HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRR26488 Ware - FCC WC Docket No 25-253 related records, 1-1-25 to Present
To:CityClerk
Subject:Public records request, City of San Luis Obispo, FCC WC Docket No. 25-253
comments and right-of-way fees
September 24, 2026
To the City Clerk or Public Records Coordinator:
Under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code § 7920.000 et seq.), I request copies of the following
records. The City of San Luis Obispo filed comments in FCC WC Docket No. 25-253, and this request
concerns that filing and the right-of-way charges it describes.
Unless an item says otherwise, the period is January 1, 2025 to the date of this request.
A. The FCC filing
1. Any resolution, minute order, agenda item, staff report, or record of a vote of the governing body
concerning the City of San Luis Obispo's comments in FCC WC Docket No. 25-253, including the 2025
notice of inquiry round, together with any authorization for a person or firm to file in the City of San Luis
Obispo's name.
2. Any engagement letter, retainer agreement, contract, or task order with outside counsel or a
consultant for that filing, and the invoices and payment records under it.
3. Any membership agreement, dues invoice, participation fee, or cost-share invoice for a coalition,
league, or association concerning that docket, and the record of payment.
4. Correspondence transmitting the draft or final comments to or from the governing body, the city
manager or county executive, and outside counsel, including the version circulated for review and the
record showing the date it was circulated.
5. For each of the following figures stated in the filing, the record it was drawn from: "Encroachment and
excavation permits are processed within an average of 15 working days, fees are cost-based and
nondiscriminatory"; the DIVCA framework's "60-day permit timeline" cited in the filing. A worksheet,
spreadsheet, invoice, ledger entry, permit file, or email is the kind of record I mean.
B. Right-of-way compensation as charged
6. The current fee schedule or rate sheet that applies to telecommunications or broadband use of the
public right-of-way, covering permit, encroachment, excavation, inspection, annual occupancy, per-
linear-foot, franchise, license, and gross-revenue fees, and each earlier version in effect at any time
since January 1, 2020.
1
7. Any fee study, cost-of-service study, cost allocation, or staff report supporting those fees, with the
calculation showing how each fee was derived.
8. Each franchise, license, master license, right-of-way use, or pole or conduit attachment agreement
with a telecommunications or broadband provider in effect at any time since January 1, 2020, with its
compensation terms and any in-kind requirement such as conduit, dark fiber, or free service.
9. The ledger, revenue report, or account detail showing right-of-way compensation received from
telecommunications or broadband providers for the last two completed fiscal years, by payer and
amount.
10. The web page or ordinance where the fees in item 6 are published to the public, identified by URL or
citation. If they aren't published anywhere, no record is needed; a line saying so answers the item.
11. Any permit application log for telecommunications or broadband right-of-way permits since January
1, 2025 showing submission date, completeness date, and decision date, or the report the permitting
system can generate with those fields.
For anything you hold electronically, I'd like it the way you keep it. Word processing and spreadsheet files
as those files, and emails as the individual messages, with sender, recipients including cc, date and
time, and attachments kept with the message they came with. That's usually less work than printing and
paginating, which should hold down the burden and any cost. Paper and scanned records are fine as
they are.
If any item overlaps a request already pending with the City of San Luis Obispo, identifying it by request
number is enough; there's no need to produce the same records twice.
Please provide a determination within 10 days (Gov. Code § 7922.535(a)); if unusual circumstances
apply, the extension notice should say which and set the date (§ 7922.535(b)). For anything withheld, the
Act puts the burden on the agency to show that the record is exempt (§ 7922.000), and the notice should
identify the person responsible for the denial (§ 7922.540(a)). Section 7922.600 asks the agency to help
identify and describe responsive records, and I'd take that call over a denial.
Charges are limited to the direct cost of duplication (§ 7922.530(a)). Records held electronically should
come in the format you hold them (§ 7922.570), at the direct cost of producing the copy (§ 7922.575).
Please send an estimate before starting if there'll be a charge.
Rolling production is welcome, newest first. If any part of this seems broad, please contact me to narrow
it rather than deny it.
If the City of San Luis Obispo takes requests through a portal, I'm glad to enter this one there as well; a
line saying so is all I need.
Appreciate it.
Lance Ware
2
3