As another prospective non-attender, I like Kevin's idea of giving feedback, so here's my 2 cents on some items.
1. I agree mostly, but remember that the original idea was to make sure measurer had actually seen the cal course map so that they could be sure to use correct endpoints etc, as well as verify that the course is still as certified.
2&3 Agree with Kevin's suggestions and comments.
4&5 No opinion but curious what questions would be added per suggestion?
6 I agree that this question should be as open as possible. What about "describe and explain how the course was modified to achieve the correct distance"? Or the like.
9 Accurate splits: I think we should encourage accurate descriptions. Provide, where possible, a long-range reference to get into the right area, and a short-range way to pinpoint the location, like distance from a utility pole. But we should recognize that some locations don't have many handy reference points and we have to accept that. I would quibble with Kevin on taped distances; I think for most split descriptions it's ok to use distances along the road which you can obtain from the bike measurement.
11. I think a GE measurement of the course would be a good way when to check a course when there are doubts. Ideally figure out a way to measure with the person, then at least they can learn good methods if they're not already.