Services

Practical support for information-heavy operating work.

Two practices. Land and entitlement, which is taking ground from a search ring to a package construction can build. Systems & Automation, which is the software that came out of doing the first one at volume. Engagements are shaped around the work, the source material, and the decisions that need to move forward.

Practice one

Land and entitlement

Twelve years of it, 865 sites across 23 states, still delivering under contract today. 225 of those sites carry twenty or more documents each, which is what a site looks like when it went the whole way. If this is what you came for, the rest of the list is not your engagement.

Site identification and feasibility

A search ring is a circle on a map and a set of constraints nobody has read yet. I work the ring: raw land availability, existing tower inventory, structure options across raw-land monopole, self-support and guyed builds, colocations, modifications, relocations and decommissions, zoning feasibility, recorded restrictions, and the jurisdictional posture that decides whether any of it is permittable. The output is a recommendation that says build here, or do not. Most of this work never appears in a site count: on one program where the candidate files survive, four search rings held 25 individually researched candidate locations, roughly six evaluated for every one delivered. A portfolio scrub can also carry a formal do not proceed track, which is the same judgment written down as a disposition.

Where the risk sits: in the money committed before anyone confirms the jurisdiction will allow the structure. A site that fails at entitlement fails after the lease, the survey and the design have all been paid for. You receive: a feasibility recommendation with its reasoning attached, so the no is as defensible as the yes. The land and entitlement practice in full

Land records, title and easements

Ownership research, landowner identification and outreach, title review, easement verification, and curative work when what is recorded is not what was agreed. Recorded documents routinely say something other than what the parties believe they say, and that gap surfaces at the worst possible moment unless somebody goes looking for it first.

Where the risk sits: in assuming the record matches the agreement. An easement recorded more broadly than it was negotiated can make an otherwise buildable parcel unleasable, and a site nobody can explain gets abandoned rather than fixed. You receive: clear title, verified easements, and a documented chain the next party can follow without repeating the work. A blanket easement, renegotiated across a border

Entitlement, zoning and public hearings

Permitting strategy, applications, jurisdictional negotiation, code compliance, and testimony in front of the body that decides. I build every hearing material in house, including the decks, the exhibits and the supporting findings, because the person answering the questions should be the person who assembled the answer.

Where the risk sits: in the public meeting, which is the one part of this work that cannot be redone quietly. I have presented several hundred times and been denied three. One of those three I called as non-conforming before we filed, and it was pursued at the client’s direction. You receive: a filing that meets the ordinance before it is submitted, and someone in the room who has done this several hundred times. The hearing record, and the three denials

Ground lease negotiation and portfolio strategy

Ground lease negotiation, renewals, extensions and amendments direct with landowners, colocation applications, and utility service and structural coordination across the major tower portfolios. Underneath those transactions sits the portfolio question: whether to keep paying for a position or to own one.

Where the risk sits: in taking the brief at face value. On a carrier rent-reduction program scoped as a move onto cheaper colocations, I found several jurisdictions imposed no zoning or permitting requirement at all, which made a self-performed build on client-owned land both cheaper and faster than the colocation it was meant to replace. The scope had been written before anyone read the ordinances. You receive: negotiated terms, and an answer to whether the transaction you asked for is the transaction that serves you.

Due diligence direction

ALTA and boundary surveys, title and land records research, Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessment, geotechnical investigation, floodplain and wetland screening, NEPA and SHPO review, utility service and power engineering, A&E design packages, and FAA and FCC coordination with regulatory counsel where structures and airspace interact. I do not perform these disciplines. I direct the bench that does, hold one schedule across all of them, and read the results against each other.

Where the risk sits: in the seams between consultants. Each report is correct on its own terms, and the problem is usually in what one of them assumed about another. You receive: a coordinated due diligence record, with the findings reconciled rather than filed.

Construction-ready handoff

Construction drawing review against local code and operator standards, constructability review, and the assembly of a package the builder can work from without calling back. Long-running projects also accumulate years of correspondence, approvals and conditions, and I keep that record structured so a condition agreed in month four is still findable in month twenty.

