Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › Time for Board to enforce California Law 8762?
Time for Board to enforce California Law 8762?
aliquot replied 2 years, 1 month ago 23 Members · 86 Replies
- Posted by: @elzeballa
@dave-karoly so then what would be your answer? I don’t think that is an apt comparison, the speeding ticket example. I think an apt comparison would be something along the lines of MLB PED policy – in my opinion, it is pretty hefty for a player. They can lose a whole season – millions of dollars, if they do it. If you make the penalties meaningful, then it does deter people. For example – deeded lots automatically require a ROS, that’s an easy one. If the board gets a complaint and sees an exhibit or PDF with a boundary line on it and there is no ROS – if they fined you a year’s salary, let’s say, every surveyor in town would take notice and there would be less willing to take the risk of being caught.
California law gives the County the authority to set the fee for reviewing and filing a Record of Survey. Have those exceeded reasonable expectations in terms of cost? Absolutely! What is the land surveying profession in California going to do about that? Who is better positioned to argue that the current statute is no longer working? If the land surveying community is not going to engage in a meaningful and effective approach to engage the state legislators in this regard and continue to complain only to themselves, what do you expect others to do for you?
I apologize to come across so blunt…but I literally hear about this every single day. Not enough complaints are submitted to the Board (see previous post from Ed Reading) and there are just as many land surveyors in California who refuse to comply with the filing requirement as there are that are responsible enough to file. Whether the language in the statutes re clear enough is subjective and can be argued. What cannot be argued is the severe lack of consistent practice and adherence to the requirements among the practicing land surveyors. If you want more compliance, then work within your professional community to increase consistent compliance. Obviously the Board is willing to work with the professional community as evidenced by the statewide seminars hosted by the Board (just prior to pandemic) and it is an entire myth there are insufficient funds or resources available for the Board to enforce the laws. Anyone saying this, on this forum or anywhere else, is entirely misinformed and does not take the responsibility to verify such information prior to expressing it.
- Posted by: @elzeballa
@dave-karoly so then what would be your answer? I don’t think that is an apt comparison, the speeding ticket example. I think an apt comparison would be something along the lines of MLB PED policy – in my opinion, it is pretty hefty for a player. They can lose a whole season – millions of dollars, if they do it. If you make the penalties meaningful, then it does deter people. For example – deeded lots automatically require a ROS, that’s an easy one. If the board gets a complaint and sees an exhibit or PDF with a boundary line on it and there is no ROS – if they fined you a year’s salary, let’s say, every surveyor in town would take notice and there would be less willing to take the risk of being caught.
I don??t think you can enforce your way out of the problem.
What would work is redesigning the system to encourage compliance. I remember talking with a Sacramento County map checker about this over a decade ago. His attitude was it??s my client??s project so they should pay the costs. But my client didn??t care about filing the survey, they just wanted to build a fence and do it right. The Record of Survey is for the benefit of the public, not the client. That particular client could and did pay but for that 1 client there are 10 or more that will just skip the Survey because they don??t have thousands of dollars for Surveyors and county map checkers.
The County views everybody as a land developer so soak those people but they don??t see that some people are not land developers. True the Board of Soups doesn??t want to put another thing on the general fund.
Its a conundrum.
@ric-moore I agree with you 100%, and I’m on board to trying to make a change. I guess the answer from you, if I could sum up, would be a.) file complaints more and b.) get involved with trying to change the legislation or enforcement? Not sure how to go about doing b.), if that is what you are saying, but I would gladly help try to do that. I can definitely do a.) when it comes up. And I agree that complaining without making a change is worthless – just not sure how to even go about doing that (b.) to be honest.
- Posted by: @ric-moorePosted by: @elzeballa
@dave-karoly so then what would be your answer? I don’t think that is an apt comparison, the speeding ticket example. I think an apt comparison would be something along the lines of MLB PED policy – in my opinion, it is pretty hefty for a player. They can lose a whole season – millions of dollars, if they do it. If you make the penalties meaningful, then it does deter people. For example – deeded lots automatically require a ROS, that’s an easy one. If the board gets a complaint and sees an exhibit or PDF with a boundary line on it and there is no ROS – if they fined you a year’s salary, let’s say, every surveyor in town would take notice and there would be less willing to take the risk of being caught.
