During the public comment period at Tuesday’s Grand Rapids City Commission meeting there were dozens of people who spoke up about their opposition to Flock cameras in Grand Rapids, but they also said they stood in solidarity with the six sanctuary policy demands from Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE.
Despite the public speaking in support of the sanctuary policy demands, Mayor LaGrand did not address these demands and instead told people who spoke up in support to merely go to the City’s Office of Public Accountability (OPA) section to see what the city was already doing to support immigrants.
I mentioned the 5 items listed on the OPA site in Wednesday’s GRIID article, but wanted to revisit the list with a more robust analysis.
Here are the 5 points listed from the City in response to Cosecha and GR Rapid Response sanctuary policy demands they introduced in January of 2025.
- The City does not operate a detention facility or jail. Kent County operates the county jail.
- The City does not have a 287(g) agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
- The City does not enforce immigration detainers.
- GRPD is prohibited from conducting investigations or making arrests based solely on a person’s immigration status.
- GRPD’s Foreign Nationals Policy prohibits collaboration with ICE on investigations.
I will address these 5 points, along with the 6 sanctuary policy demands from Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE. According to an March article from the National Immigration Law Center, it states:
Last April, Immigration and Customs Enforcement Acting Director Todd Lyons said he wanted to see an immigration detention system that runs “like Prime, but for human beings.” It was a preview of the human rights abuses that would come under Trump. Now, the Department of Homeland Security is pursuing plans to cage people in dozens of massive warehouses across the country in what they’re calling their “Detention Reengineering Initiative.”
The first point from the City of Grand Rapids that they do not operate a detention facility or jail, they misunderstand the demand from Cosecha which says, “Policies that oppose the establishment of detention centers in the city and county limits.” What is being asked is that the City not allow any future ICE detention facilities in the City of Grand Rapids, like what was proposed in Romulus, Michigan earlier this year, which was to use an empty warehouse.
The city says that they, “do not have a 287(g) agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).” While this is true, the Cosecha demand is for the city to adopt a policy that would “ban future 298(g) agreements with ICE.” This seems rather clear and it would prohibit the GRPD from essentially being deputized by ICE to enforcement US immigration laws. The Trump Administration is providing financial incentives for local police departments.
In point three on the OPA page it says, “The City does not enforce immigration detainers.” On the surface this is true, but City Officials and the GRPD need to recognize that the Kent County Sheriff’s Office does engage in detainers for ICE since March of 2025, according to their own memo that people had to submit a FOIA request to obtain. Also, the issue of ICE detainers was not a demand from Cosecha to the city.
Point 5 states, the “GRPD’s Foreign Nationals Policy prohibits collaboration with ICE on investigations.” You can read the GRPD’s Foreign National Policy here, but to be clear part of this policy does state: “The policy allows officers to provide assistance to federal immigration authorities when there is an emergency that poses an immediate danger to public safety or federal agents.”
The Foreign Nationals Policy aside, what Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE know is that the GRPD regularly provides support to ICE during arrests of undocumented immigrants, like the case of Byron Martinez.
The GRPD also provides support for ICE when their agents are attempting to abduct immigrants at the ISAP office, especially when, 1) GR Rapid Response to ICE volunteers are trying to prevent those abductions; or more recently 2) when people are trying to prevent the for profit GEO Group from transporting ICE abducted immigrants from the ICE deployment office at 517 Ottawa NW.
Mayor LaGrand referred to the incident at the 517 Ottawa ICE office as the GRPD stopping people from blocking an alleyway. Those in positions of authority can justify anything they want, and indeed have done so throughout history. A big part of the problem is the narrative that the GRPD and Mayor LaGrand want to use. For the people on the scene they were responding to a GR Rapid Response to ICE call, where ICE had earlier abducted an immigrant in Grand Rapids and brought them to the 517 Ottawa ICE office. Once the abducted immigrant was processed the GEO Group-owned van that was parked inside the 517 Ottawa ICE office would then transport the abducted immigrant to the North Lake Processing Center in Baldwin, Michigan.
The people who were blocking the alleyway were attempting to prevent the GEO Group van from departing because ICE had abducted another immigrant from this community. Those responding would not call what they did a violation, rather they would call what they did their obligation to practice solidarity with immigrants targeted by ICE and to either disrupt or reduce that harm that ICE had committed and the profiting of the GEO Group, which has a contract with ICE to run the detention center in Baldwin.
Lastly, it seems clear that moving forward that Mayor LaGrand will not take seriously the Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE sanctuary policy demands. The Mayor will simply refer people to the OPA page that lists their responses, which are empty claims that do nothing to support undocumented immigrants. Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE have plenty of evidence of GRPD assisting ICE and will continue to press their demands, along with practicing solidarity with undocumented immigrants.
