The State of Oregon has been asked for one thing:integrity.

Every system was tested for it.This archive is the permanent record.

For Volunteers
The chronology

The case, in their documents.

In early 2025, I served as an unpaid volunteer at Honeyman State Park. What happened over the next eighteen months is told here in order. Ten of the thirteen that follow are the state’s own words.

This archive is not a story about me. It is a story about them — the choices they made when given evidence of abuse, when given the opportunity to stop, when given time to self-correct.

Every mechanism of accountability was used to shield themselves.

Why I built this archive: to correct an epistemic violation.
It is not designed to win attention.
It is designed to outlast denial.
The VolunteerWritten by the volunteer
March 2, 2025
Email

I saw the writing on the wall.

One month into my service at Honeyman, trust was already broken. I had an entire year of other parks lined up. I could not simply leave, and I could not trust them with the relationships ahead of me.

I wrote to the OPRD staff member responsible for the volunteers, named each failure, and committed to finishing my service professionally. I believed putting it on the record would protect my future at Oregon State Parks.

Everything that follows is what the State of Oregon did in response to an unpaid volunteer who kept a record.

“At every critical moment, you have failed to act with integrity.”

Their Own WordsPark Manager and Park Supervisor, OPRD
01JNK2TKG01JTERAMB7J6AKPK1
March 5, 2025
Video · 62:12

They pressured me to leave.

Three days after my letter, the park manager and the park supervisor called me to a picnic table in the park’s public day-use area. Two officials with authority over my housing and my placements, one unpaid volunteer with no protections, no notice of the subject, and no one at my side. I recorded all sixty-two minutes.

The park manager worked from a handwritten list. He presented minor interactions as a pattern of concerning behavior, claimed things were in my emails that were not there, and could not be specific when I asked. He told me to chew glass and swallow it. He admitted he had never given me the benefit of the doubt. And he repeatedly suggested I leave.

The park supervisor was silent for the first nineteen minutes. Her first word was “tone.” Fifty minutes in, she reached back to a text message we had already resolved, and confirmed on tape that the interpretation she brought to that table was one she had invented.

The State of OregonPark Supervisor, OPRD
March 18, 2025
Email

They sent someone to build a case against me.

The picnic table had not gotten them what they needed. I was still there, and sixty-two minutes of their own conduct now existed on tape. The program manager’s answer to that tape was a rule: no recording without notification.

Thirteen days later, with every ranger away at meetings, a man with no uniform, no name, and no identification walked up to the yurts I was cleaning and photographed them. Then the questions: how did I like the park, and how was I being treated here.

I reported him the same day. Within two hours the park supervisor had a story. Two days later she repeated it, unprompted.

The VolunteerRecorded by the volunteer
01JQ51HAK8QR862VWGK0RKTFXN
March 24, 2025
Video · 16:47

Then they dismissed me.

Four days after they sent the man with the camera, they used what they had built. The park manager called and dismissed me, six days before my term was due to end. They could not wait even six days.

Within the hour he was at my RV for the keys with twenty-four hours to vacate the site where I had lived and worked for nearly two months.

And they put nothing on paper. Nothing to sign, nothing to appeal, nothing that would ever have to be defended. His words, on tape: “just the conversation we had.”

Their Own WordsProgram Manager, OPRD
01JQ59R3S0SHQ18E23BC0BM696
March 25, 2025
Recording · 30:56

Then they dismissed the evidence.

Less than a day later, the program manager called from Salem. I told her I was still processing what had just happened and needed more time. She said okay, and in the next breath: “That dismissal is still moving forward.”

Then she worked through the file they had built. Unnamed sources. A found journal. Conversations I never had, including words I never said. I answered every item with specifics, and every answer was filed as “perspective.”

She closed by promising a process, with a determination about my year of placements by Friday.

The State of OregonProgram Manager, OPRD
March 26, 2025
Letter

They put the retaliation in writing.

The determination took one day. On department letterhead, over the program manager’s signature: dismissed from volunteer service statewide. The year of placements ahead of me, gone in a paragraph.

The grounds were stated in writing: the public comments made about staff. They named the speech itself as the offense, signed it, and mailed it.

…the public comments made about staff regarding your volunteer service, were not in line with expectations set forth in the agreement.

The State of OregonDirector Lisa Sumption, OPRD
August 25, 2025
Email

The director responds to an open letter.

Five months later, I sent the Director of the agency an open letter documenting everything above. Her answer arrived within a day.

It thanked me for my service, said my voice mattered, and declined to respond to a single specific claim. No investigation followed.

“While I cannot respond here to the specific claims you have outlined, I want to assure you that I take concerns about our volunteer program seriously.”

The State of OregonDirector Lisa Sumption, OPRD
December 8, 2025
Letter

Then the director dismisses the matter.

What followed was mostly silence. My public records request sat unanswered for ninety days, drawing a formal notice and a complaint to the Governor. In December I wrote the Director directly. Her answer came the next morning: the documented record answered in therapeutic language, and the channel closed.

“I can see that this has been deeply painful for you… I hear the frustration and hurt in your words. …we’ve reached a point where I don’t believe further correspondence will lead to the resolution you’re seeking.”

The State of OregonDeputy Director J.R. Collier, OPRD
February 13, 2026
Letter

The deputy director tries to isolate me.

In January, I sent the agency formal notice of First Amendment retaliation: dismissal and statewide exclusion for protected speech. Three weeks later the Deputy Director answered without addressing a word of it. He instructed me to stop writing to agency staff. I refused the same day. No official has authority over what a citizen may say to his own government.

“Please do not communicate further with [Program Manager] or other OPRD staff, and please do not expect any responses from them.”