California law gives the County the authority to set the fee for reviewing and filing a Record of Survey. Have those exceeded reasonable expectations in terms of cost? Absolutely! What is the land surveying profession in California going to do about that? Who is better positioned to argue that the current statute is no longer working? If the land surveying community is not going to engage in a meaningful and effective approach to engage the state legislators in this regard and continue to complain only to themselves, what do you expect others to do for you?
I apologize to come across so blunt…but I literally hear about this every single day. Not enough complaints are submitted to the Board (see previous post from Ed Reading) and there are just as many land surveyors in California who refuse to comply with the filing requirement as there are that are responsible enough to file. Whether the language in the statutes re clear enough is subjective and can be argued. What cannot be argued is the severe lack of consistent practice and adherence to the requirements among the practicing land surveyors. If you want more compliance, then work within your professional community to increase consistent compliance. Obviously the Board is willing to work with the professional community as evidenced by the statewide seminars hosted by the Board (just prior to pandemic) and it is an entire myth there are insufficient funds or resources available for the Board to enforce the laws. Anyone saying this, on this forum or anywhere else, is entirely misinformed and does not take the responsibility to verify such information prior to expressing it.
they are supposed to set a maximum fee, it??s not supposed to be an open checkbook
8766.5. Record of survey ?? examination fee
The county surveyor may charge a reasonable fee for examining a record of survey pursuant to Section 8766 which shall not exceed the cost of the service or one hundred dollars ($100), whichever is the lesser. However, this one hundred dollars ($100) maximum fee may be increased by the board of supervisors if such an increase is authorized by a duly adopted ordinance and the ordinance was adopted pursuant to a staff report demonstrating that the cost of providing the examination service actually exceeds one hundred dollars ($100) per record of survey.@elzeballa Are you a member of CLSA? Is your company a member of ACEC-CA? Both of those organizations have very active legislative committees and are generally thought of as the leading voices representing the land surveying profession in California. Doesn’t mean they are doing enough in this regard but I believe they are always open to improving what they do and additional volunteers.
- Posted by: @dave-karoly
8766.5. Record of survey ?? examination fee
The county surveyor may charge a reasonable fee for examining a record of survey pursuant to Section 8766 which shall not exceed the cost of the service or one hundred dollars ($100), whichever is the lesser. However, this one hundred dollars ($100) maximum fee may be increased by the board of supervisors if such an increase is authorized by a duly adopted ordinance and the ordinance was adopted pursuant to a staff report demonstrating that the cost of providing the examination service actually exceeds one hundred dollars ($100) per record of survey.I agree with you Dave. This was never intended to be a revenue producing mechanism for the County. Multiple County Surveyors recognize this, but many are not in charge of the budgets/purse strings and its the administrators and Board of Supervisors which need to be reined in, so to speak. Not enough challenges to what they use to justify the costs in some cases (in my opinion). Something seriously needs to be done due to the rising costs and pricing models (e.g., deposit based is just wrong for an RS submittal). Again, who is going to engage in an effective challenge to what is occurring?
If you see a violation, and do not send in a complaint, what do you have to complain about?
BUT…I agree with the speeding violation thing. IMHO, the recording could be taken care of with a minimal fee and emailing in a pdf. If that was all it took, why not record a map? (WA is pretty much at $300 fee to record now.)
A $100 review sounds like they originally meant for it to be checking lot and parcel numbers, indexing, etc. If it take more than half an hour it is obviously exceeding the intended review.
AND…$5,000 for a survey, in a state where the median home price is over $800,000 is probably under priced. Raise your rates.
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong.@dmyhill No one is saying not to send in a complaint…the question is if it will even change any thing. And the $5k, if you read what I wrote, was not intended to serve as benchmark for how much a survey should cost. It was to show the possible ranges of prices for a client, depending on if a ROS is required. So, whether its $5k or $10k, the point being that we aren’t able to give fixed cost without a caveat that it may be significantly more IF a ROS is required. And right there, that is where some surveyors come in and say “you don’t need to do that, I’ll mark your corners for half the cost, and quicker”. Property owners don’t know the difference, or don’t want to pay a guy 2x as much even if it is a recorded map. But yes, I agree that we should file a complaint.
- Posted by: @ric-moore
it is an entire myth there are insufficient funds or resources available for the Board to enforce the laws. Anyone saying this, on this forum or anywhere else, is entirely misinformed and does not take the responsibility to verify such information prior to expressing it.
Apparently, I’m among the misinformed. I made the assumption that the complaints I’ve heard about BPELSG dismissing formal complaints without sanction were the result of funding constraints. Color me chastened.
