Between a rock and a hard place
I haven’t spent any time on here since before covid-19. I have simply had too much going on in my life. Hope this finds everyone well and happy. In 2017 Georgia passed some laws affecting how plats are recorded. One of four certifications (must be verbatim), depending on the circumstance, must be on every plat to be recorded. From the wording, the surveyor should be the last one to sign it before recording. The certification states that the plat has been approved by the applicable local governing authorities and that the approvals, stamps, signatures are “hereon”. My contention is that the Surveyor must sign last or it is a false statement. The surveyor is typically the one that records them and they are submitted electronically. The BOR issued a memorandum saying its ok to sign and release in order to obtain the approvals because some county planners won’t approve it unless signed by the surveyor first. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig. In this case no matter what weasel words are used to disclaim it, it is still a false statement in my opinion. After a bit of research I discovered that to knowingly file or record a document with any government agency that contains a false statement is a felony (all government employees performing their duties are immune). There is this one county that insists on recording any plat that they review and approve. I don’t really have a problem with that except that they will not put their stamp of approval on there until after the surveyor signs it. And then the approval is added digitally. It seems they are afraid that someone will alter the plat after they stamp it and before it’s recorded. They have recorded at least one that the surveyor had not signed it all. And they have added content to more than two of mine that were submitted for recording after I signed them in their office for them to record immediately. One was recorded twice, weeks apart, with the added content rearranged (shows they retain the image without their approval stamp). In one instance the added content restricted the future use of the property. It was supposed to be approved without that restriction or our client wouldn’t have bought the tract. Apparently they don’t want anybody altering a plat after they approve it but it’s okay for them to alter after I have signed it. They won’t approve a plat for recording unless I sign a certification that isn’t technically true (a felony). I would think that future credibility could be called into question if one does that. I’m not willing to and I’m about ready to talk to my attorney about the situation. Am I making a mountain out of a mole hill? Thoughts? Suggestions?
Log in to reply.