Although police purchased the cameras in response to break-ins, the school has scant policies on covert surveillance use.

Evergreen and Washington State Patrol documents obtained by public records requests used in this story are available at the bottom of this page.

By Daniel.

Evergreen Police Services purchased three surveillance cameras disguised as smoke detectors and electrical outlet plugs in October 2018.

The purchase was revealed in a purchase order obtained in a public records request by the Journal. The models run on a seven-day battery and are activated by movement. They film up to five hours of 1080p footage on an SD card without audio.

The smoke detector hidden camera model. Image linked from the vendor’s website.

“There was a series of office break-ins in the fall,” said John Carmichael, Vice President for Finance and Operations. “Offices broken in, stuff stolen over the weekend, replace the stuff and the following weekend broken into again. And so that is what the cameras were intended to address.”

“I don’t know if they caught anyone as far as who did that break-in,” said LaToya Johnson, who made the purchase when asked by Interim Police Chief Ray Holmes. Johnson was Administrative Assistant to Holmes and served on the Equity Council before leaving the college in February to pursue a second Master’s and higher-paying work.

Holmes did not respond to requests for comment, and referred requests for comment to Marketing & Communications.

“It sucked. I’m a web developer, so I had to start my scripts from scratch,” said Noah, a senior who works in the Marketing & Communications office. “To the best of my knowledge they’ve never found those laptops and probably never will. But we do have new laptops.”

Carmichael said he didn’t know whether there were still hidden cameras in the Admissions or Marketing & Communications Office. Public Relations Manager Allison Anderson said “I can’t speak to it now.”

Admissions staff said they were not informed that Police Services deployed covert surveillance in their office.



Questions about Equity



The Washington ACLU’s Technology and Liberty Project Advocate Jennifer Lee argued that, once introduced, new surveillance technologies can be quickly misused.

In 2015, a South Seattle College employee used a camera disguised as an alarm clock to spy on an exchange student. Also in 2015, an Orange County man was investigated for hiding a camera in a starbucks bathroom. Airbnb guests regularly find hidden cameras in their rentals.

“There’s something called mission creep. And government agencies often justify surveillance programs based on the grounds that they prevent crime, they prevent terrorism, etc. But once you have the surveillance and data storage infrastructure in place, surveillance tools may often be used for purposes other than intended,” said Lee. “Historically, cameras and other surveillance technologies have been placed in over-surveilled and over-policed communities.”

The electrical outlet hidden camera model. Image linked from the vendor’s website.

Evergreen Vice President for Equity and Inclusion, Chassity Holliman-Douglas, said that she had not been informed about the purchase of the cameras.

Carmichael and Anderson did not have an answer about the camera purchase and the college’s commitments to equity and inclusion, nor were they able explain why Holliman-Douglas was not consulted or notified about the purchase.

“When you start having these covert cameras, this starts to feel like we’re back in the 70’s, back to some of the darker days of intelligence gathering,” said Dave Maass. Maass is the Senior Investigative Researcher for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties organization focused on technological privacy and surveillance.

“There’s been a lot of research over the years that have shown that people do shy away from controversial speech, or from speaking their mind or being politically engaged when they’re under surveillance,” said Maass.

Adam Goldstein, a program officer for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) Individual Rights Defense Program, scoffed at the purchase. “Surveillance by itself can have a negative effect, but then with the added element that nobody knew they were doing covert surveillance?” laughed Goldstein. “I couldn’t say there’s never a situation where that would be called for. But if campus police are surveilling students, what else are they doing?”



Campus Response



Students expressed concern with the lack of communication about the disguised surveillance camera purchase.

“What are they going to use them for? What is there to survey?” said Evergreen freshman Margo.

“That is just ridiculous,” said Amber, a junior. “We’re in a budget crisis, and they’re being sneaky?”

“It would be nice for that to available on a public platform,” said Stephanie, a senior.

“Where’s their newsletter?” asked senior Ash Cox.

