18+ Content Warning

By clicking Enter, you confirm you are 18 years of age or older and agree to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws.

Notice: Any content or member activity - including anything you may buy, sell, transfer, or discuss - must comply with current and upcoming laws.

Members are encouraged to stay informed: California Firearm Laws: 2026 Outlook & 2025 Recap . Responsibility for compliance rests solely with the individual member.

caguns.net

Welcome to CAguns.net!
Join our growing community where you can ask questions, share knowledge, or browse our classifieds section.

Sign up for a free account today and unlock full access! Once registered, you can search, post, and take advantage of exclusive features unavailable to guests.

A note on why more of the site now requires an account: automated scrapers and AI systems have been crawling our forums and classifieds at a scale. Requiring sign-in for those sections is the most effective tool we have. It takes a minute to register, it's free, and it keeps what happens here between actual members.

New to California gun ownership or trying to keep up with the changing laws? Check out our sister site CA2A.com — free courses, plain-English legal updates, and step-by-step guides built for California owners.

Advanced features are available only to registered members. Register today!

How To: Need community help

Received email from city regarding records

Although the requested records have not yet been fully identified, based on the terms of the request, we have made a preliminary determination that the request likely does seek disclosable records within the possession of the city. This office will provide you with a status update after the requested records have been thoroughly reviewed.
Good progress!

Now patience to see what they offer. It should be electronic, so may not require a fee.
 
A pending lawsuit may delay or even shut down your PRA response. Lawyers facing lawsuits don’t like to provide information outside of the rules of Discovery.
as far as I know there is no lawsuit, unless someone else filed individually. Kostas said SAF won’t open another case as they already suing Santa Clara for exactly the same thing. CRPA’s office assistant just reffed me to Michel and refused to let me contact anyone else there.
I just signed up to be potential plaintiff, if there ever will be a lawsuit, can’t even remember I did it on CRPA’s site or Michel’s.

I’m not in financial position to pay for that myself
 

Attachments

  • 1788402336044.webp
    1788402336044.webp
    29.9 KB · Views: 13
You’ve done well on this.

This seems to be the key document:

IMG_0942.webp

The dollar values per hour would be broken down elsewhere to include mandatory support “loads”: (Salary, benefits, NDI, workers’ Comp, etc.) driving the number up.

Hourly rates sit on top of the rank columns. They get their number by applying the individual rates to the time estimate for each rank.

You could drive deeper and ask for those particulars (base hourly rate for each class, support costs, mandatory loads, etc.) but I’m sure they have the backup to show the values. Also, let’s remember, the current documents came from the City Clerk who earlier stated they don’t exist (but since they’re Budget issues, they had to be public-facing.)

Anyway, good work! You now have the background information, so you know what’s in their hand before you deal. Hopefully, you, and others, also know a bit more about the required responsiveness of government and how to poke that bear without getting mauled.

Best.
 
Last edited:
You’ve done well on this.

This seems to be the key document:

View attachment 246430

The dollar values per hour would be broken down elsewhere to include mandatory support “loads”: (Salary, benefits, NDI, workers’ Comp, etc.) driving the number up.

Hourly rates sit on top of the rank columns. They get their number by applying the individual rates to the time estimate for each rank.

You could drive deeper and ask for those particulars (base hourly rate for each class, support costs, mandatory loads, etc.) but I’m sure they have the backup to show the values. Also, let’s remember, the current documents came from the City Clerk who earlier stated they don’t exist (but since they’re Budget issues, they had to be public-facing.)

Anyway, good work! You now have the background information, so you know what’s in their hand before you deal. Hopefully, you, and others, also know a bit more about the required responsiveness of government and how to poke that bear without getting mauled.

Best.
Where do we go from here?
Waiting from Blank vs Santa Clara county decision, or retain Michel on my own. I don’t think there is anything else can be done, is it?
 
Where do we go from here?
Waiting from Blank vs Santa Clara county decision, or retain Michel on my own. I don’t think there is anything else can be done, is it?
Let’s wait to see what the CRPA letter has to say to them. The main point here is that you can gather information critical to the success or failure of your complaint. A $1k license is still exorbitant compared to other issuer’s costs.
 
Let’s wait to see what the CRPA letter has to say to them. The main point here is that you can gather information critical to the success or failure of your complaint. A $1k license is still exorbitant compared to other issuer’s costs.
We have an update!
Also, Kostas forwarded Glendale’s email to DOJ civil rights division.
DOJ just sent letter to San Jose for their high fees
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1415.webp
    IMG_1415.webp
    47.1 KB · Views: 10
  • IMG_1416.webp
    IMG_1416.webp
    63.3 KB · Views: 8
  • IMG_1417.webp
    IMG_1417.webp
    60.6 KB · Views: 9
We have an update!
Also, Kostas forwarded Glendale’s email to DOJ civil rights division.
DOJ just sent letter to San Jose for their high fees
Let’s clear some channels, here.

Kostas left Michel & Associates (CRPA) and now works for the 2nd Amendment Foundation, not CRPA.

CRPA (Matt Cubiero) sent a letter to Glendale requesting, with other issues.

We are aware of no cost study or analysis that would justify fees at this level. If your
Department has prepared such a study, we request that it be provided to us promptly. We have
separately submitted a Public Records Act request seeking all documents related to the
calculation and establishment of these fees.
 
Let’s clear some channels, here.

Kostas left Michel & Associates (CRPA) and now works for the 2nd Amendment Foundation, not CRPA.

CRPA (Matt Cubiero) sent a letter to Glendale requesting, with other issues.
I’m aware Kostas with 2AF now, I was chatting with him after he commented on my post on r/caguns.
He said 2AF doesn’t have resources to fight two different jurisdictions on same issue, but will talk to his contacts at DOJ about Glendale. DOJ might or might not act on this, will see.
Not sure how and why CRPA got involved, their office assistant, who was answering my emails, wasn’t much of the help.
 
I’m aware Kostas with 2AF now, I was chatting with him after he commented on my post on r/caguns.
But others might not have been.....
He said 2AF doesn’t have resources to fight two different jurisdictions on same issue, but will talk to his contacts at DOJ about Glendale. DOJ might or might not act on this, will see.
Others (CRPA) are in play.
Not sure how and why CRPA got involved, their office assistant, who was answering my emails, wasn’t much of the help.
Typically, OAs don't take action or guarantee someone will. They send the info to the folks in the agency who deal with the specific matter. Your inquiry was shipped to the folks running the "CCW Reckoning Project and drove a response.
 
But others might not have been.....

Others (CRPA) are in play.

Typically, OAs don't take action or guarantee someone will. They send the info to the folks in the agency who deal with the specific matter. Your inquiry was shipped to the folks running the "CCW Reckoning Project and drove a response.
Thanks for clarification and breakdown
 
Back
Top Bottom