Fusion Center Locations Revealed

Public Intelligence
February 16, 2011

Since 9/11, the U.S. Government has engaged in a multibillion-dollar effort to construct a domestic intelligence network for the ostensible purpose of combating terrorism, criminal activity and violent extremism.  One of the central components of this system is the network of “fusion centers” that have sprung up around the country over the last several years.  These entities integrate local law enforcement with a state’s police force, Department of Justice, or Office of Emergency Management and are designed to facilitate law enforcement intelligence activities throughout the jurisdiction, providing federal authorities access to local information and databases, while simultaneously allowing federal agencies to disseminate classified intelligence materials to local authorities.   There are almost always federal representatives present in local fusion centers and Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano has recently testified that DHS is “committed to having an officer in each fusion center.”  Most fusion centers also work with representatives of the private sector, particularly those industries related to so-called “critical infrastructure and key resources.”

Due to past examples of fusion centers vastly overstepping their original mandates, including monitoring political events, bumper sticker preferences and even constitutionally-protected protest activities, many civil-rights organizations have worked to monitor fusion centers and their activities.  However, public scrutiny has proved difficult in most cases as the majority of fusion centers operate in a highly secretive manner without revealing who works for them, what government agencies they work with or what their basic capabilities are.  Many lack websites or any sort of public presence and information about their activities is often unavailable from official sources.  There is no national authority overseeing their activities and many fusion centers even lack basic privacy policies concerning the collection of information on law-abiding citizens.  Some states have even worked to exempt fusion center activities from public records requests.  In fact, the majority of fusion centers have failed to even identify their most basic attribute: their physical location.  Instead, many fusion centers simply provide a mailing address that leads to a post office box or generic government building.  Some fusion centers do not even provide an address.

Public Intelligence has acquired a dataset that identifies the actual physical locations of nearly all of the 72 DHS-recognized fusion centers operating in the country today.  The information, which includes physical addresses, phone numbers, as well as email addresses for all of the fusion centers, is believed to have been compiled and distributed throughout the Homeland Security Information Network, a government information portal for “information sharing and collaboration between federal, state, local, tribal, territorial, private sector, and international partners engaged in the homeland security mission.”  Given the incomplete nature of information distributed previously by EPIC, the ACLU, and other groups attempting to document fusion center activities, this information is of great importance for working towards transparency in an area of domestic surveillance that remains largely unreported.

________________________

Police, sheriffs establishing regional fusion center

Sunday, August 16, 2009

By Tony Plohetski
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

For months, detectives from two law enforcement agencies had been on the trail of the culprits in a series of home burglaries in Southeast Austin and southern Travis County. Neither group knew the other had similar unsolved cases.

They say they got a lucky break last week. While responding to separate burglary calls within minutes of each other Monday, Austin police officers and Travis County sheriff's deputies realized they were looking for the same thieves.

They soon found and charged three people, and they say they hope the arrests will help close other unsolved cases.

"It was just happenstance," Austin police Detective John Hardage said. "We should have been sharing information months ago."

Authorities say the case — and dozens like it — highlights the need for agencies in Central Texas to routinely exchange data about crimes, trends and suspect descriptions, an information flow they think will help solve more cases and decrease duplicate policing.

Beginning next year, they plan to start doing so at a federally funded, multimillion-dollar intelligence center — one of dozens of such "fusion centers" across the nation.

But some centers have sparked controversy after critics said officials overstepped their bounds and violated people's civil rights.

As part of the information exchange, the Austin Regional Intelligence Center will give investigators broader access to confidential information about suspects or criminal organizations.

For instance, officers now can troll national and state databases to see whether a suspect has been convicted of crimes or has outstanding warrants. The center will also allow investigators to access reports from neighboring departments that show any involvement suspects may have had with police there, including investigations into crimes they may not have been charged with.

Investigators at the center also will be able to access certain databases created by other agencies, such as those documenting suspected gang members and drug traffickers.

Officials currently don't have immediate access to such information from neighboring agencies but can seek it as part of an investigation, a process that detectives said can take days and stall their work. Too often, they said, they may not know when to turn to neighboring towns or counties to further their investigations.

David Carter, an Austin assistant police chief in charge of the intelligence center project, said analysts stationed at the facility also will stitch together information collected by various agencies to create new files on suspects in criminal cases or on suspects they think may be planning to carry out crimes and merit further surveillance.