Grand Rapids community members overwhelmingly support a ban on Flock cameras and support for the Cosecha six sanctuary policies
There were several communications listed in the agenda packet for the Grand Rapids City Commission meeting that were specific to the issue of the GRPD’s use of Flock cameras.
Some people attempted to speak to the issue of the GRPD’s use of Flock cameras in Grand Rapids during the first public comment period. However, Mayor LaGrand interrupted one of the people who was using this public comment period to speak about Flock, stating that it was not on the agenda.
The Mayor clarified that communications and petitions are NOT part of the agenda. Ok, so why did the Mayor then allow the preacher talk about abortion for most of his three minutes, just because he mentioned Cure Violence in his introductory comments? This was clearly a double standard, not just because it would be obvious to any reasonable person, but it was painfully clear to people in the room who bristled by the blatant double standard.
There were a number of people who spoke on banning Flock and/or Cosecha sanctuary policies throughout the night. Here are some of the themes that stood out:
- Flock cameras in MLK Park, in front of a food pantry, in the direction of apartment complexes, even near a domestic violence safe house.
- Flock camera outside a supermercado on West Leonard, while there are no Flock cameras in front of Aldi or Meijer at Knapps Corner, thus reflecting both a class and race bias.
- Flock says they have a contract with the City/GRPD and that they don’t own the information, yet Flock makes it clear in their contract and their narrative about their freedom to use the data that Flock cameras collect in whatever way they chose to.
- There were many more compelling arguments around Flock cameras being a 4th Amendment violation and other legal and Constitutional violations as well. People did their homework and provided a deep understanding of what Flock cameras are and why the city must end the contract with Flock and not use similar technology in the future.
A total of 61 people spoke against Flock cameras in Grand Rapids and most of them also voiced support for the six sanctuary policy demands put forth by Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE. No one spoke in support of Flock and no one spoke against the sanctuary policy demands if you watch the video from last night’s city commission meeting.
Afterwards several commissioners had brief comments, but once again Mayor LaGrand spoke the longest, nearly 10 minutes. The first thing that LaGrand said was against the Cosecha-led sanctuary policies, where he directed people to the OPA website, which has a list under the heading – Immigration Status and City Services. I will list them, with a response to some of them in bold.
The City does not operate a detention facility or jail. Kent County operates the county jail. The Trump Administration has been pushing detention centers in abandoned warehouses and GR has several of those. Cosecha is demanding that the City adopt a policy to never allow vacate buildings/warehouses to be used as detention centers.
The City does not have a 287(g) agreement with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The City currently does not, but the Cosecha demand is to adopt a policy that says Grand Rapids will never sign a 287(g) agreement with ICE.
The City does not enforce immigration detainers. This is true, but Kent County does. When the GRPD arrests immigrants for non-violent offenses they end up in the county jail and then the Sheriff’s Office holds them for ICE.
GRPD is prohibited from conducting investigations or making arrests based solely on a person’s immigration status.
GRPD’s Foreign Nationals Policy prohibits collaboration with ICE on investigations. The GRPD’s Foreign Nationals Policy does provide language that says, “The policy allows officers to provide assistance to federal immigration authorities when there is an emergency that poses an immediate danger to public safety or federal agents.” In addition, Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE have first hand accounts and photo evidence of GRPD assisting ICE during ICE arrests.
LaGrand then addressed the Flock surveillance issue and acknowledged that people had some thoughtful comments. He also named people who spoke, which I think is problematic. He also said a lot of other things, but made no real point(s), except that this issue will need more time and more conversation, which is a way of saying that city officials need to figure out ways to deal with public scrutiny over Flock and other forms of government surveillance technologies. This was evident during the Public Safety Committee meeting earlier on Tuesday, where elected officials didn’t seem to even know where the Flock cameras are in Grand Rapids, which GRIID posted over a year ago.
The city does not move quickly on anything when there is significant community pushback on critical issues, like mass surveillance. Everyone who spoke tonight should dig in for the long haul and think about campaign strategies and tactics to oppose Flock cameras in Grand Rapids and resisting the GRPD’s collaboration with ICE.
With no public comment at the Public Safety Committee meeting the GRPD and Flock representatives got little pushback on what they presented
There were about 60 people who attended the Public Safety Committee meeting early this afternoon, since there is a growing concern about how the GRPD is using Flock camera technology.
Unfortunately, the Public Safety Committee meetings do not allow for public comment or questions to address important matters like government surveillance.
There were formal presentations made by Deputy Chief Michael Maycroft (with the GRPD) and two representatives from the Flock company. In other words, there were two presentations by two groups that were pro-Flock technology, which you can watch here at this link.
