Surveyors face punishment for elevation errors
February 6, 2009 - 5:52 PM
KFDM-TV - Jessica Holloway
KFDM News (Beaumont, TX) has learned two Southeast Texas surveyors who shot elevations of homes in West Jefferson County could face punishment for how they carried out their work. The Texas Board of Land Surveying met in Austin Friday.
It's decided two Southeast Texas surveyors violated at least five board rules.
The surveyors filed elevation certificates for families living in the Labelle-Fannett area of West Jefferson County. After Hurricane Ike, homeowners in that area found out their elevations were off, in some cases three feet lower than they thought. As a result, many people in Country Road Estates had several feet of water inside their homes. Some lost everything.
A few homeowners have filed civil lawsuits against their surveyors. They want to recoup the 25% of the lost value of their homes not covered by FEMA.
Monday two staff members from the board will decide the appropriate disciplinary action. That could include a fine or the maximum penalty, losing their licenses. The two surveyors have the option of telling their side of the story before the Texas Attorney General. The board will have the final say.
As for any other property owners who file a complaint against a surveyor, those complaints will be investigated by the board and if it rules against the surveyers, the same range of punishment is guaranteed.
Showing posts with label Out of State. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Out of State. Show all posts
Friday, February 6, 2009
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Jefferson County homeowner claims incorrect survey caused home to flood
As posted in the Beaumont Enterprise, February 05, 2009
By KYLE PEVETO
February, 5, 2009
James Majors' Hillebrandt Acres cabin would not have flooded if surveyors who established his property's elevation had done their homework, the homeowner said.
Majors, 43, of Port Neches, will present a complaint against Soutex Surveyors, Inc. of Port Arthur to the Texas Board of Professional Land Surveying for issuing an incorrect elevation certificate for his home on Hillebrandt Bayou in 2003.
The surveyors acted in good faith, the company president said, but the error may be rooted in a natural phenomenon discovered last year.
"I want someone to hold up to their objectives, to say, 'I made a mistake'," Majors said by phone Thursday.
In 1996, Majors hired Soutex to complete a property survey for his cabin in the Hillebrandt Acres subdivision near the LaBelle area in unincorporated Jefferson County. Before building a cabin on the property along Hillebrandt Bayou, he wanted to find the property's elevation above sea level so he could research the historical floods that hit the area and build above that point.
The survey placed his yard at 10 feet above mean sea level, according to his complaint, and in 2003, he began building almost 3 feet higher than that to rise above the historical flood level in the area.
In July 2003, Soutex created Majors a final elevation certificate he could file with Jefferson County to receive final permits, placing his home's bottom floor at 12.9 feet.
At that level, the Hurricane Ike storm surge should have hit more than a foot below the cabin's bottom floor.
Majors contacted Soutex to ask about the discrepancy, and the survey company's president, Anthony Leger, told him about other homes in the Country Road Estates area across Hillebrandt Bayou that had similar problems.
Dozens of homes in the LaBelle area were lower than their elevation certificates said, and after the storm, many were too low to get building permits from Jefferson County, because they were below the 100-year flood plain. Majors' home was above the 100-year level. Still, the storm surge pushed more than a foot of water into his house.
For 30 years, property elevation in the area of Country Road Estates and other homes in the LaBelle area had been produced using data from a federal monument - a brass disk - placed a little more than two miles northwest of Port Acres, Leger wrote in a letter to Jefferson County in May 2008.
That monument, placed by the National Geodetic Survey in 1954, placed the monument's elevation at 6.32 feet above sea level, Ronnie Taylor of the National Geodetic Survey told The Enterprise in late December.
Federal surveyors checked the area again in the early 1980s for FEMA flood maps, and the benchmark's elevation was 3.1 feet lower.
Professional surveyors cannot take the time to establish mean sea level each time they shoot a survey, Leger said, so they rely on government data from the hundreds of thousands of benchmarks across the country. The benchmark's level remained too high in the government record.