“I’m sure they would say it has nothing to do with activism. It seems that Evergreen has not been that great at policing campus to begin with,” said Alan, who works on campus. “My word to activists is that if you’re planning on meeting, don’t do it here.”

Author & activist Saab Lofton, who graduated from Evergreen in 1999 and briefly wrote for the CPJ, said the purchase unnerved him. “You have a situation where the most left-wing campus on the entire planet is toying with something that should only be discussed in a history class,” said Lofton. “They’re sorely tempting the anarchists to smash those cameras. May Day is within a matter of weeks.”

Some students supported increases to campus surveillance, but were surprised the purchase was made quietly.

“There’s currently a fairly large lack of surveillance on campus,” said Chris, an Evergreen senior. On covert cameras, Chris said “I have mixed feelings about it.”

“That’s definitely alarming but if it’s a small enough volume that doesn’t say mass surveillance of students,” said Killian, a senior. “It’s not thrilling, but I would like to know their justification for it, if it’s valid.”

“It doesn’t make me feel comfortable. If they want to watch people, they should do it openly,” said Evergreen senior Alexa. “I don’t think people like the idea of being watched without giving consent or knowing.”



A Forgotten Policy



As of Fall 2018, Evergreen Police Services Standard Operating Procedures contains no policies around surveillance use.

Lee said this was concerning. “I think it’s extremely important to have policies around that, as the most basic first step.”

Lee recommended the school model new or improved policies on Seattle’s Surveillance Ordinance, which requires police to note every use of surveillance technologies.

Evergreen has a Y2K-era policy that states which Police Services will “refrain from video surveillance, with exception of retail areas on campus, unless there is reasonable suspicion that the subjects of the video surveillance have or are about to commit a crime.”

The policy was implemented in response to the federal Patriot Act. Evergreen’s Patriot Act Policy mandates Evergreen destroy library and internet records, establish a chain of command for processing federal warrants, and that a review committee will meet twice a year to monitor the school’s compliance, among other rules.

Although staff in the library said that they still destroyed library borrowing records, staff across many departments were unaware of the policy. The policy requires notices be posted outside the bookstore, computer labs and library. Library staff said the notices had last been seen sometime around 2007 at best.

“Thank you for pointing out that policy,” said Carmichael. “If somebody is in the office over the weekend without authorization, I think, yeah, there’s probably a reason to think that they’re, they shouldn’t be there. They’re committing a crime, actually.”

Carmichael and Allison could not confirm whether the cameras were inoperable or removed during the work week, or if staff and prospective students were notified about their presence.

The Patriot Act Policy also requires that a committee “consisting of representatives from those areas most likely to be affected by a request under the Patriot Act” review the college’s compliance semi-annually. The federal Patriot Act was passed in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and fueled a rise in government surveillance against marginalized communities.

Carmichael said he did not know the last time the committee met. “I would guess the first of those reviews probably took place,” sometime in 2002 or 2003.

Similarly, Evergreen’s Police Community Review Board, Deadly Force Review Board, and Bias Incident Response Team have not met at all this year.

The Patriot Act Policy is administered by the Executive Associate to the President, who is currently Susan Harris.

Carmichael said that, due to downsizings and staff reorganizations, there was no Executive Associate to the President from 2003 until last fall. “Susan Harris, who I think you’ve talked to, got a title change, and she became Executive Associate and unbeknownst to her, inherited the Patriot Act Policy,” said Carmichael.

The policy states that “should the position be vacant the President will designate an officer to perform the functions during the interim.”

College President George Bridges did not respond to requests for comment.

No members of the Evergreen Board of Trustees responded to requests for comment.

When a reporter tried to talk to Susan Harris, the policy steward for the Patriot Act Policy, the reporter was informed that if the “discussion would be for educational purposes only, off the record, and not for publication or public consumption. If this is the case, I will also need a list of questions, concerns, and/or a proposed agenda before scheduling a meeting with Susan.” Otherwise, if the reporter wanted to have a discussion about the policy, they would need to talk to Marketing & Communications.