Deputy Chief Michael Maycroft went first and here are the things he stated that stood out to me:
- The City of Grand Rapids/GRPD began using Flock cameras in June of 2024.
- He claimed that the do not allow for Immigration searches, reproductive health visits, no facial recognition, or public gatherings that would be classified as protests
- Maycroft then offered several examples of how the GRPD has used Flock technology to solve crimes or to find suspects. All of the examples provided by the Deputy Chief were all designed to make the public believe that this technology is a useful tool and thus is a good contract that the GRPD has with the Flock company.
The Deputy Chief offered no hard data on Flock camera usage, nor could he state that this technology has made Grand Rapids safer. As the well thought out report entitled, Cops Don’t Stop Violence states:
It’s time to recognize that decades of pouring more money, resources, and legitimacy into policing in an effort to increase safety have failed — because policing is functioning as it is intended to: to contain, control, and criminalize Black and Brown communities rather than to prevent and reduce violence. It’s time to invest in meeting community needs and building non-police community safety strategies. It’s time to invest in just recovery.
Two of the Flock representatives then presented, one of which is the Flock liaison to the GRPD. They put up a slide that had a lovely, calming image of nature, with the tag line – Shape a Safer Future, Together.
The Flock guys provided a bunch of data and attempted to address some of the public concerns that have been raised in recent years in Grand Rapids, especially around immigration and ICE. They too shared some anecdotal stories to win over those in attendance, but did not make a convincing argument for the public safety value of their technology. The Flock guys also failed to state up front that they make money from more contracts and that this is driving force for the work that the Flock company does.
The Flock guys also did not adequately address the larger issues of how this technology can and is being used that violates public trust and perpetuates state surveillance. Here are several good non-governmental articles/reports on how Flock technology harms the public.
https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-os-investigate/
Grand Rapids City Commissioner Kilgore than read part of an ACLU Michigan letter that was sent out that morning to city officials, since the ACLU was not allowed to present at today’s meeting, which I mentioned in a recent post.
Mayor LaGrand spoke next and praised Chief Trigg as being, “committed to transparency and that the GRPD and the City does not cooperate with ICE in any way.” Both of those statements are false, since 1) the GRPD doesn’t practice real public transparency – try to do a search for the Surveillance Policy; and 2) Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE have first hand accounts of GRPD cooperation with ICE, along with video and photo evidence.
LaGrand went on to talk about how Amazon monitors us, how our smartphones do, etc, etc. LaGrand wants us to think that we are being heavily monitored, but he fails to mention two important points. First, If I have a smart phone or use Facebook that is my choice, but I have no say in government surveillance. Second, Amazon certainly engages in data mining so they can target you with additional products, but that is significantly different than governments that can lock you up on bogus charges and even kill you if you are challenging certain policies and practices of ICE or the GRPD.
The Deputy Chief then said there have been no complaints about Flock use. This is a ridiculous statement to make. First, most people only recently found out about Flock cameras and did not know that the GRPD has been using them for a little over two years. Second, there are no online portals on the GRPD page for people to file such a complaint. Third, up until now the GRPD hasn’t been openly telling the community about the Flock cameras they are using in Grand Rapids.
When the Deputy Chief was asked about how many Flock cameras there are in the city and where they are located, he said that he didn’t have that information in front of him. There is a reason why the Deputy Chief didn’t have that information, since he doesn’t want the public to know where the Flock cameras are or how many they are using. In fact, the Public Safety Committee meeting should have started with a map of all the Flock camera locations first, if they really believed in transparency. I’m almost certain that the public would be pissed off if they knew.
For those that don’t know, here is a listing of of the locations for the Flock cameras that GRIID posted last year.
There were three of the non-elected members of the Public Safety Committee that raised important questions and pushed back on some of the content presented by both the Deputy Chief and Flock guys, which elicited lots of support from those who were present during the meeting.
One of the Flock representatives stated near the end, “most cops wake up and serve us everyday,” which was just his opinion, even though he was stating it as fact. He also wants to see state policy for Flock use, meaning he supported regulation of the Flock tech, but obviously doesn’t support communities banning or ending their existing contracts.
Deputy Chief Maycroft also stated that Flock will limit the amount of the GRPD intrusion into our lives, which also received a visceral reaction from people who were present. Maycroft’s statement was just another example of why the community doesn’t trust the GRPD.
Not to be outdone in the arrogance department, Mayor LaGrand stated, “I’m a lawyer and it took me 90 minutes to read through and understand the GRPD’s Surveillance policy, so it will likely take you longer.”
City Manager Mark Washington said that the next steps for the city is to have an annual GRPD report on Flock usage. While that might appeared to be useful, having the GRPD make reports about their Flock camera use is about as stupid as having the GRPD Internal Affairs division address public complaints.