Leger said the benchmark's level could account for incorrect elevations throughout LaBelle. When he learned of the problem in spring 2008, he wrote a letter to the county.
The benchmark's elevation change may be caused by subsidence - the sinking of soil often caused by oil drilling or groundwater pumping in an area. A 1983 FEMA flood study said in the area where the benchmark lay, "the subsidence is about 3 feet."
Majors said the surveyors should have known about the benchmark's elevation change and should have not have used data from the benchmark that changed.
"I did my homework (while building the house)," Majors said. "Why didn't they do theirs?"
Surveyors rely on published data from the monuments, Leger said, unless the benchmarks prove incorrect.
"It's a normal practice, yes, sir," Leger said. "It's just unfortunate that LaBelle is in that situation."
The surveying board will meet at 9 a.m. in Austin and may issue its findings at a later meeting. The board can revoke or suspend surveyors' licenses.
By KYLE PEVETO
February, 5, 2009
James Majors' Hillebrandt Acres cabin would not have flooded if surveyors who established his property's elevation had done their homework, the homeowner said.Majors, 43, of Port Neches, will present a complaint against Soutex Surveyors, Inc. of Port Arthur to the Texas Board of Professional Land Surveying for issuing an incorrect elevation certificate for his home on Hillebrandt Bayou in 2003.
The surveyors acted in good faith, the company president said, but the error may be rooted in a natural phenomenon discovered last year.
"I want someone to hold up to their objectives, to say, 'I made a mistake'," Majors said by phone Thursday.
In 1996, Majors hired Soutex to complete a property survey for his cabin in the Hillebrandt Acres subdivision near the LaBelle area in unincorporated Jefferson County. Before building a cabin on the property along Hillebrandt Bayou, he wanted to find the property's elevation above sea level so he could research the historical floods that hit the area and build above that point.
The survey placed his yard at 10 feet above mean sea level, according to his complaint, and in 2003, he began building almost 3 feet higher than that to rise above the historical flood level in the area.
In July 2003, Soutex created Majors a final elevation certificate he could file with Jefferson County to receive final permits, placing his home's bottom floor at 12.9 feet.
At that level, the Hurricane Ike storm surge should have hit more than a foot below the cabin's bottom floor.
Majors contacted Soutex to ask about the discrepancy, and the survey company's president, Anthony Leger, told him about other homes in the Country Road Estates area across Hillebrandt Bayou that had similar problems.
Dozens of homes in the LaBelle area were lower than their elevation certificates said, and after the storm, many were too low to get building permits from Jefferson County, because they were below the 100-year flood plain. Majors' home was above the 100-year level. Still, the storm surge pushed more than a foot of water into his house.
For 30 years, property elevation in the area of Country Road Estates and other homes in the LaBelle area had been produced using data from a federal monument - a brass disk - placed a little more than two miles northwest of Port Acres, Leger wrote in a letter to Jefferson County in May 2008.
That monument, placed by the National Geodetic Survey in 1954, placed the monument's elevation at 6.32 feet above sea level, Ronnie Taylor of the National Geodetic Survey told The Enterprise in late December.
Federal surveyors checked the area again in the early 1980s for FEMA flood maps, and the benchmark's elevation was 3.1 feet lower.
Professional surveyors cannot take the time to establish mean sea level each time they shoot a survey, Leger said, so they rely on government data from the hundreds of thousands of benchmarks across the country. The benchmark's level remained too high in the government record.
Leger said the benchmark's level could account for incorrect elevations throughout LaBelle. When he learned of the problem in spring 2008, he wrote a letter to the county.
The benchmark's elevation change may be caused by subsidence - the sinking of soil often caused by oil drilling or groundwater pumping in an area. A 1983 FEMA flood study said in the area where the benchmark lay, "the subsidence is about 3 feet."
Majors said the surveyors should have known about the benchmark's elevation change and should have not have used data from the benchmark that changed.
"I did my homework (while building the house)," Majors said. "Why didn't they do theirs?"