"Law enforcement has been behind the curve in terms of our ability to exchange information," Carter said. "I think we also have been behind the curve when it comes to analysis and understanding. If there is something going on in this region, we need to understand it and get on top of it."

Civil liberties at risk?

To some civil rights advocates, the new effort to nab criminals has raised questions about the volume of information investigators will have at their fingertips, how they will use it and the types of files they will create.

Although Carter said center workers will abide by state and federal intelligence-gathering laws, incidents at other centers nationally have raised doubts for some.

"We do recognize that there are concerns in some people's minds concerning fusion centers in general," Carter said.

Earlier this year, for instance, an intelligence center in Collin County, north of Dallas, issued a bulletin that said, "It is imperative for law enforcement officers to report" activities of Muslim civil rights organizations and anti-war protest groups in their areas.

Among other things, federal laws bar law enforcement agencies from creating databases concerning political, religious or social views, but civil liberties groups have cited similar incidents in recent years at other intelligence centers, including those in Maryland and Missouri.

Laura Martin, a policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas, said organization leaders hope to meet soon with Austin police and other officials to more specifically discuss their worries.

Intelligence centers nationally have been "a huge priority for the ACLU," Martin said. "We have a lot of concerns."

In a 2007 report on the centers, the ACLU called on agencies to use the "utmost care" in the collection of personal data.

"Clearly not all fusion centers are engaging in improper intelligence activities and not all fusion center operations raise civil liberties or privacy concerns," the report said. "But some do."

Born of 9/11

The first intelligence centers were created soon after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Jack Thomas Tomarchio, former deputy undersecretary for intelligence and analysis operations at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said law enforcement agencies in several regions wanted to work more closely to monitor the possibility of more attacks.

Agencies around Los Angeles, Boston and New York were among the first to create intelligence centers, Tomarchio said. Federal officials have since made millions of dollars available to local officials to establish such centers, which total about 70 nationwide.

In Texas, the Dallas and Houston police departments operate their own intelligence centers. The North Central Texas Fusion Center, which opened in 2006, serves 16 counties, including Dallas and Tarrant. San Antonio also is working to establish a center.

Among its other criticisms, the ACLU contends that the centers have produced little solid evidence that they are helping solve crimes or thwarting terrorist activity.

Tomarchio agreed that few, if any, studies have generated statistics or other data about the centers' successes.

"These things are brand new," he said. "They haven't been around 20 years, and even the ones that have been around three or four years are still in their formative years. In many cases, they don't have a track record."

Support, opposition

Austin police officials and other Central Texas law enforcement representatives began last year trying to get money to create an intelligence center.

The city received a $1.8 million grant in 2008 for the center and got a $2.7 million grant this year.

Carter said most of the money will be used to buy computer equipment and to pay crime analysts from different agencies who will be stationed there. Officials have not yet established an annual operating cost.

The Austin and Round Rock police departments and the sheriff's offices in Travis, Williamson and Hays counties are the primary agencies involved in the project and will staff its operation with about eight to 10 crime analysts and detectives, some of whom will be hired using grant money. Carter said that if grant money runs out, departments probably would begin covering the salaries of the analysts.

Smaller agencies in the region will also have access to the center.

Opposition to the center surfaced at a recent Austin City Council meeting, when the council approved using $200,000 in grant money to renovate a Texas Department of Public Safety building in North Austin for the center.

Police officials said at the meeting that an agreement between agencies on privacy matters would probably be drafted next month with input from the ACLU and others. They also said there will be at least one public hearing before the council votes on the agreement.

John Bush, executive director for Texans for Accountable Government, said he wants to make sure officials seek public input on employee training, among other matters.

"There are definite benefits, without a doubt," Bush said. "They are going to be able to more efficiently solve crime."

But, he added, "I also see the potential for abuse."

Related Links:

• Even Congress Wants To Know What The NSA Is Doing With This $2 Billion Utah Spy Center

• The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)

• U.S. Police Buy Military Drones

• Police draw guns on raw-milk sellers

• MIAC Stratigic Report On The Modern Militia - 2009
• THE STATE OF MISSOURI TARGETS PATRIOTIC CITIZENS By: B.A. Brooks
• DHS Fusion Centers Trying To Turn Patriots Into Extremists By: B.A. Brooks

• FBI COUNTER TERRORISM ANALYTICAL LEXICON PDF

• U.A.F.F. Police Crimes Watch Page