February 24, 1972 Missouri State Land Survey Authority Meeting Minutes

MISSOURI STATE LAND SURVEY AUTHORITY

Minutes of Meeting

February 24, 1972

     A meeting of the State Land Survey Authority was held February 24, 1972 at the Land Survey Building, Rolla, Missouri.  Acting Chairman Willard Eckhardt called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m.  Present besides Mr. Eckhardt were James Anderson, Authority Member; Larry Fellows, Assistant State Geologist; and Robert Myers, State Land Surveyor.

     The minutes of the January 25th meeting were reviewed.  A suggested change is [sic] wording of paragraph 1, page 3 was made.  Minutes were approved.

     The following items were presented by Mr. Myers for discussion and necessary action:

     1.  The 1972-73 budget and capital improvement requests have passed the House and are awaiting action in the Senate.  Mr. Myers stated that the latest report indicated the Land Survey would receive $2300 as requested from the Emergency Fund.  Further confirmation is awaited.

     2.  Trial balance sheets for the month of February.

     3.  Mr. John Flowers had been hired as a part-time employee in the position of engineering technician.  The employment of Mr. Flowers completes the roster of employees as approved for this fiscal year.

     4.  Equipment purchased to date and purchases being processed as previously approved by the Authority.

     5.  Four "requests for opinion" were submitted to the Attorney General's office.  Mr. Eckhardt stated that it was his opinion that the following question should also be submitted for an opinion:  In 3rd and 4th class counties, can we pay more than statutory fees, and if there is a county surveyor, is he required to do the work if so requested.  Requests submitted were nos. 92, 96, 97 & 98.

     6.  Missouri-Nebraska boundary dispute and the Missouri-Iowa boundary line.  It was agreed that the State Land Survey's position should be as surveying consultants only.  However it was the opinion of the Authority that the State Land Survey Authority could take part in the restoration and remonumentation of the original Iowa-Missouri boundary.

     7.  Pattonsburg new city project.  It was recommended by Mr. Myers that a pilot project be conducted in this area for corner search and evaluation.  The above recommendation was approved.  If contractural work in excess of $500 is required, further Authority action will be required.

     8.  A meeting with Mr. Louren Wood, Assistant Attorney General, to discuss the Corner Restoration Forms.  The forms were revised per Mr. Wood's suggestions and are now out for bid.  A form number and date will be added to the form before printing if possible.

     9.  Cast iron markers available from Harrison Monument Co.  Mr. Myers also reported that Buie Brass had been unable to supply acceptable brass caps as bid, and the order had now gone to Gilbert Brass Works.

    10.  Mr. Ray Ford, University of Missouri-Rolla graduate student, had prepared a trial records indexing program for the State Land Survey Authority as part of his studies.  Also, Mr. Byrd, Assistant Director of the University of Missouri-Rolla Computer Center, is preparing a cost proposal for a records indexing program.  It was suggested that Mr. Myers check on possible assistance in geocoding from Administrative Services in Jefferson City.  It was agreed that this would be discussed further at a future meeting after receipt of the cost proposal from Mr. Byrd.

    11.  No additional information was available on the Springfield Coordinate System at this time.

    12.  MARLS Legislative Committee met with Mr. Myers on February 5, 1972 at the Land Survey Building.  Proposed county surveyor legislation was discussed.

    13.  A letter from the Bureau of Land Management, concerning surveys in the Meramec Reservoir area, was read.  It was the opinion of the Authority that no action should be taken concerning this letter.

     The next meeting of the Land Survey Authority will be held March 23rd.

     Meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m.

========================

PLAN OF SEARCH AND EVALUATION

OF GENERAL LAND OFFICE CORNERS

IN TOWNSHIP 60N, RANGE 28W of 5TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN

IN DAVIESS COUNTY MISSOURI

(PATTONSBURG NEW TOWN AREA)

The new town project planning has been in progress for over one year under contracts with Washington University and UMR.  Planning was previously carried out by private concerns.  Under the present setup several agencies have provided input and support for the program.

The overall program has progressed almost to the point of land acquisition but so far as can be determined no effort has been made to locate the original or perpetuated land corners in the area.  The perpetuation of these land corners is of utmost importance to avoid problem of ownership now and in the future.  If these corners are not found before construction starts all evidence of existing corners may be lost and thereby increase the costs of future surveys and also decrease the certainty with which land corners could ever be restored.

At the present time we would have the advantage of being able to tie the corners which could be found to an electronic traverse net which covers about one half the area.  With this information a mathamatical [sic] analysis of the found data and the possible location of corners not otherwise recoverable without expensive resurvey on our part.

The program required by our office would be as follows:

    1)  The compilation of GLO data for the township from the microfilm files of our office.

    2)  Obtain data of subsequent surveys of record from the court house (2 volumes record of survey and 3 other record books).

    3)  Field search of corner location areas as determined by map and airphoto interpretation.

    4)  Tie corners found in "3" to survey net.

    5)  Evaluate total area for general fit and probable location of corners not found.

    6)  Field search of critical areas with information gained from "4".

    7)  Monumentation of verified corners and recommendation as to further required work in the area.