Surveyors rely on published data from the monuments, Leger said, unless the benchmarks prove incorrect.
"It's a normal practice, yes, sir," Leger said. "It's just unfortunate that LaBelle is in that situation."
The surveying board will meet at 9 a.m. in Austin and may issue its findings at a later meeting. The board can revoke or suspend surveyors' licenses.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Candidate for surveyor was fined in 2003 on ethics issue (Medford, Oregon)
By John Darling for the Mail Tribune - May 14, 2008
Kerry Bradshaw, a candidate for Jackson County surveyor, came under review five years ago by the state ethics commission over allegations he used city time and resources to do private work on the side while employed as a surveyor for the Medford Public Works Department.
Based on documents found on Bradshaw's computer and other evidence, the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission found there was "substantial objective basis" to believe Bradshaw had violated the law and recommended further investigation.
Bradshaw said in a recent interview that rather than fight the complaint, which would've cost him "thousands of dollars," he paid a $500 fine and quit the job.
"The city felt my outside business was crowding into my city work," Bradshaw said. "We had a disagreement and I quit and started my own business."
The complaint was filed by public works Director Cory Crebbin, who declined to be interviewed for this story.
Darrell Huck, Bradshaw's opponent in the primary, said the complaint against Bradshaw was five years ago and therefore a "dead issue."
Huck added, however, that he believes mixing personal and government business is a clear conflict of interest.
"You shouldn't use public resources to conduct personal business," Huck said. "That is straightforward, basic ethics."
Huck said he is concerned that Bradshaw has said he would keep operating his private business, Timberline Land Surveying Inc., if elected county surveyor.
"I would treat the county surveyor job as a prime occupation needing full-time attendance," Huck said. "To try to run two businesses opens the door for potential conflict of interest."
According to the GPSC's preliminary review, the city found documents on Bradshaw's work computer indicating he had engaged in personal business with city resources and on city time. The documents included legal descriptions of property, proposals and contractual agreements, survey drawings and invoices for work performed.
"It appeared that Mr. Bradshaw had been operating this personal businesses as a land surveyor during the years 2000 into 2003," the review said.
In his defense, Bradshaw said surveyors were allowed flexible work schedules and could work on weekends, evenings or early mornings to compensate for personal time taken during normal business hours. He also said he used the work computer when his home computer was down and that some of the documents found, though personal, were used when conducting city business. He said that his personal business activities "had never resulted in any complaints, reprimands or unfavorable evaluations," the GSPC review said.
Bradshaw said in an interview he admitted no guilt when he paid the civil penalty.
"It wasn't worth the hassle. I didn't agree with it but I didn't have the thousands of dollars to fight it," he said.
Doug Detling, manager of the city's Human Resources Department, said in an interview that city employees, then and now, are not authorized to do secondary work using city time or resources and that flex time (making up hours used for personal work) is not allowed.
Employees are allowed secondary work outside business hours as long as they report it in advance and it doesn't occur inside the city, Detling said.
John Darling is a freelance writer living in Ashland. E-mail him at jdarling@jeffnet.org.
Posted in The Mail Tribune: http://www.mailtribune.com/
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080514/NEWS/805140326/-1/LIFE
Kerry Bradshaw, a candidate for Jackson County surveyor, came under review five years ago by the state ethics commission over allegations he used city time and resources to do private work on the side while employed as a surveyor for the Medford Public Works Department.
Based on documents found on Bradshaw's computer and other evidence, the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission found there was "substantial objective basis" to believe Bradshaw had violated the law and recommended further investigation.
Bradshaw said in a recent interview that rather than fight the complaint, which would've cost him "thousands of dollars," he paid a $500 fine and quit the job.
"The city felt my outside business was crowding into my city work," Bradshaw said. "We had a disagreement and I quit and started my own business."
The complaint was filed by public works Director Cory Crebbin, who declined to be interviewed for this story.