Their Own WordsOregon State Police
01KMFMJW809QNR8PVTXT8HAAG7
March 24, 2026
Video · 0:55

The police show up at my door.

Exactly one year after the dismissal, police came through a locked gate posted against public access, onto the federal land where I live and work as caretaker, and knocked on my door. Three officers, no agency identified, concerned about what I was posting online.

I declined to speak without an attorney and closed my door. I recorded them leaving.

The State of OregonOregon State Police
March 24, 2026
Dispatch record

The state’s record blames the forest service.

I pursued the record of that visit. The state police answered first that a search identified no records. Ten days later, a record existed, behind a fee. Three months after that, they released it in full.

Officer-initiated. No call type. Priority low. No action taken. Unit type: Criminal. My date of birth, entered ten days before I gave it to them. And the comment field claims who the visit was for.

FOR THE FOREST SERVICE // FOLLOWUP INTERVIEW W/ ROBERT WHITE

A Federal Third PartyDistrict Ranger, U.S. Forest Service
July 24, 2026
Letter

The forest service demonstrates accountability.

The state record said the visit was for the Forest Service, the federal agency whose land I live on and care for. They are not a party to any of this. I asked them directly, in writing. The district ranger’s answer:

…the Forest Service did not initiate the interview. The agency’s involvement was limited to assisting OSP by providing access…

The State of OregonOregon State Police
August 11, 2026
Letter

The state police continue to block the record.

So I kept asking the state police: for the video, the reports, the communications around the visit. In August they answered. Six categories of records exist, including body camera video of the encounter. The video is withheld.

“Body Cam Video – Body Cam video will be withheld pursuant to ORS 192.345(40).”

The full record is hundreds of documents across five accountability pages — every original preserved, every one readable and downloadable.

The accountability pages →
March 2025StartAugust 2026

WHAT IT MEANS TO VOLUNTEER


The word smuggles something in. It suggests that because you are there by choice, you need no protection. That whatever happens to you, you chose it, and can simply choose otherwise. It treats the decision to arrive as proof that you are free to leave.
That is not what volunteering in a public agency is.
Volunteers provide a public service to public institutions that need them. It is civic participation. It is how a citizen engages directly with the function of government, on public land, in the open, for no pay.
For the institution, it is labor they could not otherwise afford. Volunteers cover the shortfall. We clean the facilities, maintain the trails, meet the visitors, and hold the ground the agency cannot staff. The work is not incidental to how these places operate. In many parks and forests, it is how they operate.
And we receive none of the benefits or protections that the people supervising us receive.
No union. No human resources access. No grievance process. No appeal. No progressive discipline. No requirement that a reason be given. A supervisor’s account of you is the only account, and there is no mechanism by which it can be questioned.

You cannot always leave

The idea that a volunteer can simply walk away assumes a relationship that ends at the property line. Many of these do not.
We live on the land we steward. The position comes with a site, a hookup, a place to live. It is arranged months in advance and often built around a long-term commitment. Leaving is not resignation from a role. It is losing your housing, on a date you did not choose, with somewhere to be next and no time to arrange it.
Every park and every forest is different. What does not vary is the dependence. Your entire experience, and often your entire situation, rests on fair supervision. On the assumption that the person with authority over your placement will not use that authority against you.
When that assumption fails, there is nothing underneath it.

What happened to me

I served as an unpaid volunteer at Honeyman State Park in early 2025. I asked an operational question during a power outage and followed up with an email that named a dismissive tone. That email created a record, and the record is what everything after it responded to.
I was confronted alone. Personal disclosures were drawn out of me and passed up the chain. I was held at a picnic table for sixty-two minutes and told to chew glass and swallow it. My sexuality was used against me. I was pressured to resign and I did not.
I was dismissed by phone six days before my term ended. The park manager arrived at my RV within the hour to collect keys and gave me twenty-four hours to vacate. Two days later I was permanently expelled from every Oregon State Parks volunteer program, in writing, on agency letterhead, for documenting my treatment.
A year later, on the anniversary of that dismissal, armed officers arrived at a locked gate where I live and work. My date of birth reached the police record from a volunteer file.
Every mechanism that could have protected me was pointed the other way.

The instrument

Oregon has a statewide policy, 50.010.02, Violence-Free Workplace. It applies to every executive branch agency.
Section 7 names volunteers among those who may be barred and terminated under it.
Section 8 prohibits retaliation against those who report workplace violence. It names employees only.
The same document brings volunteers inside its enforcement reach and leaves them outside its protection. It can be pointed at us. It offers us nothing pointed back.
Twice I reported conduct that meets that policy’s own definition of workplace violence. Once in writing. Once on the call where I was dismissed. Both times, the half of the instrument that would have protected me did not reach me. The half that could remove me did.

Why this is here

This is not a claim that volunteers deserve special treatment. It is a claim that we are inside the structure, doing the work the structure depends on, and that the protections stop at a line drawn around the people who are paid.
That line is not an oversight in one park. It is written into a policy that governs an entire executive branch, and it has been in force since at least November 1, 2024.
I am one volunteer who kept the records, and that is the only reason this archive is possible.
If you volunteer for a public agency, document what happens to you, and do it with integrity, and you will already be on the right side of any action they take against you.

THE DISPLACEMENT FRAMEWORK

This is not a story about one park. It is about the architecture that made it possible. The structure underneath the individual choices. The mechanism that runs on volunteers at state parks and libraries and hospitals and schools — anywhere unpaid labor meets institutional authority and there is no one whose job it is to protect the person giving the labor freely.
This archive is not for revenge.
It is for those who have been told they imagined it.
It is for those about to walk into something similar.
It is for the future, when denial no longer holds.
It does not ask for apology.
It does not ask for repair.