-------------------------------
Transcribed by Steven E. Weible

Analysis of Section 3, Township 31 North, Range 2 East, 5th Principal Meridian, Missouri

At a recent surveyor's workshop one speaker presented Section 3 in Township 31 North, Range 2 East of the Fifth Principal Meridian in Missouri as an interesting example.  The speaker posed the question: How would you establish the corners of the subdivided Northeast quarter of Section 3 in accordance with the official Township Plat?  The speaker left the question unanswered, so let's see what we can find.

The speaker presented the following image of the section in question:

Image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey

This image comes from the Township Plat for Township 31 North, Range 2 East of the Fifth Principal Meridian found in Missouri Plats Volume 36, page 44 (Missouri State Land Survey document name: Y9901072).

This Township Plat is dated March 4, 1853

Image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey

and is signed by D. A. Spaulding, at that time the Surveyor General for Missouri and Illinois.

Image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey

This plat is the latest version in the custody of the Missouri State Land Survey and is regarded by nearly everyone as the "official" government plat.  It lacks some critical details, however, which lead to the initial question to which we seek an answer.

As I discussed in my article, entitled "See New Plat?"
(http://www.atnhayseed.blogspot.com/2012/02/see-new-plat.html),
there is sometimes an older Township Plat available, depending upon when the township was subdivided into sections.  These older plats often have more information on them that was not copied over to the newer plats.

If we check the Missouri Land Survey Index (https://apps.mda.mo.gov/molandsurveyindex/), we find that for this township there is indeed an older plat in Missouri Plats Volume 1, page 46 (Missouri State Land Survey document name: Y9903817):

Image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey

This Township Plat is dated September 16, 1822

Image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey

and is signed by Joseph Barton, the Deputy Surveyor to whom the work was contracted.

Image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey

If we examine the two plats side by side, we see that the northeast quarter of Section 3 is depicted essentially the same in each plat ... except for one detail (disregarding the differing location of Black River in each as, basically, a guess).  You will notice on the 1822 Township Plat that the tract in the southwest part of the quarter section has a red letter "S," indicating that the tract had been sold.  Often this indicates a sale that disrupted the standard scheme of protracting into lots.

To find out more about what may have been sold, let's go to the U. S. Bureau of Land Management's Official Federal Land Records Site (http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/) to look for the land patents that were issued.

When we "Search Documents" for Township 31 North, Range 2 East, Section 3 in Missouri, we find three patents issued in the northeast quarter, as follows:

- Certificate # 4748 to Pate Buford, dated November 14, 1837, for

"the South West quarter of the North East quarter of Section three, in Township thirty one North, of Range two East, in the District of Lands subject to sale at Jackson, Missouri, containing thirty three acres and seventy one hundreths of an acre"

- Certificate # 22019 to Henry Coil, dated October 10, 1856, for

"the North West quarter of the North East quarter of Section three, in Township thirty one North, of Range two East, in the district of lands subject to sale at Jackson, Missouri.  Containing thirty three acres and ninety six hundreths of an acre."

- Certificate # 36023 to John Stubbs, dated March 1, 1860, for

"the West half of the Lots numbered One and two of the North East quarter, and the lot numbered two of the North West quarter of section two, and the East half of the Lots numbered One and two of the North East quarter, and the North East quarter of the South East quarter of Section three, in Township thirty One North, and the South West quarter of the South East quarter of Section thirty-five, in Township thirty-two North of Range two East, in the district of lands subject to sale at Jackson, Missouri, containing two hundred and seventy-eight acres, and sixty nine hundreths of an acre."


Before we proceed further, it may be instructive to review the development of laws that affected the sale of the public lands.

First, the Act of February 11, 1805, chapter 14, (U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 2, page 313) anticipated the sale of the public lands in units of half sections and quarter sections, but no smaller.

Next, the Act of April 24, 1820, chapter 51, (U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 3, page 566) allowed the public lands to be offered for sale in half quarter sections.

Then the Act of April 5, 1832, chapter 65, (U.S. Statutes at Large, Volume 4, page 503) provided for the sale of public lands in quarter-quarter sections.

Now, let's examine the chronology of our situation:

- 1821 - Joseph Barton was awarded a contract that included the subdivision of Township 31 North, Range 2 East.

- 1822 February - Charles Lockhart, working under the contract of Joseph Barton, completed the subdivision of Township 31 North, Range 2 East into sections.

- 1822 September - a Township Plat (which we have previously identified as the old Township Plat) was prepared and signed by Joseph Barton.  At the time it was signed by Joseph Barton this Township Plat would not have shown parts of sections smaller than a quarter section.  The quantity of the Northeast quarter of Section 3 was computed and shown on the plat as 134.84 acres.

- 1832 April 05 - Act of Congress provides for the sale of the public lands in quarter-quarter sections.

- 1837 November 14 - Pate Buford is issued a patent for "the South West quarter of the North East quarter of Section three, in Township thirty one North, of Range two East, in the District of Lands subject to sale at Jackson, Missouri, containing thirty three acres and seventy one hundreths of an acre."  The computed quantity of the quarter section is 134.84 acres.  Taking this number and dividing by 4 gives a result of 33.71 acres, which is the quantity patented to Buford, an aliquot part of the northeast quarter of Section 3.  So, the "S" shown on the 1822 Township Plat corresponds with the purchase of Pate Buford.  You will note, however, that the quantity for the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter shown on both Township Plats is 33.46 acres.