Darrell Huck, Bradshaw's opponent in the primary, said the complaint against Bradshaw was five years ago and therefore a "dead issue."
Huck added, however, that he believes mixing personal and government business is a clear conflict of interest.
"You shouldn't use public resources to conduct personal business," Huck said. "That is straightforward, basic ethics."
Huck said he is concerned that Bradshaw has said he would keep operating his private business, Timberline Land Surveying Inc., if elected county surveyor.
"I would treat the county surveyor job as a prime occupation needing full-time attendance," Huck said. "To try to run two businesses opens the door for potential conflict of interest."
According to the GPSC's preliminary review, the city found documents on Bradshaw's work computer indicating he had engaged in personal business with city resources and on city time. The documents included legal descriptions of property, proposals and contractual agreements, survey drawings and invoices for work performed.
"It appeared that Mr. Bradshaw had been operating this personal businesses as a land surveyor during the years 2000 into 2003," the review said.
In his defense, Bradshaw said surveyors were allowed flexible work schedules and could work on weekends, evenings or early mornings to compensate for personal time taken during normal business hours. He also said he used the work computer when his home computer was down and that some of the documents found, though personal, were used when conducting city business. He said that his personal business activities "had never resulted in any complaints, reprimands or unfavorable evaluations," the GSPC review said.
Bradshaw said in an interview he admitted no guilt when he paid the civil penalty.
"It wasn't worth the hassle. I didn't agree with it but I didn't have the thousands of dollars to fight it," he said.
Doug Detling, manager of the city's Human Resources Department, said in an interview that city employees, then and now, are not authorized to do secondary work using city time or resources and that flex time (making up hours used for personal work) is not allowed.
Employees are allowed secondary work outside business hours as long as they report it in advance and it doesn't occur inside the city, Detling said.
John Darling is a freelance writer living in Ashland. E-mail him at jdarling@jeffnet.org.
Posted in The Mail Tribune: http://www.mailtribune.com/
http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080514/NEWS/805140326/-1/LIFE
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Tennessee-Georgia border dispute derided
By Lee Shearer | lee.shearer@onlineathens.com | Story updated at 11:20 PM on Monday, March 3, 2008
When Georgia legislators moved to redraw the border with Tennessee last week, they launched a doomed and costly waste of taxpayer money, say professionals and researchers in the arcane field of state boundaries and surveying.
The long-held legal principle is simple, said border expert Louis DeVorsey: The decisive fact is not where surveyors meant to draw the line - it's where people have accepted the line to be over time.
"It's where people adjusted their lives to," he said.
A retired University of Georgia geography professor, DeVorsey wrote the book on another Georgia border dispute - a court battle between Georgia and South Carolina over the exact line dividing their two states.
Apparently motivated by a thirst for Tennessee River water that flows temptingly close to the state's northern border, Georgia lawmakers have called for a new land survey to put the border where the Peach State lawmakers say it ought to be - on the 35th parallel, about a mile north of where it is now.
The actual state line was drawn in 1818 by a joint Georgia-Tennessee survey team led by UGA surveyor and mathematician James Camak.
The survey team's charge was to go into the mountain wilderness between the two states and mark a line along the 35th parallel, the agreed-upon border between the two states. Traveling in rough mountain territory, the team missed the right spot by a mile, according to modern measurements.
But courts have held over and over again in other border disputes that the line everyone follows over time - not the theoretical one - is the legal border, DeVorsey said.
The Georgia-Tennessee dispute legally is no different than if someone builds a garage partly on a neighbor's land. If the garage sits there for 30 years, a court will not make the garage builder tear it down, he said.
Farris Cadle of Savannah, another author and researcher of boundary history, was less diplomatic.
"The whole thing is stupid," Cadle said.
The legislature's move to annex a slice of Tennessee will just replay what's happened before with a lot less publicity, he said.
"Every 20 or 30 years, some bright legislator that doesn't know the background of this situation ... will say, 'Oh, we're missing out on some of our territory,' " he said.