Where the risk sits: in the handoff. Work that lives in one person’s memory has to be rediscovered by whoever inherits it, usually under schedule pressure. You receive: a construction-ready package, and a project record that survives the person who built it. 317 packages, built to be handed off

Program management, and the playbooks a team runs on

Carrying one site is a skill. Carrying a portfolio is a different job: status, schedule risk and mitigation reported to the people funding it, a standing team of staff and subcontractors recruited and trained, and the raw land and colocation workflows, permitting playbooks, state regulatory references and document templates written down so the team executes against a standard instead of against whoever is most experienced. My peak year was nearly 100 sites.

Where the risk sits: in the work living in one person. A portfolio run on individual memory delivers until that person is unavailable, and the cost of that arrives all at once. You receive: written workflows, playbooks and templates your team can run without me, which is also the whole reason the second practice exists. What those playbooks turned into

Practice two

Systems & Automation

Operating systems, workflow design, internal applications, release controls, and applied AI. Built after 2024, deliberately in sectors outside telecommunications. If this is what you came for, the row above is not your engagement.

Property and hospitality operating systems

Multi-property work creates a dense web of locations, owners, listings, supplies, standards, inspections, expenses, documents, and exceptions. I design and build the systems that make it dependable: property directories, item catalogs, linen and consumables inventory, turnover inspections, issue queues, expense workflows, and controlled onboarding and offboarding.

Under human control: employees work in guided interfaces while data rules, catalogs, configuration, and audit history stay protected, and administrators approve consequential changes. You receive: one connected operating picture across locations, with documentation and a durable handoff. Seven systems built this way, in production

Operational data and workflow design

Choosing a tool before understanding the operation locks the confusion in. I map objectives, roles, responsibilities, sources, dependencies, states, identifiers, decision points, normal paths, and exception paths first, so whatever gets built sits on an accurate model of how the work runs.

Under human control: the operating model makes ownership and authority explicit before anything is automated. You receive: a source map, data model, and workflow design that any subsequent tool can be built against.

Custom internal tools and lightweight applications

Off-the-shelf software rarely fits recurring operational work, and shared spreadsheets grow fragile under it. I build practical internal tools: registries, trackers, guided entry surfaces, dashboards, forms, QR and mobile entry, and local-first applications, with stable data models designed to be app-ready rather than trapped in their first tool.

Under human control: field users get simple operating surfaces; protected logic, approval gates, and admin controls stay behind them. You receive: a working tool with documented structure, dependencies, and an evolution path.

DevOps, QA, and release controls

Operational software should be safe to change. I combine verified baselines, source-controlled packages, schema manifests, dependency maps, test and production separation, staged QA, runtime evidence, release gates, and rollback planning, so a working system is not placed at risk by an untraceable patch.

Under human control: promotion to production is a visible decision backed by evidence, with stop conditions and a recovery path prepared in advance. You receive: release records, QA evidence, rollback artifacts, and a system that is testable and recoverable. What this looks like when something fails

Knowledge systems and applied AI

AI helps most when its inputs and authority are defined. I build knowledge and retrieval systems, decision support, multi-model tooling, and AI-assisted workflows that preserve source evidence, human review, auditability, and continuity across sessions and providers.

Under human control: AI proposes; the responsible person approves. Consequential writes are reviewed, verified by readback, and recorded in an audit log. You receive: a governed knowledge base, retrieval, and AI workflows your team can trust and continue. The platform built on this

Some engagements are one practice. Some are both, and that is the case where having them in one place changes the work: the operating model is written by someone who has run the operation, and the person automating it is the person who has to defend it in a hearing.

A useful engagement

Starts with the operating reality.

Understand

Identify the sources, people, constraints, and decisions already in motion.

Model

Define stable data, states, relationships, and authority.

Build

Create the smallest effective operating system using appropriate tools.

Verify

Test the structure, workflow, user experience, evidence, and recovery path.

Transfer

Deliver controlled documentation and a handoff that allows the work to continue.

Contact

Discuss the work in front of you.

Contact SSU