- 1848 August 01 - A clerk in the Surveyor General's office protracts the northern and western tiers of sections into lots and calculates the quantities of each, as evidenced by a notation on the 1822 Township Plat as shown below.

Image courtesy of the Missouri State Land Survey

The standard practice, as can be seen from the rest of the sections that were protracted, was to create standard lots of 80 acres each and irregular, or remainder, lots along the township line on the north and the range line on the west.  In this case, however, there had been a previous sale for an aliquot part of the quarter section (as authorized by the Act of April 5, 1832), so it could not be lotted in the same manner as the other quarter sections.  (Please, note that the previous sale of the aliquot part in 1837 took place before the protraction into lots in 1848.)  Recalling that Pate Buford's patent was for 33.71 acres, we must wonder where the 33.46 acres came from that is shown on both Township Plats.  Curiously, if we multiply 33.46 by 4, the result is 133.84.  The acreage on the plat for the quarter section is shown as 134.84 acres.  In his calculation could the clerk have miswritten the quantity of 134.84 as 133.84?  Remember, he would have been calculating long-hand without the aid of a calculating devise.  Is it possible that the clerk miscalculated the area of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter at one time and wrote it on the plat with the letter "S" and then at some later time he (same clerk, same handwriting) correctly calculated the remainder of the northeast quarter?  At any rate it appears that the clerk made a mistake in labeling the quantity for the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 3, which resulted in a miscalculation of the quantity of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 3.

Continuing our chronology:

- 1853 March 04 - A new Township Plat is copied from the 1822 Township Plat with the 1848 calculated quantities and is signed by D. A. Spalding, Surveyor General of Missouri and Illinois.

- 1856 October 10 - Henry Coil is issued a patent for "the North West quarter of the North East quarter of Section three, in Township thirty one North, of Range two East, in the district of lands subject to sale at Jackson, Missouri. Containing thirty three acres and ninety six hundreths of an acre."  We see that the quantity (incorrect as it is) quoted in the patent comes from the 1848 calculations that were copied to the 1853 Township Plat.

- 1860 March 01 -John Stubbs is issued a patent for "the West half of the Lots numbered One and two of the North East quarter, and the lot numbered two of the North West quarter of section two, and the East half of the Lots numbered One and two of the North East quarter, and the North East quarter of the South East quarter of Section three, in Township thirty One North, and the South West quarter of the South East quarter of Section thirty-five, in Township thirty-two North of Range two East, in the district of lands subject to sale at Jackson, Missouri, containing two hundred and seventy-eight acres, and sixty nine hundreths of an acre."  Interestingly, the tract of interest in this patent is described as the east half of lots 1 and 2 of the northeast quarter of Section 3, even though neither Township Plat shows the northeast quarter protracted into "lots."  The result, really, is no different than if it had been described as the east half of the northeast quarter of Section 3.  Also, considering that the west half of the northeast quarter had already been sold, only the east half remained for sale, so there's really no question about the intent, when the history is taken into account.  Just for good measure, let's check the total of the quantities covered by this patent as shown on the 1853 Township Plat:

     Township 31 North, Range 2 East
        W 1/2 Lot 1 NE 1/4 Sec 2       40.00
        W 1/2 Lot 2 NE 1/4 Sec 2       31.69
        Lot 2 NW 1/4 Sec 2             59.58
        E 1/2 Lot 1 NE 1/4 Sec 3       33.71 (or 40.00)
        E 1/2 Lot 2 NE 1/4 Sec 3       33.71 (or 27.42)
        NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec 3            40.00

     Township 32 North, Range 2 East
        SW 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec 35           40.00
                                      ======
                                      278.69 acres


Having examined the evidence, can we now answer the question that we began with:  How would you establish the corners of the subdivided Northeast quarter of Section 3 in accordance with the official Township Plat?  Taking the chronology of events into account, including the Township Plats, patents and protraction into lots, I believe that it is clear that the intent was to create aliquot parts in the northeast quarter of Section 3 in conformity with the initial sale in 1837.  Therefore, the northeast quarter of Section 3 should be subdivided by intersecting straight lines, one from the midpoint of the south line of the northeast quarter to the midpoint of the north line of the northeast quarter and the second from the midpoint of the west line of the northeast quarter to the midpoint of the east line of the northeast quarter.


----------------------------------------
Original composition by Steven E. Weible

Surveyor General William Rector's Connections

William Rector was appointed Principal Deputy Surveyor of the Missouri Territory in 1813.  In 1816 he was elevated to the newly created position of Surveyor of the Public Lands (aka Surveyor General) of the Territories of Missouri and Illinois.  In 1815 he began contracting with deputy surveyors to commence the surveys of the United States Public Lands.  Those to whom he granted contracts tended to be relatives and fellow military veterans.  The following is a list of some of those to whom contracts were granted and their relationship to Rector.