That lawmaker convinces fellow legislators to appoint a boundary commission and hire lawyers; the lawyers look up court rulings that say the boundary can't be redrawn to suit Georgia and then the border war dies - until the next time, Cadle said.
Like others, Cadle believes Georgia legislators are motivated by a thirst to tap into the water that flows in the Tennessee River, just across the state line - but south of the 35th parallel.
But the effort might backfire, he said.
"It's bad enough they're throwing away taxpayer money. It's going to create bad relations with the people of Tennessee," he said.
Virtually no surveyed state line in the eastern United States - and none of Georgia's - is exactly where it originally was meant to be, Cadle said.
Surveyors back then had crude instruments, had to traverse rugged wilderness on foot or horseback and had to worry about hazards like Indians attacking, he said.
Surveyors did the best they could with the instruments they had, said Greg Spies, a professor at Troy State University in Alabama and an authority on the history of state border lines - especially the Georgia-Tennessee line.
"There was no way - absolutely no way - they could accurately put a parallel of latitude on the ground," Spies said.
Spies wrote a scholarly article on the Camak survey expedition four years ago.
Camak wanted to get better survey instruments before he set out to map the Georgia-Tennessee border, but the expedition began before the tools could be shipped from Europe, Camak wrote in 1826, when the surveying discrepancy was first detected.
The instruments Camak took included a sextant made for nautical use - good enough to get a ship to within a mile of land, but not the best tool for accurate land surveying, Spies said.
But the boundaries Camak and his team drew are the ones legally accepted today, he said.
"All those old surveys like that are in error, if you want to look at it like that, but the boundaries are where they are," he said.
And Georgia will lose the border war of 2008, as well, Spies predicted.
"I'm not a betting man, but I'd just about put money on it," he said.
-----
Published in the Athens Banner-Herald on 030308
http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/030308/news_2008030300238.shtml
When Georgia legislators moved to redraw the border with Tennessee last week, they launched a doomed and costly waste of taxpayer money, say professionals and researchers in the arcane field of state boundaries and surveying.
The long-held legal principle is simple, said border expert Louis DeVorsey: The decisive fact is not where surveyors meant to draw the line - it's where people have accepted the line to be over time.
"It's where people adjusted their lives to," he said.
A retired University of Georgia geography professor, DeVorsey wrote the book on another Georgia border dispute - a court battle between Georgia and South Carolina over the exact line dividing their two states.
Apparently motivated by a thirst for Tennessee River water that flows temptingly close to the state's northern border, Georgia lawmakers have called for a new land survey to put the border where the Peach State lawmakers say it ought to be - on the 35th parallel, about a mile north of where it is now.
The actual state line was drawn in 1818 by a joint Georgia-Tennessee survey team led by UGA surveyor and mathematician James Camak.
The survey team's charge was to go into the mountain wilderness between the two states and mark a line along the 35th parallel, the agreed-upon border between the two states. Traveling in rough mountain territory, the team missed the right spot by a mile, according to modern measurements.
But courts have held over and over again in other border disputes that the line everyone follows over time - not the theoretical one - is the legal border, DeVorsey said.
The Georgia-Tennessee dispute legally is no different than if someone builds a garage partly on a neighbor's land. If the garage sits there for 30 years, a court will not make the garage builder tear it down, he said.
Farris Cadle of Savannah, another author and researcher of boundary history, was less diplomatic.
"The whole thing is stupid," Cadle said.
The legislature's move to annex a slice of Tennessee will just replay what's happened before with a lot less publicity, he said.
"Every 20 or 30 years, some bright legislator that doesn't know the background of this situation ... will say, 'Oh, we're missing out on some of our territory,' " he said.
That lawmaker convinces fellow legislators to appoint a boundary commission and hire lawyers; the lawyers look up court rulings that say the boundary can't be redrawn to suit Georgia and then the border war dies - until the next time, Cadle said.
