'It Appears That Jack Wiles Had Quite a Lot of Input to this "independent" Survey'
“this survey do not match the recorded Powers Subdivision plat”
From: Dru Urquhart [mailto:dhurquhart@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2014 9:59 PM
To: Kisela, Greg
Cc: Kela Lindsay; Ford, Bob; Burman, Tim
Subject: Re: Upham Survey – Atlantic Marine Property Boundary
Mr. Kisela,
Just to clarify, we are requesting hard copies of all the documents used by Upham to determine their boundary along with a written explanation for their findings. It appears that Jack Wiles had quite a lot of input to this “independent” survey done by Upham for the City.
We expressed concern through the Lindsay’s, 509 Powers Ave., that Mr. Wiles knew who the chosen surveyor was and his attorney sent Upham the attached 26-page letter prior to the survey being started. The message we got back was that you were not concerned that it would taint the survey because you didn’t feel the surveyor would take the time to read the letter.
During the survey, on Monday, December 23rd, we saw Mr. Wiles out talking to the surveyors for approximately 20 minutes while they were working. We have no idea what other contact Mr. Wiles or his attorney had with Upham before, during and after the survey but based on the resulting language in the survey it appears his influence was significant . We and the Lindsay’s were not afforded the same opportunity to discuss our side with the surveyor. This was not an “independent” survey by any standard.
Since the results of this survey do not match the recorded Powers Subdivision plat, could cause major issues with deed descriptions for 507, 509, 511 and 513 Powers Ave. and will cause us to lose approximately 20 feet of our yard, we ask that you put the survey out to bid again and not allow Mr. Wiles or his attorney to tamper with the process. Sincerely, Dru & Fred Urquhart 511 Powers Ave. Attachments: Wiles’ Attorney Letter, Upham Survey, Powers Subdivision Plat
________________________________
On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Kisela, Greg <gkisela@port-orange.org> wrote:
Mr. Urquhart:
We have asked Upham to provide additional explanation for their findings.
Greg Kisela
City Manager
________________________________
—–Original Message—–
From: Dru Urquhart [mailto:dhurquhart@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 6:52 AM
To: Kisela, Greg
Cc: Kela Lindsay; Ford, Bob; Burman, Tim
Subject: Upham Survey – Atlantic Marine Property Boundary
Mr.Kisela,
We received a copy of the Upham boundary survey last night from Tim Burman. Because of the significant difference between the measurements on the Upham survey and the measurements on the recorded Powers Subdivision plat we would like to request the following:
1. An explanation for the difference in the measurements between the survey and the plat and copies of the historical data (plats, surveys, etc.) that Upham used to support their measurements.
2. An explanation and copies of the historical data (plats, surveys, etc.) used to determine that the 3″ pipe referenced on the Upham survey serves as the subdivision corner marker rather than the PRM that is depicted on the Powers Subdivision plat.
3. A picture of the 3″ pipe that Upham has determined to be the subdivision corner.
4. A copy of the instructions given to Upham by the City regarding completion of the survey, specifically the intent of the survey.
We also request that the fence permit continue to be held until we receive this information and have had a chance to go over it with our surveyors. Since the Upham Survey contradicts the information on the recorded plat and potentially impacts the deed descriptions of four properties we feel this is a reasonable request.
The majority of Mr. Wiles’ property is zoned Neighborhood Preservation and not Commercial Industrial. He is not being denied use of the property for boat storage since it is not currently zoned for that.
Sincerely,
Dru and Fred Urquhartn
511 Powers Ave
________________________________
Submitted by Interested on 2014/01/02 at 1:24 pm
This dispute is starting to spin out of control.. If Jack Wiles is a city official and the local government allowed him in any way to select or supervise or take part in or interfere with the independent city surveyor that would be disgusting.. Residints say the city manager said he gave a 26 page document from the Wiles lawyer to the surveyor before the survey started and he was not concerned That sounds like collusion to us
If anyone changed lots on the original 1925 Powers Subdivision plat there must be records on file in the county
And why is the city payng some of the construction cost of his project.. Used car lots are a blight for any city.. We are inclined to agree with ted Notall that it maybe time for an investigation
Interested
Mrs. Urquhart:
I believe that the City provided to Upham any and all surveys/maps/plats the City had in its possession. You stated in your e-mail as it related to Mr. Wiles attorney’s letter that “ The message we got back was that you were not concerned that it would taint the survey because you didn’t feel the surveyor would take the time to read the letter”. I do not recall telling you this but my memory bank may be wrong. Was this in an e-mail? Mr. Wiles owns the property. If he saw a surveyor on his property he probably approached them.
We have requested that Upham provide us the explanation that you have requested. Once received the City will then have to either issue the fence permit, deny it or ask for additional information.
