UCSC Academic Senate releases Tent City Report that includes anonymous spy testimony

January 23, 2006

To Whom it May Concern,

During the Fall 2005 quarter at UC Santa Cruz, I became aware of information that I find to be extremely troubling – information that we should all be very concerned about. In an attempt to understand the degree to which the administration of UCSC has been involved in surveillance of student political activity, I am writing this letter.

On October 12, 2005, I was invited to discuss the events surrounding Tent University Santa Cruz (TUSC) with the Academic Senate’s Task Force investigating the issue. The TUSC Task Force was chaired by Professor Carolyn Martin Shaw, and included other professors, staff members, and a couple token students. During the course of this private meeting, Professor Shaw noted that UCSC’s administration had obtained information about the internal proceedings of a planning meeting/workshop for the participants of Tent University. To my knowledge, this meeting, located off-campus at the Resource Center for Nonviolence, was not open to administrators or police, only the event participants. I asked Professor Shaw how they had obtained detailed information about what occurred during this meeting, and she informed me that the University administration has sent ‘someone’ for the sole purpose of documenting the meeting and passing the information on to administrators. It is not clear who this agent of the administration may have been, but it is clear that they did not identify themselves to student organizers, and thus, acted in the capacity of a spy. I believe this information to be true, as Professor Shaw was the Chair of the Task Force, and is a respected professor and member of the Academic Senate. Prior to Professor Shaw’s accidental release of this information, no Tent University participants were aware that their workshop was secretly monitored by UCSC administrators.

This information of administrative spying on student political activity is in stark contrast to Chancellor Denton’s claims that UCSC’s administration and police are not engaged in spying on students. I request that UCSC’s administration immediately admit all surveillance and/or repression of student political activity that they have been involved with since Denise Denton was appointed Chancellor, and that they release any and all information regarding this specific incident – including who the undercover agent was, what administrator directed and/or knew of them, any notes that the agent or administrator(s) recorded, and any actions taken as a result of those notes. I also request that appropriate action be taken against any administrator or other official involved in this horrendous activity.

I certify that the above information is true to the best of my knowledge,



Joshua Sonnenfeld
Cowell ‘07

Thanks for reprinting this statement.

Why wasn't this information released in October after you learned about it? I see the statement is dated January 23rd, but then wasn't released for another two weeks.

What was the point in the delay?

Is there still only one "Free Speech" zone on campus?

UCSC Police never responded to my April Public Records Act request asking for all correspondence between police and administrators around the "camping" controversy prior to the Police Assault. If someone wants to contact the Northern California ACLU, they might repeat the request and have better luck (and more punch). They were able to squeeze some stuff out of the SCPD on the Last Night-DIY.

Anyone who's interested can call in to my FRSC show 6-8 PM Thursday or 9:30 AM to 1 PM Sunday.

Is there a regular student program on FRSC or any other local radio station that discusses these issues?

Thanks again for printing your letter, Josh.

This collage was made with photos found on the following SC-IMC posts:

Stages of an Action
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17454/index.php

THE TENT UNIVERSITY OUTRAGE – A PHOTO EDITORIAL BY BOB FITCH (Photos ©Bob Fitch)
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17462/index.php

UCSC's Vice-Chancellor of Communications lies about police brutality at TUSC
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/feature/display/17085/index.php

Agents of Repression and Big Brother
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17456/index.php

Cops Spoil Fun at Tent University Santa Cruz (TUSC)
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17428/index.php


SC-IMC coverage of April 18th, 2005:

Suddenly, the Cops Ran Away and the People Rejoiced!
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/feature/display/17083/index.php

The SCPD has repeatedly said that their spying on the Last Night Parade was a unique incident, that it has not happened before, and it will not happen again.

When photos of uniformed officers videotaping participants of the Action in Defense of Education walkout were circulated at a city council meeting, SCPD Deputy Chief Kevin Vogel said that photographed officers were UC not SC police.

Anyone want to attach that photo here? Better yet, can anyone identify the officer and his agency?

The photo that was passed out and handed to the City Council on January 24th was of someone WITHOUT A UNIFORM videotaping participants of the Action in Defense of Education walkout on April 20, 2005. The person videotaping was next to the Jail and across from the County Building. Of course SCPD Deputy Chief Kevin Vogel knows much more about spying in Santa Cruz than I do, but perhaps the County Sheriff was involved with the information gathering....

Here's the caption I left on April 21, 2005, "Seems Big Brother was out again in Santa Cruz and he knows who "ditched" school. Better not try to forge a note from your mom.... Do you feel more safe and secure now? Is Homeland Security active in Santa Cruz, or what?"

Here are some more links, but the info is basically the same:

Larger version of photo:
http://images.indymedia.org/imc/santacruz/image/4/large/surveillance_4-20-05.jpg

Surveillance on 4/20/05 of Action In Defense of Education school walkout
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/mod/comments/display/23282/index.php

Walkout for Education moves to Ocean and Water Streets
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17491/index.php

Students and Workers take Action in Defense of Education
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/feature/display/17088/index.php

I note that the letter to Chancellor Denton signed on April 27, 2005 by 230 faculty and staff members at UCSC did NOT include Mike Rotkin, Community Studies, Tim Fitzmaurice, Creative Writing, or Ryan Coonerty, pre-law.