“Whenever you have a policy that you’re treating journalists differently, you’re off to a bad start,” said Goldstein. “A journalist is anybody who’s exercises a civil right: the desire to acquire and publish information.”

Before the reporter was aware of the break-ins, they noticed signs outside of the Marketing & Communications office which state that “Due to recent thefts, this area under surveillance.” A staff member would not disclose whether there were any cameras currently operating in the room.

The reporter was escorted to reception, but neither Vice President of College Relations Sandra Kaiser nor Allison Anderson were available to comment. When the reporter stated that they’d like to wait in reception a moment to catch Kaiser, a staff member was overheard discussing calling Police Services to dislodge the reporter.

“I think most of us believe that the administration is trying to do the right thing, that campus security is trying the right thing, and want to believe that they’re being driven by their better angels,” said Goldstein. “But to undermine that trust, from the institution’s perspective, by trying to restrict what student journalists can report – and from the security perspective, trying to restrict it by not disclosing what the rules are for the use of covert cameras, or, if they’re not using them, not disclosing that they’re not using them, for example – these failures undermine that basic trust.”



A Policy Deficit



The Washington ACLU’s Jennifer Lee said that although the language in the school’s Patriot Act Policy is “overly broad,” the lack of procedures in the Police Services Standard Operating Procedures was especially concerning. “Who is actually enforcing those policies is super important, but the absence of a policy leaves open the possibility of a lot of abuse of surveillance tools,” said Lee.

Carmichael said the college did not conduct the reviews of its policy compliance “regularly enough.”

Johnson, who facilitated the purchase for Holmes, said the lack of regular review was unlike any other college or healthcare facility she had worked for. “If they had a policy review committee that met on a regular basis, this would have been a gap that would have became known,” said Johnson. “I will say that I did policy work at the university level — not here, in Louisiana, where I’m from — we did policy review every year. It’s not hard. You have a policy review committee and they meet every month.”

Cornell, University of Michigan, Tufts, University of Pittsburgh, Fresno State, Clemson, the University of Vermont, the University of Maine, Southern Methodist University, SUNY Oneonta, Calvin College, Alfred State, Waldorf University, Lynchburg College, Washington University in St. Louis, Virginia Polytechnic, the University of Connecticut, Georgia State, Trinity University, the Ontario College of Art and Design and Harvard Law all have policies limiting the use of covert surveillance available on their websites.

In 2017, then-chief of Police Services Stacy Brown produced a “Needs Assessment” for Police Services. Brown stated that “The department currently uses a ‘homegrown’ policy and procedures model.”

She recommended the school contract with the firm Lexipol, which bills itself as “Policy management for public safety.”

“Lexipol is some garbage that makes boilerplate policies, oftentimes ignored by the agencies and oftentimes don’t match what the law requires,” said the EFF’S Dave Maass.

As revealed in a public records request, Evergreen Police Services’ Standard Operating Procedures states that there is a policy related to responding to riots and “Civil Disturbances.” However, it does not list text associated with that policy. Former chief Sorger shared a “Contingency Plan” for civil unrest with president Bridges in September 2017, according to emails obtained in a public records request.

Carmichael and Anderson refused to state if the college still intended to pursue the purchase of crowd control equipment. Brown recommended the purchase of industrial pepper-spray and PepperBall explosives.

Evergreen’s candidate to take interim chief Holmes’ job, David Brunkhurst, did liability management for the Whirlpool Corporation and helped negotiate the closure of a United Auto Workers plant in Indianapolis. Brunkhurst was also a sergeant in the LAPD during the Rodney King riots, according to the resume and cover letter made available on closed review in the Library.



A Growing Watch



In 2017, after that year’s protests, Brown wrote in her Needs Assessment for the college that there are currently “55 cameras throughout campus, mostly at transaction counters. Notable missing areas are Red Square, administrative areas, and parking lots.” She recommended the school “purchase and install an expansion to campus surveillance camera infrastructure and related equipment in highlighted higher risk areas.”

