Question

> By what authority do we professionally licensed individuals allow low or even high level bureaucrats to review and comment on our work?

The only time bureaucrats review and comment on my work is to verify compliance with locally (at the county or municipal level here in Maryland) enacted land use regulations. In Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365 (1926) the Supreme Court decided that land use regulations (as long as they did not arbitrarily violate the 14th Amendment's right to due process) were a logical extension of state and local "police powers" which allow regulation to enforce order for the betterment of the general welfare.

Excellent response.

I really do not like the answer, though.

That's okay, I am a grouchy guy at times, just ask my wife.

Is it just me or have these "police powers" gone way too far with local zoning & permitting "authorities"?

My real question, is when can we say to a local red tape cop, hey you have gone too far & I refuse to comply with your ridiculous comment?

I understand there would be a short term negative effect with the client, but I am fishing here for something I can stand on when telling a local fool to go pound sand.

Thanks, Brad

> My real question, is when can we say to a local red tape cop, hey you have gone too far & I refuse to comply with your ridiculous comment?

James' response is spot on.

There are limitations, however. The comments and red tape must be based upon an ordinance or regulation which applies to all applicants. They can't single out an applicant and require them to do something that others don't. Basically, if they can't support their comment by pointing to a rule or regulation, then their comment is nothing but their opinion, not the law. Even if it sounds like a good idea, if it's not in the ordinance, you can't/shouldn't comply with the request. If it is, then you should have made sure that it was in compliance before you submitted it. Nothing peeves the red-liner off more than having to check someone's work for them.

JBS

> By what authority do we professionally licensed individuals allow low or even high level beaurocrats to review and comment on our work?

I don't mind when it's a Licensed Surveyor. Often we get reviewed by someone not competent in Surveying, with an agenda. A few years ago I was dealing with a City, that would throw in requirements that were not in their codes. They wanted State Plane Coordinates on Property Corners of BLA's, so they could use the information to upgrade their GIS. We could fight them, but it was easier to just comply. They also used to go overboard on environmental issues, causing us to submit projects several times. Our first copy would be in agreement with their codes, but some bureaucrat, with a green agenda would add restrictions. Once again is was easier to comply than to fight them. We had one client (with deep pockets) that fought them. He won in court, but it cost him 30k in legal fees, for a 40 lot subdivision. He did it strictly out of principle, but it cut heavily into his profits. It changed nothing with the City, they continued to restrict projects beyond their codes. Because he was our client, even though we advised him to just comply. They became more difficult on every project we turned in after. We quit doing work within that city. There were only a project or two we would get calls on from that area. Most other surveyors in the area refused to do work there also.

I guess it goes to show that these bureaucrats will violate the power they get, and use the residents money to fight you.

Many cities are great to work with, but they typically have a Surveyor that spent most his/her career in the private sector.

I guess we're lucky..

around here. I can't remember, if it ever happened at all, a time when someone (local government personnel) questioned anything 'professional' about any submittals.

Don't get me wrong...I've had plenty of people tell me to put it on a different size paper, make the text a different size, they want dimensions here and here...I even had someone tell me the drawing didn't scale correctly (a 1263' line at 100 scale looked more like 1270'...wtf?!).

I guess I've always rolled with the punches and figured it was all part of getting my client what he was paying for.

LOL....Johnson county getting on yer nerves?

Ambler is an excellent and interesting case. Several years ago, I was called on to do the title work for the original Ambler tract, as the title company had mucked it up terribly.

But Ambler certainly did not foresee that, just ten years later, the State of Ohio would license Land Surveyors and thus take the lead in licensing, regulating, and controlling the profession and the practice.

Here in Ohio I have had few run-ins with local bureaucrats over my work. I have no problem following published local standards which do not deviate from minimum standards, but if there is no licensed surveyor reviewing my work's compliance with the local standard, I insist on judging that compliance myself. With a pleasant approach and a copy of the state laws in my pocket, I have never had a problem. Where there has been a licensed surveyor to review my work there has never any issue.

" Nothing peeves the red-liner off more than having to check someone's work for them."

Excellent, JBStahl!

