ROY A. SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.

I.AND SURVEYING AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING

County Surveyor For Bcckor CountyLlncoln Profeaelonal Ccnter

910 Llncoln Avc.DETROIT LAKES, IIINNESOTA 56501

218-847-4289

0ctober 9, 1 994

Dennis Fultz, ChairmanC I earwater County Board of Commi s s i oners% Auditors 0ffice213 Main AvenueBag ley, Mi nnesota

56621

Dear Chairman Fultz,

I had been retained by property owner 0rion l,leege t0survey his property which is Out Lot 6 in the plat ofHighland View. This property is located on the easterly sideof-Long Lost Lake. In the course of this survey severalitems have surfaced. Since I began this proiect I have hadmany cal ls regarding my findings. I've had a cal I from theCounty Sheriff's office, many calls with 0rion }Jeege, a 2

hour telephone conversation with Mr. Weege's neighbor MerleMetcalf, bonversations with the DNR and with Mr. Aus of theCounty Land Office. I am writing in an effort to disclose my

findihgs and the resultant problern. As I understand Mr.Metcalf has talked to the Power CompdIlY, County Boardmembers, and different departments at the County in aneffort to prove where he feels the property line is located.

I am enclosing 3 documents.0ne is a copy of the Plqtof Highland View. Tne second document is a copy of a 1994surve! that I had done and the third document is a reducedversi6n of my 1994 survey. I have put the survey reqqctiondrawing on a semi transparent paper 9o that.you could.overlay that survey unto the original plat document. By

matching the 2 surveys at the quarter cgrner y9u 9an seethat my survey data ioes compare favorably wi!l'the originalsurvey plat. ihere is some difference due to the paper notsca I i ng exact ly correct.

Mr. Metcalf insists that his south line is the sectionline. The problem is that the section line is not the same

as the lot'line between Out Lots 5 and 6. I'm not certain ifthe surveyor that made the plat was indicatilg.!hat.the lotline was tne section line or if he was just indicating onthe drawing that part of the plat was north of the sectionline and plrt of ttre plat was south of the section line. The

area beinb ptatted yras in both Government Lot 5 of Section19 and Government Lot 7 of Section 18. Since the surveyor

ROY A. SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.

I.AND SURVEYING AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING

County Surveyor For Beckcr CountyLlncoln Profegslonal Centcr

910 Llncoln Avc.DETROIT LAKES. iIINNESOTA 56501

218-U7-4289

0ctobeF 9, 1995page 2

was surveying on both sides of the section line the lot linebetween Outlots 5 and 6 did not have to be on the sectionline. I have also surveyed to the east to try to determinethe approximate location of the section line. I have shownthe approximate location of the section line on the platcopy. As you can see there is a significant difference. IfMr. Metcalf is claiming to the section line and Mr. }Jeege isclaiming to the lot line there is definitely a conflict. Ihave suggested to Mr. }{eege to see an attorney in thisregard to see if both parties could negotiate a boundaryline by agreement between them. If they could I woulddescribe the new boundary I ine and both parties could signit. I pointed the problem out to Mr. Metcalf but he feelsthere is no problem. In my lengthy conversation with Metcalfhe indicated he had contacted an attorney and is willing togo to court to prove his claim to the section line. I havemade a very diligent effort to get the two parties togetherto agree on a common boundary line that would be acceptablefor both parties.

In the course of doing surveys in this area vle havefound many markers that have been set by landowners or bypeople who are not qualified surveyors. It appears that whenpeople see these erroneous markers they are using them as"gospel" regardless of who set them.0n my drawing of 1994 Ihave tied into several steel fence posts where someone feltthe easterly line of 0ut Lots 6-10 rras located. These wereover ,|00 feet out of position. It seems that when anymeasuring is done in that area someone will take a compassand start running lines assuming that is the properprocedure. IT Is N0T. I have told Mr. Metcalf that if he is

By overlaying the drawings the transparent copy of mysurvey is very nearly a retracement of the original survey.Therefore I feel that the line I have established is thecorrect out lot line. Since Mr. Metcalf would not accept thesurveyed line and is willing to go to court to dispute thatline Mr. Weege he does not feel it is financially wise forhim to pursue the matter in court. In view of this I haveadvised Mr. t'leege that I am going back to the project andremove the markers that I have set. I will not be completingthe survey.

ROY A. SMITH & ASSOCTATES, tNC.

I.AND SUBVEYING AND CONSULTING ENGINEERING

County Surveyor For Beckcr County

Llncoln Profccclonel Centcr910 Llncoln Avc.

DETROIT LAKES, TINNESOTA 56501218-U7-4289

0ctobef 9, 1 995

page 3

in disagreement vlith the survey he should contact a landsurveyor and we could discuss the procedures that I haveused.

I would suggest in the future that instead of havingcounty personel, town board members, power line people,friends with compasses, board members, etc. check lines inthat area it would be wise to have a registered surveyor dothe surveying in there. Approximate and erroneously ideascreate quite a horde of problems.

Thank you for allowing me to state what I have done. AsI mentioned in view of the circumstances it appears to be animpossible situation for Mr. l'leege to resolve. He doesn'tfeel it warrants further surveying. If the board would careto discuss this project with me I can be reached at thenumber on my letterhead.

RAS : mrS0rian Weege

Since

Smith