- Posted by: @elzeballa
@dmyhill No one is saying not to send in a complaint…the question is if it will even change any thing. And the $5k, if you read what I wrote, was not intended to serve as benchmark for how much a survey should cost. It was to show the possible ranges of prices for a client, depending on if a ROS is required. So, whether its $5k or $10k, the point being that we aren’t able to give fixed cost without a caveat that it may be significantly more IF a ROS is required. And right there, that is where some surveyors come in and say “you don’t need to do that, I’ll mark your corners for half the cost, and quicker”. Property owners don’t know the difference, or don’t want to pay a guy 2x as much even if it is a recorded map. But yes, I agree that we should file a complaint.
To be clear, I am not saying to just turn someone in. First, you call them. If you are young, ask rather than tell. “Just curious, as I try to develop my practice, why did you chose not to record, I thought you had to, and I could certainly save my clients money by not doing so, am I looking at this incorrectly?”
Second, the post where it is said that you should present a full set of evidence if you report someone is great advice. Doing so might clarify whether there is just a difference of opinion or a real violation.
The same issues with fixed costs exist in WA. There is a guy that wants just a topo and boundary, and I will not give it to him unless he also pays for the recording…what I found demands a recorded survey. I completely identify with the guy, but I am not a mechanic where I have a book that tells me how long something will take. Some surveys I can tell you within $50 what it will cost, some I really do not know.
-All thoughts my own, except my typos and when I am wrong. - Posted by: @ric-moore
[ . . . ] there are just as many land surveyors in California who refuse to comply with the filing requirement as there are that are responsible enough to file.
I question that assertion concerning ROSs. The Statute is clear, any discrepancies found during a survey triggers an ROS. (OTOH, if there are no discrepancies no ROS is required). I can count on one hand the situations where I’ve found convincing evidence a survey which reveals discrepancies has been performed (fresh pins w/Tags for example) and the required ROS was never filed. Any LS who routinely violates Section 8762 and others is playing with fire and is his/her own worst enemy. A quick perusal of the Board’s end of year bulletin shows over 30 LS’s or unlicensed individuals suffered citations or disciplinary actions in FY 2020/2021.
@kevin-hines In Santa Barbara County, if you file a Record of Survey on a property that falls within City limits, you are required to submit a $3,400 deposit for the County Surveyor to review. They then charge $172 per hour for a map review against that deposit, keep in mind at least one person reviewing maps is not licensed. If it is an unincorporated part of the County it is $546….neither include recording fees, around $130, I believe.
I brought this matter up to my local CLSA Chapter and we wrote a letter to the Board of Supervisors before they voted, on the record there was a letter from my local Chapter, myself and two other surveyors in the area. That was it, they passed this without much of a thought, if I knew the process better I would have rattled the cage much more than I did, lesson learned.
- Posted by: @jim-framePosted by: @t-ford
Has the California Board investigated any surveyor for not complying with this Law?
Many times. And it has levied substantial sanctions (fines and/or limitation on or loss of license) many times. Unfortunately, there are more violators than there are Board funds to enforce.
The Board recovers administrative fees from violators so in theory it’s a zero sum game concerning costs.
- Posted by: @elzeballa
@dmyhill No one is saying not to send in a complaint…the question is if it will even change any thing. And the $5k, if you read what I wrote, was not intended to serve as benchmark for how much a survey should cost. It was to show the possible ranges of prices for a client, depending on if a ROS is required. So, whether its $5k or $10k, the point being that we aren’t able to give fixed cost without a caveat that it may be significantly more IF a ROS is required. And right there, that is where some surveyors come in and say “you don’t need to do that, I’ll mark your corners for half the cost, and quicker”. Property owners don’t know the difference, or don’t want to pay a guy 2x as much even if it is a recorded map. But yes, I agree that we should file a complaint.
Get involved and file complaints. That is how we make it a level playing field. If people just whine about it and don’t do anything to affect change it won’t change. It literally takes 10 minutes to file a complaint on the Board’s website. Get rid of the people that are cheating or make them do it right. The answer is very simple and it isn’t hard to do.
From what I have read throughout this post, it is my understanding that every survey is being “checked” as a step in the county/city planning process, and that they are not only looking for compliance with standards, laws, and local ordinances, but whether or not the survey is in harmony with the planning commissions plans for future growth. If my understanding is correct, the author of the legislation that required this action missed the mark in protecting the health & welfare of the public. The reasoning for recording surveys varies from State to State, but the general intent is to have records for posterity in order to eliminate major snafu’s when retracing an ancient title. There is also an argument of recorded surveys being a major instrument in re-establishing property lines after a catastrophic natural disaster such as an earth quake, major mud slides, or fires that destroy everything in their path.
