Since the release of an investigation’s findings that Santa Fe Public Schools used its security cameras to record audio without notice, and to allow administrators to eavesdrop on workers, seventh grade teacher Matthew Pacheco has lost some faith in his school district.
School leaders said the cameras’ audio capabilities were shut off as soon as they were made aware of them. In response to an inquiry over the investigation last month, Superintendent Christine Griffin wrote in a text the district “promptly disabled” audio recording after it learned it had been enabled on certain cameras.
But, Pacheco, a science teacher at Milagro Middle School, told the board, “We can’t just accept your word. We need evidence.”
Wednesday evening, Santa Fe Public Schools took a step toward providing it. The school board unanimously approved a $132,684 contract to initiate a full audit of the school district’s camera surveillance system across 34 properties and schools.
Used to eavesdrop
The audio surveillance system, which was built over years with likely millions of dollars in board-approved funding, rapidly collapsed once employees raised concerns over the district breaking wiretap law by listening to staff without their knowledge.
Shortly after, the district placed Mario Salbidrez and Mark Lewandowski — police veterans serving as first and second in command of the Safety and Security Department — on paid leave last September, within weeks of employees’ whistleblower complaints.
Early last October, it commissioned the outside inquiry from Albuquerque private investigation firm Robert Caswell Investigations, which finalized its findings in January. The school district terminated Salbidrez and Lewandowski shortly after.
“This contract provides an independent districtwide assessment of our camera system so that we have an accurate and verified understanding of what’s currently in place,” Griffin said at the meeting.
She noted neither the contractor, Albuquerque-based Ardham Technologies, nor its subcontractor, Innovative Integration Solutions, was a camera vendor for the surveillance buildout, “which provides us an important level of independence and objectivity.”
Levi Monagle, the lawyer for Salbidrez and Lewandowski, filed a lawsuit last month alleging the district had overredacted its report. He has indicated he would sue further for wrongful termination. The school district’s general counsel, Joshua Granata, also said the matter is under law enforcement investigation.
The situation has created backlash among school district staff, which a few raised during the Sept. 24 school board meeting.
“I cannot say that I fully trust my district or the board right now,” Pacheco said during the meeting. “If you want to gain and build trust again with myself and everyone who works in these spaces, these cameras should be removed.”
On Wednesday, board President Kate Noble reaffirmed “we have been assured that there are no audio-capable cameras enabled in the district, so I want to make that clear.” But, she said, “I think we do have some work to do to rebuild trust.”
She noted there are instances where cameras are necessary in certain safety incidents, “but ultimately, I think as part of rebuilding trust, that we need to be able to say clearly what we’re monitoring and why.”
Findings
The audit comes after calls for proof from educators like Pacheco — and uncertainty over the specifics of the district’s camera system within the outside investigation’s findings.
The findings of that investigation, released according to New Mexico’s public records law in the form of a highly redacted 87-page report, included interviews with a slate of district employees who gave differing answers on the state of the district’s camera system.
Then-Deputy Superintendent of Operations Neal Weaver, for example, first told investigator Christopher Cappon 85 cameras had active audio recording. He later corrected that figure to 72.
Cappon also wrote that Weaver indicated the presence of at least one “unknown” camera in a classroom connected to an Ethernet cable. He wrote district technician Mark Kendrick later clarified that while at least 72 cameras had audio-recording capability, 11 of them were not actively recording.
The total number of cameras, too, drastically varied across differing interviews, with some saying up to 6,000 and others estimating lower than 4,000.
Audit to come
There is no definite deadline for the results of the audit, but Deputy Superintendent of Operations Jaime Holladay said most of the work will be done over the next three months.
The board will be given periodic updates and a final presentation to staff, said Griffin, but some information will be withheld from the public “because it’s part of our safety of where cameras are located.”
“But as far as number of cameras and their findings and makes and models and things also requested — yes,” she added.
The district should make known, board member Juan Blea said, “if there’s any audio-capable cameras, the purpose of that audio capture — and who actually has access to it.”
A email from Salbidrez to Griffin the day before his suspension last year had noted “multiple instances where video, some with audio, was shared with the cabinet member.”
“Additionally,” he wrote, “I’ve experienced frequent in-office visits from Cabinet-level members who requested to view certain footage, or in some cases, entered while I was reviewing videos with an audible voice or activity, and listened in due to the nature of the content they were overhearing.”
