Map Checking Fees

Is this a common experience? Here in Oregon the survey review fees are high ($425 in one county), but not open ended. It would be tough to complain for fear of reprisals, passive or otherwise, but I think it's something that should be challenged. Perhaps to a county commissioner and/or through the local chapter of CLSA.

The CS tells me that I would not believe some of the crap they get turned in by some surveyors. It's like they make a stab at it and expect the CS to complete their map for them. I wonder what those cost? They've talked about coming up with a flat fee for years but in a way that would not be fair to the people that turn in decent maps.

what do you do to modify unwanted behavior?

If you want to change behavior, the options are positive re-enforcement or aversion therapy.

When someone breaks a traffic law, there are consequences, usually some type of punishment and the form of the punishment is typically a fine.

We all know that filing surveys is a good thing to do. This is something that we want to encourage. I do not see how we can encourage this behavior by PUNISHING PEOPLE WHO DO FILE.....

These escalator fees took off after passage of prop 13.....

I have a PE and LS that does that, the next one goes to the board.

High fees are a rip off. It costs $25 to file a survey here and I review most before the final is printed as a curtsy. $75 is what is charged for a Partition Plat review, Again a preliminary is prepared for my review before the final is ran and recorded after signatures. Same for a Subdivision, the fee, $125 + $5/lot. With the preliminary's there is no reason to submit a final more than once. The Office of County Surveyor is not funded for providing a source of income for the one holding the position, I get a little for my time keeping the records and the filing and review fees are to compensate me for my time providing those services. I make my living from private practice and do not have retirement or medical benefits from the county. Fees are going up on everything to keep the little empires going, when those services were intended to be provided and the funding budgeted for in the county tax income. The out of line fees is a form of taxation without representation and double taxation if any county moneys are budgeted and released to those offices providing the service they were created to provide. High fees should mean that there is no more money budgeted to those offices and their funding is obtained solely from those fees, if the economy is down and the fees collected will not pay for the service, that position is eliminated or solely payed to maintain a minimum staff using money from the county general fund. The voters need to get a handle on their governments from top to bottom and show them that the people in government serve only at the will of the people and their loyalty is intended to be with the people and not some union, government office or empire building.
jud

It's been discussed before that the recordation of surveys is not mainly for the benefit of our clients; it's for the general benefit to the community. My client's going to get a copy of the survey whether it gets recorded or not. The community benefits because next time a surveyor wants to work in that neighborhood, they know what to look for and what kind of problems I may have had. It's mandated by the state and it's a blank check for the counties. Not that they make lots of money by having a staff of surveyors and charging those kinds of fees; I'd be surprised if they come anywhere near breaking even with the overhead they have. I just think the cost should be spread out over the community rather than soaking the person that's doing the right thing.

There is some benefit to the client. The next surveyor that comes along to survey the lot next door is more likely to agree with my survey if it's recorded, available and makes pretty good sense. So, even a subsidy by the county would be helpful. The CS tells me the Board of Supervisors requires that their department be financially self-sufficient. My question is what if they only had two maps submitted in a year, would they have to charge $100,000 apiece in map checking fees?

It seems to me that they should be mainly checking it for compliance to statute regulations. Giving advice such as pointing out a misspelled word or suggesting you add a note that something was not there that you never implied was there, is more of a courtesy and not necessary for the main objective to my view and not something they should be charging for (but I don't work in CA.)

I agree that maybe a maximum fee should be addressed. You should be paying a filing fee and the county should be doing no more than checking that you map has the minimum standards for a plat to be filed. They should simply have a checklist with itmes such as north arrow X, basis of bearings X, etc. (whatever is required).

Hey if I wanted an spelling editor, I would have hired a professional at a lesser, professional fee. They have you on the ropes charging whatever they feel like, for not that great of advice.

No, they could use the Clerks office to file surveys, if they have a legal requirement for any land divisions of any kind to be reviewed, then have a local surveyor provide that service at a flat fee for doing so. The boundary surveys filed here are not required to be reviewed and approved by the county Surveyor. Some want to impose their will, but I know of no State requirement that justifies them to do so. There is a requirement that if a monument is set, then a record of survey will be filed, but being filed in the county survey records does not mean that a county surveyors office needs to be funded to do so, those records need preserving and made available for the public for review or to obtain copies and the County Clerk can do that just fine.
jud

I've heard the County Surveyors here complain about the quality of plans that get turned in, too, and I understand. I've also been through the grinder myself and I understand how some surveyors could get frustrated and turn in just about anything - because the reviewer will just bleed all over whatever is turned in anyway, might as well not overwork the first draft. I'm not saying, I'm just sayin'. It cuts both ways. I've had surveys come back because the reviewer didn't like the font I used.

Just across the river in Washington State there is no review at all of the surveys and some real junk gets in the record. So I'm not against reviews.

As I understand it the CS only has the authority to check compliance with state law and minimum standards. I had one survey tech in SB Co. try to tell me my reconstruction was incorrect. I had a chat with the CS. No more BS from survey techs.

I actually like the review process, if it isn't applied to just create a fiefdom in the CS office. It does help with the quality of the final recorded plats. However I will NOT have someone in the CS office dictate to me on my boundary resolutions. Though I will listen to the CS or one of his deputies(if registered) if they have a differing opinion. They just might have a piece of information I did not find.