> > By what authority do we professionally licensed individuals allow low or even high level bureaucrats to review and comment on our work?
>
> I don't mind when it's a Licensed Surveyor. Often we get reviewed by someone not competent in Surveying, with an agenda.
Any review by another land surveyor, aside from a review for compliance with existing regulations, is a conflict waiting to happen. What can be regulated is the information on the product. What cannot be regulated is the surveyor's professional opinion regarding the boundary location. That's a civil matter which cannot be governed by administrative process.

>A few years ago I was dealing with a City, that would throw in requirements that were not in their codes. They wanted State Plane Coordinates on Property Corners of BLA's, so they could use the information to upgrade their GIS. We could fight them, but it was easier to just comply.
If it's not in their code, then they can't just "throw in requirements." What you're saying is, that it's easier to bend over allow your client and the public to be violated. That's the wrong attitude that simply fosters the behavior. It's not difficult to say no. And, it's not difficult (or expensive) to let them know when you mean it. If they want to require SPC on corners, then prepare an ordinance through the public forum like they would for any regulation. If not, then it's not a requirement.

>They also used to go overboard on environmental issues, causing us to submit projects several times. Our first copy would be in agreement with their codes, but some bureaucrat, with a green agenda would add restrictions. Once again is was easier to comply than to fight them.
Yes. It's easier to bend over than to stand up for your client's property rights. If the surveyor won't stand up for property rights, then what profession will? The legal profession. That's what they're there for. And, it doesn't have to cost anything if it's done properly.
>We had one client (with deep pockets) that fought them. He won in court, but it cost him 30k in legal fees, for a 40 lot subdivision. He did it strictly out of principle, but it cut heavily into his profits. It changed nothing with the City, they continued to restrict projects beyond their codes. Because he was our client, even though we advised him to just comply. They became more difficult on every project we turned in after. We quit doing work within that city. There were only a project or two we would get calls on from that area. Most other surveyors in the area refused to do work there also.
If the client won-but-lost 30k then his attorney wasn't very good. He should have started with a letter to their attorney requesting a writ of mandamus. When such action is taken, the city is simply required to obey their own laws. They have no way around it. Any costs incurred by the citizen in making the government follow their own law is paid for by the government (when they loose). Your client should have gotten all 30 k in legal fees back, plus delays and damages. Throw in a reverse condemnation action, and they'll get compensated for the property rights as well.

So, what's the answer? We recommend the client bend over too? We walk away from our business, our livelihood? There's a solution that sucks in every direction I can think of. How about a solution that 1) requires the government to do their job, 2) requires the client to conform to the rules and regulations, and 3) requires the professional to know the laws and make certain they are in compliance.
> I guess it goes to show that these bureaucrats will violate the power they get, and use the residents money to fight you.
>
And... It goes to show us how spineless too many have become when it comes to allowing themselves to be violated. The laws are written to protect the citizens from themselves and from their government. If we, as a profession, are unwilling to uphold those laws, then who are we to moan about the regulators.
> Many cities are great to work with, but they typically have a Surveyor that spent most his/her career in the private sector.
Again, yes... Most cities don't have properly trained people on staff who know or understand the rules and regulations, let alone the government process. That's even more reason why professionals in the private sector are the ones who need to fill that role. I don't submit a project unless I know what the regulations are that govern it. When confronted by some left-field requirement, it's pretty easy to say, "Where is that in your code? I must have missed it."

JBS

In Houston

When surveys are submitted through the Survey Section for approval, the City is reviewing strictly for "presentation". Houston has adopted a "Current Infrastructure Design Manual" which is only a guide, but defines the minimum requirements for Horizontal and Vertical Control for Improvement Projects. The Design Manual also specifies the minimum requirements for boundary parcels (new easements, acquisition parcels, sales parcels, etc.). The City almost never addresses boundary resolution (it would have to be upon the request of a Project Manager, due to some complaint from a private citizen concerning new construction being built on what he perceives to be his property). Correct State Plane coordinates, CORS monuments for vertical, good closures, no missing calls in either report are the things the City looks for. Unfortunately, out of 100 plats turned in within a month, almost all by people very familiar with the City's requirements, approximately 5 are without comment.

> " Nothing peeves the red-liner off more than having to check someone's work for them."
>
>
> Excellent, JBStahl!

Ditto.

When confronted by some left-field requirement, it's pretty easy to say, "Where is that in your code? I must have missed it."
>

That has always been my response. It seems to work pretty well. I just simply ask them what section of the ordinance it is in so that it can be cited in the revisions. Blank stares and crickets ensue..