Thomas C. Rector - brother of William Rector.

Stephen Rector - brother of William Rector.

Elias Rector - brother of William Rector.

Wharton Rector - brother of William Rector.

William Vance Rector - son of William Rector's brother, Wharton Rector.

Henry Wharton Conway - son of William Rector's sister, Nancy Ann Rector, who married Thomas B. Conway.

James Sevier Conway - son of William Rector's sister, Nancy Ann Rector, who married Thomas B. Conway.

Frederick Rector Conway - son of William Rector's sister, Nancy Ann Rector, who married Thomas B. Conway.

Joseph C. Brown - fellow veteran of the War of 1812.

Prospect K. Robbins - fellow veteran of the War of 1812.

Jenifer T. Sprigg - fellow veteran of the War of 1812.

William H. Ashley - fellow veteran of the War of 1812.

Angus Lewis Langham - fellow veteran of the War of 1812; his sister married William Rector's nephew.

Elias Barcroft - was an assistant to Rector in 1809; in 1818 he married Margaret Mary (Vance) Rector, the widow of William Rector's brother, Wharton Rector.

Joseph Kimber Barton - married William Rector's sister, Elizabeth Rector.

Kimber W. Barton - brother of Joseph Kimber Barton.

Charles Lockhart - married Catherine Wise Barton, the sister of Joseph Kimber Barton and Kimber W. Barton.

Enoch Steen - married William Rector's sister, Polly Mary Rector.

Lucius F. Thruston - brother of Fannie Bardella Thruston, who married William Rector's brother, Elias Rector; also uncle to William Rector's wife.

Thomas W. Thruston - brother of Fannie Bardella Thruston, who married William Rector's brother, Elias Rector; also uncle to William Rector's wife.

Mr. January - brother of William Rector's wife.


----------------------------------------
Information compiled by Steven E. Weible

January 1972 Repository Recommendation for the Missouri State Land Survey Authority

Note:  The following report was presented by Mr. Robert E. Myers, Missouri State Land Surveyor, at the January 25, 1972 meeting of the Missouri State Land Survey Authority.

==================================================

RECOMMENDED STATE LAND SURVEY AUTHORITY REPOSITORY PROGRAM

     The responsibility to provide a storage facility and a retrieval system for all land survey information in the State of Missouri has been given to the State Land Survey Authority by the legislature.  The documents to be stored in this repository include the records from the Secretary of State's land vault in Jefferson City, the survey plat records and county surveyor records recorded in each of the respective county recorder's office, and such other information that will benefit the land surveying system in the State of Missouri.  The stations established for the basic control of the Missouri State Coordinate System and its accessories are also to be included in the repository.  Many other documents will be received from private sureyors and they will also be stored in this facility.  It is estimated that at this time the library would contain approximately 400,000 documents.  These documents should be readily available for use by the surveying profession in the State of Missouri.  Other documents, approximately 50,000, would be stored by the repository, but would not be in general use.  These documents would include such things as the original land patents and the various instructions given to the original surveyors.

     A repository containing 400,000 useful and readily available documents requires a great deal of planning and organization to be effectively used.  One system of display is to be designed for all documentation.  This unitized system will alow the most efficient use of all equipment for the repository.  The documents today, in their original form, are in various sizes, shapes, and forms.  It is obvious that this type of original documentation must be converted to one unitized system in order that an effective system can be designed.  The use of microfilm seems to be the only way that this could be attained economically.  Therefore, we recommend the use of microfilming as the basic system for the State Land Survey Authority repository.

     Today we have three different formats in microfilming information available.  First we have roll microfilm.  The term, roll microfilm, is used here to mean micro images or photographic negative prints on film at a reduced scale attached together so they may be stored in roll form.  The two widths most commonly used are 16mm. and 35mm.  Roll film has been in use for many years.  Consequently there is much equipment available for preparing, viewing, and making enlarged prints of it, and many people are familiar with its use.

     The second format is that of the aperture card.  An aperture card is the mounting of a single micro image on a Hollerith card.  The card is a standard computer card with a small window in it.  There is only one frame or one image mounted on each card.

     The third format is that of microfiche or jackets.  Here we use the microfiche to mean a relatively large number of micro images assembled in a two dimensional aray [sic] on a 4" x 6" standard card size.  The jacket is the format of the original film.  In this jacket either 16mm. or 35mm. film is cut into strips and placed into the jacket which holds either 60, 16mm. frames or 6, 35mm. frames.  Each one of these jackets has a tab at the top for typing information for retrieval of the jacket itself.  The microfiche document is a film copy of the microfiche jacket.  It is the basic format used by many of the agencies today.  The clearing house for scientific and technical information of the National Bureau of Standards uses the microfiche for storage and retrieval of all the Federal Government scientific information.

     It is important that we list the advantages and disadvatages of each one of these modes or formats.  The roll film concept has the basic advantage that the greatest number of documents can be stored in this manner in the least amount of space.  The roll film system also provides a greater file integrity  than any of the other systems.  In other words, documents may not be lost individually because they are connected with an entire roll and may not be removed singularly.  The main disadvantage of the roll film is the length of time necessary for retrieving information from the roll.  There is also the disadvantage that a person using the film, or a particular roll, ties up a great many documents that may not be used by another person.