Bridges wrote to then-Chief Sorger and responded to this section of Brown’s assessment positively. “Agree in principle but must be discussed more broadly on campus,” wrote Bridges. He recommended that funds be acquired through a supplemental budget request.

“My stance is there always needs to be a discussion. If they say there’s going to be a discussion, there needs to be,” said GSU communications liaison Sakiko Krishna. “That’s fucked.”

Although the 2018 supplemental budget request notes that Police Services required additional staff, it does not note that funds might be used to purchase surveillance cameras. It states that, if granted, the funds will “purchase other resources needed for improved response to all public safety issues.” The request says purchases would require no change to “existing statues, rules or contracts,” and that the purchase would not include “funding for any IT-related costs, including hardware, software, services.”

The request notes “anticipated on-campus activity including those from outside organizations.”

“We’ve seen a lot of police departments on schools either increasing surveillance or conducting more surveillance for specific kinds of issues,” said Maass.

Maass highlighted the threat of active shooters and conflicts between the alt-right and other opponents including anti-fascists as a common motivation. “We’ve seen the conflicts between conservative groups and groups on the right in the last, so there might be some white nationalist groups vs. some affiliated groups, and these conflicts, also giving rise to various increases in surveillance.”

A 2017 rightwing Vancouver WA group Patriot Prayer Evergreen rally was defended from anti-fascist counter protestors by Washington State Patrol riot police. According to documents obtained in a public records request, Washington State Patrol deployed aircraft to surveil the protest. Antifa still managed to slash Patriot Prayer leader Joey Gibson’s tires.

Earlier that month, Robert Kerekes Jr. of New Jersey called the college and threatened to “execute as many people on the campus as I can get ahold of.” Brown cited the threat of active shooters in her 2017 Needs Assessment.

The purchase of the cameras isn’t the first time that Evergreen Police Services has engaged in covert surveillance.

Emails from a records request show that Veterans Resource Center Director Thomas Kelley shared student-produced screenshots of student organizing discussions in private Facebook groups with Chief Stacy Brown and Washington State Patrol. This included the names and profile pictures of students. WSP Captain Monica Alexander, who joined the Board of Trustees earlier this year, reviewed WSP notes on the 2017 protests. Alexander did not respond to requests for comment.

As reported by the Journal, the Evergreen Chief of Police shared information about a political group organizing a Port of Olympia blockade with local, state & federal police and a US Military spy named John Towery. The Ninth Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit by the organizers in 2017.

In 2009, a local cop-watcher named Drew Hendricks alleged that Police Services officer Dwight Monohon took pictures of him attending a meeting of the Evergreen student group Infoshoppe. Monohon no longer works for Police Services.

In 2012 a student group dedicated to improving the perception of campus police shared opposition research on Evergreen professor Peter Bohmer with chief Sorger and officer Tim Marron.

The Patriot Act Policy states Police Services will refrain from surveillance based on participation in First Amendment activities. Carmichael said he wasn’t aware of any review of Police Services employees or others after these incidents.

A records request for police personnel records is pending, as well as requests related to the use of surveillance cameras and discussion about the Patriot Act Policy.

However, as revealed in a public records request for ongoing records requests, Evergreen’s sole public records officer is still working through requests made by national journalists in response to the 2017 protests.

The records request that revealed the purchase of disguised surveillance cameras was received almost six months after the request was first filed by a CPJ reporter.

“The public has a right to access information, and they have a right to get that in a timely fashion,” said the EFF’s Dave Maass. “Certainly, you know, agencies often find themselves overwhelmed. But really, they should be considering that when they’re structuring their government.”

“Open records requests are part of the fundamental bargain of operating a public institution,” said the FIRE’s Adam Goldstein. “If salaries are being paid for by the people, the people have some degree of oversight. And I understand it’s really inconvenient. And it takes a long time. But if you feel you can’t take the deal, don’t take the money. Become a private university and do whatever you want.”

Evergreen and Washington State Patrol documents obtained by public records requests used in this story are available below (PDF and .MSG):

Click here to return to the top of this article.

Share this: Facebook

Reddit

Twitter

Tumblr