I also note that the University denies that carotid pressure pain compliance holds were used. However, the mastoid pressure holds that they claim they used instead, would not have produced unconciousness---which dozens of those arrested experienced.

The only violence at TUSC was committed by the police. The University was unbending on allowing any camping. Not mentioned in the 25 page report is that the Chief of police at UCSC had the authority to issue camping permits for the event--but instead chose to violently arrest those sitting on the ground for "tresspassing".

Fears that camping would continue permanently are unfounded and paranoic.

It will be interesting if organizers try to put together another Tent University this year. Perhaps UCSC is THE most repressive campus in the country for this type of event.

Hey Robert, here's some responses to your questions:


"Why wasn't this information released in October after you learned about it? I see the statement is dated January 23rd, but then wasn't released for another two weeks."

I've been spreading the information around campus ever since I heard of it - I just never posted it on Indymedia. There's been so many accusations of different forms of spying, including a recent claim that UCSC admin paid a student to film Tent U and claim they're a Film and Digital Media major, that it's difficult to make sure that all the information and accusations get out.

My priority has been focusing on the Pentagon spying scandal involving SAW. Now that TUSC is organizing again for this year, I hope they take this information and start their own investigations. I'm sure SAW will be happy to collaborate with them to obtain as much information as possible.

"Is there still only one "Free Speech" zone on campus?"

Well.. that's a question we asked the Chancellor and senior officials and never received a response. There used to be multiple free speech zones (that sometimes were changed without notice), but now UCSC's policies aren't clear on the speech limitations. At the military recruitment debate at College 9/10 Wednesday, they taped a line on the ground outside which a friend who was flyering was not allowed to step over. So obviuosly free speech limitations still exist, it's just more difficult to say exactly what/where they are.

"Is there a regular student program on FRSC or any other local radio station that discusses these issues?"

KZSC is doing a show on the spying, I believe, but your best source of information is still SC Indymedia and The Project newspaper.

I don't think you can conclude anything about someone that didn't sign the petition. I almost missed it. I've missed several others that I wish I could have signed.

at the student media meeting with Denton yesterday, Denton was asked about the conflict between sending someone from the administration to the RCNV direct-action training session with Solnit and her claim that the University doesn't spy on students.

her response was that she thought it was an open meeting, that she thought she remembered that it was advertised in the Sentinel. and ergo, it was not spying.

Does anyone know if this is true? where was the direct-action training advertised and what did it say?

April 17th: Direct Action Training w/ David Solnit
http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17305/index.php

David Solnit Direct Action Training
http://www.radicalendar.org/calendar/SC-IMC/all/display/30864/index.php?view=event&fulldate=2005-04-17

"This event is free and open to the public. Residents of the greater community of Santa Cruz (beyond UCSC) are encouraged to come learn more about the following week's Tent University Santa Cruz manifestation, where Solnit will be keynote speaker on April 18th at 6 p.m."

When the individual in attendance, sent by UCSC, reports back to the university and calls the others in attendance "subjects," it tells you that the person relaying the information is either the Queen of England or is doing "law enforcement." Assuming the latter (the queen was busy that day), the word "subjects" is legalese, and has a similar connotation to the word "suspect," but in this case the latter word is inappropriate as no crime was being committed (apart from exercising the constitutionally protected Right to Assemble).

The Chancellor doubtless authorized and approves of the spying, just as she authorized the police to attack Tent City. The main goal to be achieved is compliance. If they were genuinely worried about hygiene, they could very simply have opened up the public restrooms in the barn on the other side of the street. The University wanted a confrontation in order to enforce compliance. The administration know they have a huge problem, having been caught repeatedly with their hands in the till, while rank and file workers, students, and even lower-level faculty continue to get the shaft as they consolidate their stranglehold, turn UCSC into a diploma factory, and loot the place in the Enron style of corporate governance.

ANOTHER LINK:

Here, activist Becky Johnson transcribes Liz Irwin, the PR rep for UCSC explain away the police crackdown on Tent U.


http://santacruz.indymedia.org/newswire/display/17457/index.php

The silly insistence on the public safety issue is a fabrication concocted by the attorneys who wrote Irwin's script. The problem with using the police to break up Tent City is it is a very clear violation of the US Constitutional Right to Assembly to redress grievances. By claiming a public safety issue, they are trying to pre-empt a First Amendment-based legal challenge, even though the stated concern for the safety of the students is transparently disingenuous to the point of appearing idiotic. In general, if you are concerned about someone's safety and well being, you don't use your police to attack them (or in this case UC Berkeley's police to avoid accountability).

"I am not sure how much debate there will be," said psychology professor Faye Crosby, who chairs the Academic Senate. "Some people may not like all the conclusions. But everyone must admire the dedication and integrity of the task force."

There you have it. Our marching orders.