     The advantage of using aperture cards lies in the fact that each card contains a single document, and these may be filed very readily for easy retrieval.  They can be either retrieved manually or with automated equipment such as IBM sorter.  The aperture card system has two basic disadvantages.  First, the system has very low file integrity.  Once a card is removed from the file it can easily be replaced in the wrong position, and therefore very difficult to find--particularly when you have as many as 400,000 cards.  Also, the other disadvantage is the amount of space required to file these documents.  The amount of space is approximately equal to the space required to file the original document.

     The microfiche system has the advantage that it contains more than one document per file in a very usable form.  Also, the reproduction of the jackets into microfiche is a very inexpensive type of operation and allows changing and sectionalizing the information very readily.  The main disadvantage of the microfiche today is again, the lack of complete file integrity.  this file integrity, of course, is much better than the aperture card, but not as good as the roll film.  The microfiche is preferred over the use of roll film primarily because of the much faster retrieval and the fact that only a small number of documents receive wear during use,  where with the roll film, the entire roll is subject to wear during the viewing process.

     We have considered and investigated the use of all three of these particular formats.  It is our recommendation that the Survey Authority adopt the microfiche or jacket system for its basic format; and that the roll film format be continued and used in conjunction with microfiche and their jackets for the storage of information which would not ordinarily be used in the retrieval process.

REPOSITORY PROCEDURES

     Based on the use of microfiche and jackets as the system for this repository, the following procedure of operations is to be utilized.

     1.  Production.  Microfilm from all existing sources will be obtained by the Survey Authority.  Much of this microfilm will be in roll film format, and some of it will be in aperture card format.  At the present time we do not believe any of it will be in microfiche.  Most of this existing film will be converted to the microfiche or jacket format.  The aperture card is readily converted by removing the single frame from the aperture card and placing it in the jacket.  The roll film is also readily converted by inserting the film into the jackets in the appropriate manner using a microfilm reader filler.  This may also be accomplished by hand if necessary.  All new microfilm will be photographed in the normal manner on roll film, either 35mm. or 16mm., as the size dictates.  This film will then be placed in microfiche jackets.  At this point we have all of our microfilm in either roll form or jacket form.  We will take the microfiche jackets, both the diazo second generation copies and the silver first generation copies, to the archives section of the Secretary of State's office and they will make diazo microfiche copies for us at no cost.  These microfiche copies then will be used as our working file.  The jacket film will be stored for safe keeping and in most cases will be the security copy.

     2.  Indexing.  Each frame on the microfiche jacket will be indexed.  Basically, according to the jacket number and the position in the jacket.  This index shall also include information that will be necessary to define what the document contains.  After indexing each one of the frames, overall indexes will be made giving the location of each document by jacket and jacket position according to various formats.  This will be a computer generated index system.

     3.  The Use of the System.  As requests are received by the Land Survey Authority, they will be entered upon an appropriate request form.  The clerk typist will select the correct jacket or jackets containing the required information.  This will be done by using the printed index system.  She will then verify the information on each jacket by displaying it on a microfiche reader available at the microfiche file drawer.  If the request is from a person in the office, he may also at this time study the microfiche document through this same reader and possibly copy the information that he might need.  If a print is required, the printing instructions shall be written on the request form and attached to the microfiche jacket.  This will include information as to whether the particular drawing should be blown up, or if only a small part of the document is needed.  These instructions, with fiche cards, will be deposited in one central place.  Once each day these microfiche documents will be copied for the user and these copies mailed out or given to the people by whom the request was made.

     It is believed that this procedure will give us the most efficient use of our personnel and give us an effective and adequate means of distributing the information from the repository.  At the present time we are receiving requests at the rate of about two or three per week.  It is anticipated that in future months the rate could be as high as four or five a day, requiring as many as maybe twelve to twenty copies.  This procedure will work equally well with the volume of today or the expanded volume.

     4.  The Equipment Necessary.  To implement this particular program at the present time it is necessary that we invest in the very basic microfilm reader printer equipment.  The following equipment is necessary to effectively operate  the system.  A variable magnification reader capable of blowing the microfilm documents between a magnification of 10 and 40 diameters.  This reader must be capable of handling either roll, card, or fiche documents, and will be the overall workhorse of our system.  In conjunction with this reader we need a rapid process print developer.  This will allow us to use a photographic process in conjunction with the reader to produce very high quality photographic copies of the microfilm.  A fixed magnification microfiche reader is also necessary.  This unit will be used to verify the microfiche document retrieved and will also serve as a means for inhouse viewing of the microfiche without using the variable magnification reader.  A 35mm. jacket filler will also be a very important asset to our repository.  This will allow us to very efficiently convert roll film to jackets, therefore to microfiche.  It is not absolutely necessary, but with the limited personnel in our organization, this will allow us a great deal more production.  Also, we will need file cabinets to store the microfiche.  These will be standard 4" x 6" file card cabinets.  At the present we will need approximately eight drawer capacity.  This should hold all of the microfiche cards necessary in the next year or two.  These will be purchased in lots of four at a time, and will be stacked together.