Like others, Cadle believes Georgia legislators are motivated by a thirst to tap into the water that flows in the Tennessee River, just across the state line - but south of the 35th parallel.
But the effort might backfire, he said.
"It's bad enough they're throwing away taxpayer money. It's going to create bad relations with the people of Tennessee," he said.
Virtually no surveyed state line in the eastern United States - and none of Georgia's - is exactly where it originally was meant to be, Cadle said.
Surveyors back then had crude instruments, had to traverse rugged wilderness on foot or horseback and had to worry about hazards like Indians attacking, he said.
Surveyors did the best they could with the instruments they had, said Greg Spies, a professor at Troy State University in Alabama and an authority on the history of state border lines - especially the Georgia-Tennessee line.
"There was no way - absolutely no way - they could accurately put a parallel of latitude on the ground," Spies said.
Spies wrote a scholarly article on the Camak survey expedition four years ago.
Camak wanted to get better survey instruments before he set out to map the Georgia-Tennessee border, but the expedition began before the tools could be shipped from Europe, Camak wrote in 1826, when the surveying discrepancy was first detected.
The instruments Camak took included a sextant made for nautical use - good enough to get a ship to within a mile of land, but not the best tool for accurate land surveying, Spies said.
But the boundaries Camak and his team drew are the ones legally accepted today, he said.
"All those old surveys like that are in error, if you want to look at it like that, but the boundaries are where they are," he said.
And Georgia will lose the border war of 2008, as well, Spies predicted.
"I'm not a betting man, but I'd just about put money on it," he said.
-----
Published in the Athens Banner-Herald on 030308
http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/030308/news_2008030300238.shtml
Thursday, February 14, 2008
"Rural Surveyor" Designation in Alabama
Apparently, the State of Alabama is contemplating creating a new type of surveyor that requires no background in surveying! This new surveyor would be referred to as a "Rural Surveyor". I am not sure how or if we should get involved, but I think we should support our counterparts in the State of Alabama as they fight this bill.
The following is a letter dated February 12, 2008 from Ann M. Galloway, Executive Director of the Alabama Society of Professional Land Surveyors:
The following is a letter dated February 12, 2008 from Ann M. Galloway, Executive Director of the Alabama Society of Professional Land Surveyors:
Feb. 12, 2008
To: All Members of ASPLS
Fr: Ann M. Galloway , Executive Director
Re:House Bill #333 by Rep. Marc Keahey(whose District 65 covers Choctaw, Clark and Washington Counties ) was introduced in the legislature last week.
This bill would amend the BOL law relating to licensure of surveyors. This bill would allow for a "rural surveyor". This type of surveyor would not have to be licensed. This bill would limit the practice of the rural land surveyor to rural areas and municipalities with a population less than 5,000.
We believe that rural areas are just as important as any other to be properly surveyed by a licensed professional land surveyor.
This bill has been assigned to the Board and Commissions Committee.
This is a very bad bill and ASPLS opposes this bill. Please review the bill yourself. For a complete copy of this bill, go to the website of the Alabama Legislature: www.legislature.state.al.us
Select legislation, code & constitution
Scroll down and click on Visit ALISON
On left hand side, click on BILLS
Then BILLs by Sponsor
Under House, scroll down to Rep. Keahey's name, click on his name, then Get bills on the left, scroll down to HB #333.
Click on this bill number, then up in the top red tool bar, click on VIEW, then you can print a copy of this bill.
Also in the red bar, you can click on amendments and history to get a detail about the progress of this bill.
MOST IMPORTANTLY call your Representative today and tell him that you oppose this bill because it is important that boundaries whether rural not should be located by a licensed professional land surveyor.
Ask your representative to oppose HB#333. To reach your representative, call (334)242-7600 and ask for him by name.
If you do not know the name of your legislator, you can search on the legislature website by your zip code to find out who it is.
Please email me back when you make contact to let me know if your representative agreed to vote against the bill when it comes up.
It is very important that you contact your representative now!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)