If I have to do so, I will walk the plat to the CC office and record it myself.

SJ

I just changed my mind about a recording law in West Virginia. Until I read this little thread I was for it. We kinda sorta have a recording law but there isn't much to it.

I can't get $782.16 out of a survey half the time (lots). Holy Cow! No not you, I'm just sayin.

It's not the recording that is wrong, it's when some plan checkers get it in their mind to make every recorded survey the image of their idea of the perfect survey.

50 other Counties have a flat fee so their contention they can't do it is BS.

If they get a map in under a flat fee that is atrocious they should just send it back. Darn I solved their problem in about 5 seconds.

The California Professional Land Surveyors Act requires that there be a County Surveyor's Statement on the Record of Survey map that says it's been examined in accordance with the PLSA. The PLSA gives the authority to the CS to examine it but specifically states "the examinination...shall not require the...surveyor...to change the methods or procedures..." The PLSA also says, though, that the CS can add a note to the map explaining differences that cannot be agreed on. That has been interpreted, wrongly I believe, that the CS can note disagreement with the methods or procedures. But, I agree that I don't mind the CS asking questions or making suggestions that I might not have thought of.

(c) Nothing in this section shall limit the county surveyor from including notes expressing opinions regarding the record of survey, or the methods or procedures utilized or employed in the performance of the survey

Dane

Doh - I forgot about 8766(c). Please disregard my previous pontifications. The CS can note his disagreement with methods and procedures by law. Where I work, that is extremely rare, but I have seen it. The survey has to be pretty blatantly bad to get a County Surveyor's Note. I think they've only proposed one on my surveys in the 27 years I've been licensed and I talked them out of it by including some explanatory language in my Surveyor's Note.

Map Checking Fees STEVE ON SOZ.....

I have to say I like the idea of the standard lodging and examination fee. Here for lodging, examination of plan and associated documentation the issue of 2 new titles for a certified land division is around $1200. The developer is aware of this standard fee and is therefore accordingly budgeted. BTW this fee includes a survey levee fee of around $70 that is then used to run our regulatory surveyors board!

I notice in some posts of criticism on examiners being pedantic. The reality is that the plan is a legal document A misspelled word could have legal implications, the examiners are therefore assisting you by pointing out a mistake, while also covering their posterior.

The great asset of our system is the central plan register and the confidence of knowing you have all plans when surveying.

Surveyors should appreciate one another lodging plans and market to client the positive aspect of lodging plans as it makes subsequent surveying easier and with more certainty of definition, so future surveying fees can be prevented from escalating to unknown amounts unnecessarily duplicating work already done.

I assume that the problem for some surveyors lodging is the additional cost inured by those who are not financially benefiting from the surveying. Eg the non developers who stand to financially gain and therefore passes on the cost.

I believe that surveyors should promote to all clients the benefits of lodging plans, as after all it is more likely subsequent surveyors having a registered plan will agree with their work provided diligently done.

The reality is that surveyors are extremely poor marketers ! Strangely we feel sorry for our client's costs yet have you ever had a bonus from a windfall because of your expertise / experience? NO!

RADU

First off, I have a dog in the fight... I am a Deputy County Surveyor.

Overzealous plat checkers are not good... I had a Deputy County Surveyor send back redlines on a plat I drafted when I was working in WI as a tech. He redlined some of the calls and record calls on the plat exterior because they were not perfectly centered on the line. He drew tick marks on the map where he scaled the center to be and wanted the text shifted about a 1/16 of an inch along a line that is about 6 inches long on the map. That sucked.

In the County I work for we try to keep our fees reasonable. We are luck in our area. Very few surveys come in looking bad, but they do take a lot of time to review. Most are good. I can say that a majority of the comments I make on plats are spelling errors, missed records, or mathematical errors (block distances or curve data not totalling correctly). I don't comment on text type, sometimes text size, but never type. All of our fees are flat except for research. If a surveyor requests that we research a particular area for them the fees are hourly with no guarantees (I guess we are trying to encourage surveyors to do their own research)!

We do a lot of stuff without charging or receiving any fees.

I don't feel it is right to step on the cartographic style of a surveyor. They earned their stamp just like I did and they have a right to have their work reflect their workmanship and style. I actually prefer if every map isn't exactly the same style. I can recognize which firm/surveyor produced a plat just by glancing and not even reading.

Some "suggestions" are put on the map, and I try to always label them as such. I am not perfect and don't always remember.

All of this being said. I am still in favor of plat reviews, though plat review fees are obviously not always fair. I don't really know how one would even go about trying to get plat review fees reduced.

Kevin, I have filed surveys in Jefferson, Deschutes, and Crook Counties. The review comments were quite limited and reasonable. The tri-county metropolitan Portland area (one county in particular) can be quite another thing.

Map Checking Fees STEVE ON SOZ.....

That $1200 fee can be budgeted for, which at least makes it manageable, but it still has to be paid by the ultimate consumer - added on to the price of the property. In a lot of American states (without recording laws) a lot survey can be done start to finish for half, or less, of that plan check fee.

When the plan check fee is high, and the checking and edit demands are in proportion, the cost of doing the survey and plan itself rises exponentially. When a simple lot survey costs $3000 (instead of $600 in non-recording states) the lot owner will likely build his house, barn, fence, shed, well, etc. without a survey at all. Is the public properly served by that?