     Future plans would include the acquisition of a dry process reader printer of variable magnification.  At the present time there are no variable magnification reader printers that give good quality prints.  The dry process reader printers available today are designed for high volume and small size documents such as bank drafts and 8 1/2" x 11" size documents.  This equipment is changing rapidly and in the next few years we will see a considerable change.  As our volume increases, and the quality of this equipment increases, there will be a time when we will want to purchase a piece of equipment such as this.  This equipment will not replace the equipment we are proposing at this time, but will add to our capacity.

     5.  Filming Equipment.  We have three avenues open for obtaining microfilm copies ourselves.  First we have the ability to work with the Secretary of State's archival section in microfilming documents with their cameras in Jefferson City.  They have 35mm. and 16mm. planetary cameras.  They are excellent for microfilming documents less than 26" x 36" in size, and for documents not needing a back lighting system or vacumn [sic] frame mounting.  There is no cost for this microfilm service.  Therefore, when at all possible we will use this source.

     The second alternative open to the Survey Authority is the use of the microfilm equipment available at the University of Missouri-Rolla Library.  The maximum copy size of this equipment is 37 1/2" x 52 1/2".  The drawings can be back lighted and it also provides for a vacumn [sic] frame to hold down drawings that are hard to copy.  The approximate cost of this operation will be about $.04 per frame.  This compares very favorably with the commercial rate of about $.14 per frame.

     The third alternative for microfilming is the purchase of a small panetary [sic] camera similar to the one used in the Secretary of State's office.  These cameras can be taken apart and transported to the recorder's offices and then can be assembled and adjusted to give good quality work similar to that which we would receive from the Secretary of State's office.  The cost of this camera is about $4,000 or it may be leased on a basis of about $135 per month.

     It is our recommendation that the program of filming the records proceed as follows:  First, obtain all of the existing microfilm records available to us and convert these into microfiche.  We will take all the documentation that we have here and that can be filmed by the small camera to the Secretary of State's office for their filming and placing in jackets for us.  These jackets will then be converted to microfiche.  We will determine which of the records cannot be filmed by the Secretary of State's office and then make arrangements with the University of Missouri at Rolla to film them.  We believe that most of the county recorder's records today need to be copied on the large planetary camera, such as the one at the University of Missouri at Rolla.  Approximately nine counties will allow us to bring the records to Rolla for microfilming.  This may require that we bring one of the recorder's men along with the documents while the microfilming process is carried on.  Because of the equipment and arrangements with the University, this would be a very economical and fast operation requiring approximately one to two days for each of the counties.  Therefore the total cost to us would be relatively small.  We will not be able to have this same turn around time if we use the Secretary of State's office.  This phase of the microfilming program will carry us until July 1 of this year.  At that time we will know how many of the other counties will allow us to remove their records for filming.  In the event that we find that many of these will not allow us, we then will purchase the microfilm caera [sic] and transport it to the county offices and reassemble and readjust it there.  This same microfilm camera will be installed here in our offices for a continuing program of microfilming of the documentation received as time progresses.  This camera will be sufficient for almost all documents after the initial filming of the documents at the recorder's offices.  This is primarily because of the proposed adoption of a standard plat size of 18" x 24".


-------------------------------
Transcribed by Steven E. Weible

January 25, 1972 Missouri State Land Survey Authority Meeting Minutes

MISSOURI STATE LAND SURVEY AUTHORITY

Minutes of Meeting

January 25, 1972

     The meeting of the State Land Survey Authority was called to order at 9:00 a.m., January 25, 1972 at the State Land Survey Building, Rolla, Missouri.  Present were Chairman Daniel Kennedy, Authority Members James Anderson, Richard Barr, Willard Eckhardt and Wallace Howe, and State Land Surveyor Robert Myers.

     1.  The minutes of the January 18, 1972 meeting were reviewed and approved as presented.

     2.  The Trial-balance sheet for December, 1971 was reviewed.

     3.  Mr. Myers presented proposals for purchase of the following Additions requests during the third quarter:

          A.  Reader-printer request          $4,380
          B.  Surveying equipment request      2,822
          C.  Van Request                      3,600

     A motion was made by Mr. Anderson and seconded by Dr. Howe, that the four items included in the Reader-Printer Request be approved for purchase.  These items are:  Variable power reader-printer combination, fixed power microfiche reader, 35 mm. jacket filler, and file case.

     Purchase of items listed in the Surveying Equipment Request, which included a Wild T-2E Theodolite (1 sec.), misc. basic surveying equipment, pocket transit, dip needle, and 100' Minuar standard tape, were approved for purchase.  However Mr. Barr stated he would make inquiry as to the possibility of the MARLS Minuar tape being presented to the State Land Survey Authority.  If this tape is formally presented to the SLSA, purchase of an additional tape will not be made.

     Authority members approved an expenditure of $4,000 for purchase of a van.  The request figure was increased to allow for purchase of a van with an automatic transmission.

