Twenty years designing, selling, and delivering complex broadcast and media systems. Now focused on what matters most: tighter architecture, stronger engineering standards, and disciplined execution from proposal through commissioning.
Most broadcast practices separate the people who design from the people who deliver. That gap is where projects fail. Scope assumptions collide with field reality, and no one owns the space in between.
My work is about closing it. I bring end-to-end accountability to broadcast and media systems programs: from the architecture decisions made in pre-sales, through design documentation, commissioning, and operational handoff.
As Director of Media Systems Design & Engineering at CHESA, I own technical direction and design integrity across federal and commercial programs, working closely with Solutions and Sales to ensure what we propose is achievable, properly scoped, and grounded in delivery reality.
The objective: build a more scalable, technically consistent broadcast practice as federal and commercial work continues to expand.
Full bio →
I grew up in Phoenix in circumstances that required resilience early — stability was not given, it had to be built. With college financially out of reach, the military became the most practical path forward: structure, skills, and a way to build something on solid ground.
The Navy became the turning point. I spent seventeen years as an Interior Communications Electrician, ultimately serving as a Chief Petty Officer responsible for 132 personnel and the maintenance of 24,000+ critical shipboard systems. That experience shaped how I think about engineering and leadership: systems only work when the people responsible for them are trained, accountable, and aligned around the mission.
During my Navy career I was first exposed to broadcast technology through Armed Forces Network, which later led to work at the Defense Information School developing and delivering broadcast engineering curriculum. After leaving active duty I transitioned into the commercial broadcast industry, applying the same systems-focused discipline to the design and integration of production infrastructure for commercial media organizations and federal agencies.
Over time my role expanded beyond engineering into system architecture and technical strategy. I have worked across the full lifecycle of complex media systems — design, pre-sales architecture, executive technical briefings, and project delivery. One of the most significant programs I led was the broadcast modernization initiative for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the largest integration project ever delivered by CHESA. I initially led the system architecture and later transitioned into delivery leadership to ensure the project was executed according to the design.
Today I serve as Director of Media Systems Design & Engineering at CHESA. My focus is on strengthening engineering standards, ensuring architectural discipline, and building consistency between the systems we design and the systems we ultimately deliver. The environments I came up in, the years spent in the Navy, and the systems I have helped build have all reinforced the same principle: complex systems succeed when they are approached with discipline, accountability, and a clear understanding of how every part fits together.
20+ years spanning the U.S. Navy, broadcast operations, facility design, federal programs, and engineering leadership.
It built over time, and it came from all directions at once. The Navy gave me my first real education in leadership. A Chief Petty Officer earns authority. It isn't inherited. I watched good chiefs lead from the front, absorbing organizational friction so their sailors could focus, developing people even when it cost them short-term, and holding accountability upward instead of pushing pressure downward. I also watched the other kind. That contrast was instructive.
Later, managing engineers, I learned something the Navy had hinted at but civilian work made undeniable: authority without service is just pressure. You can get compliance through positional power. You can't get excellence that way. Engineers do their best work when they trust their leader, when ambiguity is managed above them rather than handed down, and when the environment is stable enough for them to think clearly.
I've also been on the receiving end of leadership that didn't work, managed in ways that made good work harder, not easier. That experience shaped a commitment I return to consistently: I will not be that leader. The standard I hold myself to is whether my team is better positioned to succeed because of what I do, not in spite of it.
None of this is abstract. It shows up in specific decisions: taking the heat when a scope call goes wrong rather than redirecting it to engineers who executed in good faith. Advocating for someone's growth even when keeping them comfortable is easier. Saying no to a proposal commitment that would set my team up to fail. These aren't grand gestures. They're the daily work of leadership done right.
The conviction also has roots that predate my engineering career. In the Navy, I led the Multicultural Committee aboard ship, providing guidance, education, and perspective to more than 5,000 sailors and Marines. That work had nothing to do with systems or technology. It was entirely about showing up for people, understanding where they came from, and creating an environment where everyone could contribute fully. That's the same thing I try to do now, just in a different context.
These aren't values statements. They're the operational commitments I hold myself accountable to as an engineering leader.
Whether you're evaluating a broadcast infrastructure program, building a team, or want to discuss a technical challenge. I'm glad to engage.