Greg Kisela
City Manager
This dispute is starting to spin out of control.. If Jack Wiles is a city official and the local government allowed him in any way to select or supervise or take part in or interfere with the independent city surveyor that would be disgusting.. Residints say the city manager said he gave a 26 page document from the Wiles lawyer to the surveyor before the survey started and he was not concerned That sounds like collusion to us
If anyone changed lots on the original 1925 Powers Subdivision plat there must be records on file in the county And why is the city payng some of the construction cost of his project.. Used car lots are a blight for any city.. We are inclined to agree with ted Notall that it maybe time for an investigation
Interested
Thank you writer of this post. We feel all residents should be very concerned about how this entire process has proceeded. A complete lack of transparency. It sure looks like collusion to those of us being directly affected. Where are our city advocates? The city is stepping all over itself helping Jack Wiles get his goals achieved.
Mrs. Urquhart wrote: “…..The message we got back was that you were not concerned that it would taint the survey because you didn’t feel the surveyor would take the time to read the letter”.
The city manager responded; “I do not recall telling you this but my memory bank may be wrong. Was this in an e-mail? Mr. Wiles owns the property. If he saw a surveyor on his property he probably approached them…….
Hank Springer comments: Telling a citizen, or not telling a citizen complainant, that a surveyor probably would not read a letter sent to him, does not seem to me something that a city manager would not remember, or not be sure that he never responded in such a careless way. Perhaps the city manager is worried that there is an e mail on record which attests to his flippant reply to Mrs. Urquat. I do not have all the evidence, and perhaps there is a written record out there somewhere, but the City Manager’s lack of memory about such a reply, either positive or negative, seems somewhat suspicious to me.
It is noteworthy that the city manager looks upon Wiles talking to a surveyor as an innocent act of talking to someone who is on his property. Perhaps it is, but I myself see little reason to conclude that the dialogue with surveyor was not one of nefarious purposes. But fortunately for those who work the political streets, “we may never know.”
I take note that all these allegations by the complainants seem to be too easy to put in writing, with no convincing replies to put them to rest. Something seems to have gone wrong in this issue and our city government should not conduct its affairs so that questions like these linger and can’t seem to be put to rest.
—- Hank springer
Hank,
I am pleased to see you have reached largely the same conclusions and fundamental concern that I have, and that is why does take Greg Kisela’s administration as long as it does to provide what should be rather easy and straightforward answers.
Two months Finance went into shutdown mode for several weeks until they were able to craft an analysis and explanation regarding the $ 239,000 error in the YMCA reserves.
Last month Finance again went into shutdown mode until they were able to craft and analysis and explanation regarding problems with fuel dispensing records that we were absolutely assured had been corrected following the Public Works scandal of 2 years ago.
And now we have the Manager and Community Development in full ‘know nothing’ mode until they get their stories straight.
Come on Mr. Manager these were straight forward questions that should have been able to be answered in an open interview format by anyone of your staffers with his file, unless ……………..
Ted Noftall
Most of the residents in this subdivision have lived here for over 20 years. A few have lived here their entire lives. We know each other well and have been communicating almost daily on this issue. We have been calling and emailing the City since this mess began back in August. We were working with City staff and getting nowhere. No one could/would answer the questions or we were just plain ignored. In a couple of cases we were lied to. We do have email trails documenting this. When we realized that the City Manager’s emails were public and this site was publishing them we made sure that our emails were directed to him.
We have come to expect the responses we get from the City Manager and his staff and now we can share them with all our friends! We have linked our Facebook page – “No Boatyard on Dunlawton” to several of your posts regarding our issue. This page is only a few days old but we expect it will grow exponentially over the next couple of weeks.
I realize that in the entire scheme of things that this is a relatively small issue, except to us. Hopefully by directing people to your site they will see that secrecy and cronyism is a continuing theme throughout the City Government. Keep up the good work!
Dru Urquhart
Hank,
As you noted, the City Manager said: “Mr. Wiles owns the property. If he saw a surveyor on his property he probably approached them…….” However, Mr. Wiles does not live on that vacant lot, or in the vicinity, so what do you think the odds are of his meeting with the surveyor on that date and exact time as purely coincidental?
One thing is clear, Mr. Wiles is differently not helping the City Manager with his credibility in resolving this issue.
Pat
Our point exactly.How did he know when the surveyor would be there? We as homeowners were not advised so we could provide input to the surveyor.
Coincidental? We don’t think so. It appeared that the surveyors were finished the field work on Friday. When they came back out on Monday afternoon they spent over an hour digging a trench 8 feet long, 3 feet deep and 18 inches wide on our side of the line. We knew they were out there but we respected the fact that it was to be an independent survey and did not discuss the survey with them.
Dru
Never ceases to amaze me that Politician’s & Officials ever seem to learn, that it is not the original oops that’s their real problem, it’s always the attempted cover-up that results in their downfall.
Pat