     4.  Mr. Myers presented the Operations Request for third quarter.

     Mr. Barr requested that Mr. Myers participate in discussions concerning a possible metropolitan St. Louis--NGS control search and evaluation program.  It was agreed by the Authority that Mr. Myers could take part in discussions (see page 4, Minutes of Meeting, December 21, 1971), but no monies would be budgeted for participation at this date.

     Mr. Anderson made a motion that the Operations request for third quarter be approved for budget planning.  Seconded by Mr. Barr.  Motion carried.

     Adjourned for lunch.

     5.  Mr. Myers reported that Mr. Daryold Arnall, executive director, Lake of the Ozarks Regional Planning Commission, had visited him concerning the possibility of the State Land Survey Authority producing key maps for the Planning Commission.  It was agreed that the State Land Survey Authority would not enter into any agreement to produce these maps at this time.  Also, further study should be made to see if the State Land Survey Authority can use these maps to any advantage.

     6.  It was agreed that the Restoration forms prepared by Mr. Myers be referred to Mr. Louren Wood, Assistant Attorney General, for his opinion as to whether these forms should be cast in affadavit form.  If Mr. Wood does not believe it is necessary for these forms to be in affadavit form, Mr. Myers will iniate [sic] use of these forms as presented this date.

     7.  The State Land Survey Program Plan presented by Mr. Myers was approved as a guideline.

     8.  Mr. Myers reported on his meeting with members of the MARLS Legislative Committee, January 15th.

     9.  Mr. Barr stated that he had written Governor Hearnes requesting the week of February 20-26 be observed as "Surveyor's Week."  Request was granted.

   *10.  A proposed amendment to Missouri State Land Survey Authority Rules and Regulations (16.080) was reviewed.  It was agreed that since these regulations originated in the Governor's office, they could not be altered by amendment.  However, these regulations will be reasonably interpreted and administered by the State Land Surveyor in accordance with their real intent and spirit.

    11.  Approval was given for Mr. Myers, Mr. Jacobs, and Mr. Brown to attend the IRLSA-MARLS meeting in Belleville, Illinois, February 21-23.

    12.  Chariman Kennedy stated he would be out of town from January 28 to March 3.  Dean Eckhardt will be acting chairman during his absence.

     The next meeting of the Land Survey Authority is scheduled for February 10, 1972.

     Meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

----------------------
*As revised February 24, 1972 Authority meeting.


-------------------------------
Transcribed by Steven E. Weible

January 18, 1972 Missouri State Land Survey Authority Meeting Minutes

MISSOURI STATE LAND SURVEY AUTHORITY

Minutes of Meeting

January 18, 1972

     The meeting of the State Land Survey Authority was called to order by Chairman Kennedy at 9:00 a.m., January 18, 1972, at the Land Survey Building, Rolla, Missouri.  Present were Authority members James Anderson, Richard Barr, Willard Eckhardt and Wallace Howe, and Robert Myers, State Land Surveyor.

     The minutes of the December 21, 1971, meeting were reviewed, amended, and approved.

     Mr. Myers reported on the meeting with the House Appropriation Committee, January 3, 1972, concerning the State Land Survey's emergency budget request.  To date, no word has been received on the outcome of the emergency request.  Mr. Myers reported that on January 10, 1972, Mr. Kennedy, Dr. Howe, Mr. Jacobs, and himself met with the same committee concerning the 1972-73 budget request.

     Budget figures, totaling $238,653, as recommended by Governor Hearnes for FY 72-73 were reviewed.

     Authority members met in executive session from 10:00 a.m. to 11:25 a.m.  In executive session, and after a review and evaluation of the work of Robert E. Myers, State Land Surveyor, it was moved by Mr. Eckhardt, seconded by Mr. Barr, and carried, that Robert E. Myers, State Land Surveyor, be granted a probationary salary increase of $3,000 per annum effective April 1, 1972, so that his total salary will be $18,000 per annum.  It was the original understanding that Mr. Myers' initial salary of $15,000 was a probationary salary, that his work would be reviewed and evaluated by the Authority, and that if his probationary period of service was satisfactory his salary would be increased to the statutory amount at or near the end of the first year of service.  It is believed that this action is permitted under the applicable federal guidelines, but this action is subject to said guidelines.

     The meeting resumed at 12:30 p.m. with Mr. Louren Wood, Assistant Attorney General, present.  Legal questions and clarification of terms in the Land Survey Authority Statute were discussed at length.  Legal questions concerning the Registration Law, Plat Act, county surveyor, and State Coordinates were discussed.  Mr. Wood agreed to answer the questions proposed either informally or by an Attonrney General's opinion.  Mr. Wood agreed to return periodically and meet with the Authority.


-------------------------------
Transcribed by Steven E. Weible

December 21, 1971 Missouri State Land Survey Authority Meeting Minutes

MISSOURI STATE LAND SURVEY AUTHORITY

Minutes of Meeting

December 21, 1971

     The meeting of the State Land Survey Authority was called to order by Chairman Kennedy at 9:10 a.m., December 21, 1971, at the Land Survey Building, Rolla, Missouri.  Present were Authority members James Anderson, Willard Eckhardt and Wallace Howe, and State Land Surveyor, Robert Myers.

     The minutes of the November 30, 1971, meeting were reviewed and approved as presented.

