occupant IN WRITING, but so far, they have allowed a door hanger. But, sometimes the owner is not easily discovered, and you find out that there is a tenant only when you get there.
Other issues are that if one is surveying or even tying to a single monument of a property, you have to notice the owner and the occupant/tenant if they are not the owner. If the property is an apartment building or condominium, that means the owner of the property/building and all residents (not just the manager) and the owner of the condominium and all unit owners, individually.
Advice of the Board/state lawyers is to send letters Certified (which means that often people have to go the the post office to pick them up if they are not home to take delivery initially), and to take pictures of the door hanger posted on the property, on the door, or in the hands of the person you handed it to. (Has anyone actually done the last?)
Many are all for revision to simplify or even repeal of our Right of Entry, but the very act of going to the Oregon Legislature is fraught with danger as there is no telling what changes they will make. It could get even worse - and I've seen it happen first hand.
People refuse certified letters. Usually reprobate trespassers are expert at avoiding legal notices. If the tweaker next door is trespassing on your client then he could prevent you from surveying the boundary just by being hard to find. I've had it happen but in CA I can bring the Cops and enter against their will.
Holy Cow, post: 425900, member: 50 wrote: [USER=7154]@Scott Ellis[/USER]
The error comes with people assuming (and we know all about that) that one must have a current license from some State in order to be a (whatever profession you choose). Wrong. If one wishes to provide consulting services to the public they need to obtain the license first. Otherwise, they do much of the exact same work but under someone else who is licensed or employed in a situation where no license is required. They are by definition a (whatever profession you choose) but they are not a Professional/Registered/Certified (whatever profession you choose). Basically it's the difference between using the lower case letter versus the upper case letter.
It took thousands of engineers to put Neil Armstrong on the moon. Maybe 20 held a license as a Professional Engineer in some State, but not necessarily the State where they were working.
Cow,
Every engineering firm I know of in the NW does not call non-licensed graduate of an engineering program engineers even when they are working under the direct supervision of one of their PEs. Additionally, this guy was not working under anyone authority and he claimed to me an engineer to the Board not once even after he was told to desist.
As an add on to my last post, LSIT's and field crews are not called refereed to has survey technicians.
Holy Cow, post: 425900, member: 50 wrote: It took thousands of engineers to put Neil Armstrong on the moon. Maybe 20 held a license as a Professional Engineer in some State, but not necessarily the State where they were working.
- they were working for the feds, which probably exempted them from state licencing requirements
- they were working as technicians under the supervision of those few licensees.
Dave Karoly, post: 425902, member: 94 wrote: People refuse certified letters. Usually reprobate trespassers are expert at avoiding legal notices. If the tweaker next door is trespassing on your client then he could prevent you from surveying the boundary just by being hard to find. I've had it happen but in CA I can bring the Cops and enter against their will.
It's not a question of refusing delivery . Certified is only to prove mailing and it is not in the law that you send certified. Once you mail the letter and wait 7 days, you're good to go. Or just deliver a door hanger and go in immediately. Except for the big dog.
Unfortunately, our "right" has no teeth - there is no provision in the law for consequences for the owner or occupant who refuses entry.
I think he should hire an engineer, or 30, (pro bono) and sue the pants, socks, and shoes off of them...
I think he should hire an engineer, or 30, (pro bono) and sue the pants, socks, and shoes off of them...
Tyler Parsons, post: 425979, member: 139 wrote: Unfortunately, our "right" has no teeth - there is no provision in the law for consequences for the owner or occupant who refuses entry.
Oregon's "Right of Entry" law would be more accurately called a "Requirement to Notify" law.
Mark Mayer, post: 426129, member: 424 wrote: Oregon's "Right of Entry" law would be more accurately called a "Requirement to Notify" law.
Or a PIA to surveyors law. I NEVER had an issue before this law, be polite and ask and no problems. Now it is such a burden as to be more of a hinderance than benefit to surveyors. I think one time many years ago prior to the law an employer required a sheriff escort, not sure, may have required a court order, I would rather do that for the rare case than be burdened by the current so called right of entry.
SHG
I have listed 'Electrical Engineer' on my taxes, business cards, visa applications, vita, resume since 1981. I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and spend my time working as an electrical engineer. I guess I don't know what to call my self going forward. Might be easier to just stay the f' out of Oregon.
The New York Times covered this over the weekend:
Yellow-Light Crusader Fined for Doing Math Without a License https://nyti.ms/2pkBLk5
Looks like Oregon is going to be spending real tax payer money making Oregon safe from EE's
Just ordered new cards:
Mark Silver, post: 426363, member: 1087 wrote: I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and spend my time working as an electrical engineer. I guess I don't know what to call my self going forward. Might be easier to just stay the f' out of Oregon.
An investigator for the Washington Board contacted my fathers company in 1983 because they had engineering in the company name and didn't have a licensed PE on staff. He finally showed up at the office one day demanding to know what sort of work they performed and who their clients were. At the time they were mainly subcontractors to Northrop designing the EMP hardening for the electrical systems on the B-2 Stealth Bomber. They just followed their regular protocol when people asked about their work in detail; they reported the board investigator to the FBI counter-espionage division.
He was never licensed but he does have a little project he and a couple of guys came up with documented in the Library of Congress's Historic American Engineering Record.
https://www.loc.gov/resource/hhh.md1450.photos?st=gallery
Nate The Surveyor, post: 426125, member: 291 wrote: I think he should hire an engineer, or 30, (pro bono) and sue the pants, socks, and shoes off of them...
He is bringing suit to the board
James Fleming, post: 426368, member: 136 wrote: He was never licensed but he does have a little project he and a couple of guys came up with documented in the Library of Congress's Historic American Engineering Record.
https://www.loc.gov/resource/hhh.md1450.photos?st=gallery
Go BIG or don't go at all! The quality (resolution) of those black and white photos is absolutely amazing.
Yes, I love the reporting to FBI standpoint. That is too cool.
It is interesting how I could work as an Electrical Engineer doing nose cone testing on missiles, down hole MWD survey tools, down hole survey software, and emission testing equipment, but god forbid I call my self a EE. I have had a pretty full life of working at interesting companies doing interesting stuff and it has all been EE. (I guess I am afraid to even write the word down here now.) And actually my job today is about 80% EE. And I pretty much work on three continents as a EE. If I am not an EE then I don't know what I am, and I am confused as to who might be.
This could be the straw that forces me to the libertarian camp.