In my humble opinion, any review prior to recording should be limited to checking for the compliance with standards, laws, and local ordinances which should not take more than one hour from the County/City Surveyor. That review should be a charge to the surveyor signing the document and the expense built into the surveyor’s fees. Any review for the planning commission’s plans for current or future growth should be an expense to the municipality requiring such an in-depth review and not being a burden on the surveyor or the general public. I think of it as, if big government wanting to play in all games, they have to pay the admission fee to play. Lord knows they collect enough taxes to pay government employees on the payroll, even if there isn’t enough work to go around.
If you want this to change, get the State Societies involved, engineering and surveying. Form an action group to review the original intent of the requirement, identify how the original intent has changed over time, list the pros & cons of keeping things as status quo, make recommendations to change the verbiage of the law to better benefit the profession with keeping our charge of protecting the health and welfare of the public. After you have a package that makes sense for all concerned, use your lobbyists and the political friends of the societies to author and champion a bill in the house or senate. Change the law, change the overburden on the profession and damage to the public.
Stepping down from the pulpit.
- Posted by: @mike-marksPosted by: @ric-moore
[ . . . ] there are just as many land surveyors in California who refuse to comply with the filing requirement as there are that are responsible enough to file.
I question that assertion concerning ROSs. The Statute is clear, any discrepancies found during a survey triggers an ROS. (OTOH, if there are no discrepancies no ROS is required). I can count on one hand the situations where I’ve found convincing evidence a survey which reveals discrepancies has been performed (fresh pins w/Tags for example) and the required ROS was never filed. Any LS who routinely violates Section 8762 and others is playing with fire and is his/her own worst enemy. A quick perusal of the Board’s end of year bulletin shows over 30 LS’s or unlicensed individuals suffered citations or disciplinary actions in FY 2020/2021.
You’d be surprised how accurate I am with that assessment. The Board publishes citations and disciplinary actions in each quarterly bulletin and do not repeat across published editions. Not sure where you are seeing “end of year” bulletin…what am I missing?
- Posted by: @k-huerth
@kevin-hines In Santa Barbara County, if you file a Record of Survey on a property that falls within City limits, you are required to submit a $3,400 deposit for the County Surveyor to review. They then charge $172 per hour for a map review against that deposit, keep in mind at least one person reviewing maps is not licensed. If it is an unincorporated part of the County it is $546….neither include recording fees, around $130, I believe.
I brought this matter up to my local CLSA Chapter and we wrote a letter to the Board of Supervisors before they voted, on the record there was a letter from my local Chapter, myself and two other surveyors in the area. That was it, they passed this without much of a thought, if I knew the process better I would have rattled the cage much more than I did, lesson learned.
I still believe the County overstepped their authority with this. But to my knowledge, no one has legally challenged the County on this.
- Posted by: @mike-marksPosted by: @jim-framePosted by: @t-ford
Has the California Board investigated any surveyor for not complying with this Law?
Many times. And it has levied substantial sanctions (fines and/or limitation on or loss of license) many times. Unfortunately, there are more violators than there are Board funds to enforce.
The Board recovers administrative fees from violators so in theory it’s a zero sum game concerning costs.
That’s not accurate. California Board has the authority to issue administrative citations with fines and also to proceed with formal disciplinary actions. This likely differs across state jurisdictions and their respective laws.
Administrative fines are not a recovery, never intended as such and never will be.
The Board can seek to recover investigative costs associated with formal disciplinary actions and does in most circumstances. However, the Administrative Law Judge can recommend a lesser amount and the actual Board (which has the final decision making power) can choose to ignore that recommendation or choose a different amount. More often than not, it is much less than a full recovery.
- Posted by: @ric-moore
Something seriously needs to be done due to the rising costs and pricing models (e.g., deposit based is just wrong for an RS submittal). Again, who is going to engage in an effective challenge to what is occurring?
If the maximum fee is not authorized by a duly adopted ordinance then the County is in violation of state law.
If they are violating a state law as you say then I might expect there to be some board outreach to the County attorneys on the matter. Would you endorse a class action lawsuit against a specific county where all filing surveyors are plaintiffs?
Log in to reply.