     1.  Mr. Myers reported that he and Dean Eckhardt had met with the Appeal Hearings Committee on December 8th.  According to a telephone conversation with Mr. Yarrington, budget analyst, following the appeal hearings, the Governor's recommended budget for the Land Survey Authority was increased to $238,653.  Written confirmation of this action has not been received.

     2.  Mr. Myers reported that he and Arthur Jacobs, Chief, Administrative Services, had met with the Committee on State Fiscal Affairs in Jefferson City, December 15, 1971.  This meeting was to request transfer of funds to Repair and Replacement appropriation for this fiscal year from either Personal Services or Operations appropriations.  A letter was received on December 17th from the Committee on State Fiscal Affairs permitting $3800 to be transferred to R&R from the Personal Services appropriation.  Mr. Myers reported he is awaiting further confirmation from the Comptroller's office before expenditure of these funds.

     3.  The State Land Surveyor's quarterly request for Personal Services in the amount of $18,126 was presented and reviewed by Authority members.  The positions of surveyor and engineer technician were included in this request.  Dr. Howe moved that the Personal Services recommended request be approved.  Motion carried.

     4.  The third quarter additions request for $11,954 was presented.  Mr. Kennedy stated that Mr. Joe Wollard of UMR Business Office had contacted him concerning the possibility of a State Land Survey Authority and UMR agreement for use of equipment owned by the University for microfilming purposes.  Mr. Myers stated that he had talked to Mr. Williams, UMR Library Assistant, concerning this work and was awaiting additional information before making a recommended proposal to the Authority.

     In connection with the 3rd quarter additions request, there was discussion whether approval of these requests were approval for purchase or as a budgeting figure needing additional approval by the Authority.  It was the consensus that Authority approval of budget requests by the State Land Surveyor is approval for planning purposes, and purchases and contracts over $500 need further specific approval.

     Dr. Howe made a motion that the 3rd quarter additions request be accepted with the exception of the van, and that to be considered at a later date.  Anderson seconded the motion.  Motion did not carry.

     Adjourned for lunch.

     5.  The meeting resumed at 1:20 p.m. with Dr. C. V. Mann as quest.  It was agreed that further discussion of 3rd quarter Additions recommendation and Operations recommendation be delayed until the end of the agenda.

     6.  Three proposed forms were presented by Mr. Myers for the Authority's review and comment at the January 13th meeting.  Titles of the forms were:  Certified Land Corner Restoration; Surveyors Acknowledgment; and Resident Witness Affidavit.

     7.  A proposed questionaire, "County Surveyor Service Inventory", along with a cover letter was presented for comment and approval.  The inventory form and letter were approved subject to suggested minor editorial changes.

     8.  Mr. Myers stated that he and Mr. Eckhardt had called at the Attorney General's office on December 8th.  Mr. Louren Wood has been assigned to the State Land Survey Authority.  Mr. Wood requested to attend a meeting of the Survey Authority.  Mr. Myers and Mr. Eckhardt will prepare a list of problems to be submitted to Mr. Wood prior to the January 13th meeting.  It is hoped that Mr. Wood will be able to attend the meeting that date.

     9.  Mr. Myers reported that the Legislative Committees of MARLS and the Recorder's Association have requested to meet with him.  Authority members approved that the meeting be held in the conference room of the Land Survey Bldg., and agreed that coffee and rolls be provided for the meeting.

     10.  Mr. Myers reported that during the 3rd quarter there were two meetings he would like to attend:  MARLS meeting at E. St. Louis, and ACSM meeting at Washington, D. C.  Attendance was approved.

     11.  The Authority met in executive session from 2:35 to 3:15.

     12.  The following was approved by the Authority during executive session:  Recommended request for tools and office equipment authorized to be expended at the State Land Surveyor's discretion.  Recommended requests for reader-printer, van, or vehicle, and surveying equipment are approved as budget figures for planning.  Specific proposals will be prepared by Mr. Myers and submitted to the Authority for approval before actual purchase.  Consideration should be given as to the utilization of these items in the ultimate SLSA programs.

     13.  Approval was given to Mr. Myers to follow through on his investigation of possible use of UMR equipment and other equipment -- including portable microfilm camera and report to the Authority by the January 13th meeting.

     14.  Contractural services of the quarterly recommended request were discussed by the Authority.  Mr. Myers' request for $5,000 to obtain records was approved as a budget planning figure and related in part to bringing records into Rolla for microfilming.  No firm committments will be made to obtain records until further approval.

     15.  Mr. Myers reported he had met with Mr. Gay Weeks of the City of Springfield concerning possible SLSA participation in the Springfield--NGS coordinate system program.  Mr. Myers recommended that the State Land Survey Authority participate with expertize and money in this program for control expansion.

     After discussion by Authority members and Mr. Myers, a motion  was made by Mr. Anderson that $2,000 be approved as a budget figure to be used for possible participation in this program.  In addition, any participation in the St. Louis Metropolitan--NGS program would be delayed until after results of the Springfield program had been evaluated.  Seconded by Dr. Howe.  Motion carried.

     Meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m.


-------------------------------
Transcribed by Steven E. Weible