I plan to be at the City Commission meeting and report back on what the public has to say and how the commissioners respond to what is expected to be a large turnout.
The influence of the DeVos oligarchy is palpable in Grand Rapids
Within the past week there were two concrete examples of how the DeVos oligarchy wields its influence in Grand Rapids.
On August 22nd MLive reported that AHC Hospitality lands 5-year, no-bid DeVos Place food and beverage contract. ACH Hospitality is owned by the DeVos family, which includes 16 properties, most of which are hotels.
The MLive story begins with:
The public authority that owns DeVos Place approved a five-year, no-bid contract Friday allowing AHC Hospitality to continue managing a food and beverage operation that generated $10.7 million in sales last fiscal year. The Grand Rapids-Kent County Convention/Arena Authority (CAA) approved the contract after board chair Rick Winn, president of AHC Hospitality, disclosed a conflict of interest and recused himself from the discussion and vote.
The MLive article primarily cites CAA Executive Director Rich MacKeigan, but the reporter never challenges the conflict of interest with the DeVos-owned ACH Hospitality nor the relationship between the DeVos oligarchy and the other members of the CAA board.
- Seven DeVos family members each gave Commissioner Thiel $1,225 in her re-election bid in 2024.
- Krista Flynn and Birgit Klohs are both on the Executive Committee of Grand Action 2.0, which was created by the DeVos family.
- Thus, at least 4 of the 7 CAA Board members have a direct connection to the DeVos family, but hey, there is no conflict of interest to give ACH Hospitality a 5 year, no bid contract to provide food and beverages for the DeVos Convention Center.
The other recent DeVos-related local news was from August 12, where the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) voted to use $50,000 of public funding to continue the locker storage program to benefit the unhoused. The $50,000 to cover costs of staffing and hours of operation.
The nine member DDA board voted 8 – 1 to provide the funds to continue the storage locker program at Mel Trotter Ministries. The only no vote was Greg McNeilly with the Windquest Group, which is one of the major assets owned by Dick & Betsy DeVos.
In 2006, McNeilly served as campaign manager for Michigan gubernatorial candidate Dick DeVos. McNeilly was also Executive Director of Choices for Children, a Michigan-based group that was working to undermine public education. In addition, McNeilly currently serves on the Board of Directors of the DeVos-created Great Lakes Education Project, which also seeks to undermine public education and replace it with privatized education.
It is instructive that the primary DeVos representative on the DDA board did not want to approve funding this project that would benefit the unhoused. Moreover, this program to provide locker storage for the unhoused in a direct response to the GR Chamber of Commerce initiated ordinances that Grand Rapids adopted in 2023. There were over 100 signatories that the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce collected to support the criminalization of the unhoused, and several of those names were DeVos family members and DeVos operatives.
In the end the DeVos oligarchy continues to influence policies in Grand Rapids that will protect their interests, expand their wealth and solidify their hold on the development of Downtown Grand Rapids.
Around the country, momentum is growing against Flock cameras. People are disabling these cameras in their communities—for example, someone sawed off and removed every Flock license plate reader operated by the Winona Police Department. This is laudable, civic-minded activity.
GRIID has been writing about the Flock cameras in Kent County and Grand Rapids since last year, primarily because it has been one of the demands of Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to the City and the County to not share Flock camera images with ICE.
GRIID did an initial article in June of 2025, followed by a map of the then known Flock camera locations 10 days later.
In December of 2025 Mayor LaGrand said that Flock cameras being used in Grand Rapids have an off switch that doesn’t allow ICE agents to access the images from the cameras. Then in May of 2026, the Mayor made the claim that the GRPD does not share Flock camera images with ICE, even though there are GRPD logs showing immigration specific designations. (shown above)
Flock and the Grand Rapids City Commission
This Tuesday, Flock cameras are taking center stage as they will be discussed during the Public Safety Committee Meeting at 12:30 on the 9th floor at City Hall, then an anti-Flock camera rally at 5:30pm before the City Commission meeting on Calder Plaza.
There are several groups involved in promoting all of this, but there are also groups that are taking a more pro-police position, such as the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce. In a recent post the GR Chamber wrote:
“City Manager Mark Washington announced that during the next Public Safety Commission on August 25 city officials will present on their use of Flock license plate readers and they have invited Flock representatives to present on the technology as well. This has been a hot topic nationwide with some communities canceling service and reports of vandalized cameras. Local activist groups made comments on concerns regarding privacy and surveillance concerns, particularly around issues relate to immigration. Grand Rapids has strict policies related to surveillance technology. Chief Trigg stated that the readers are used to respond faster and investigate criminal activity. He cited an incident with someone wanted for attempted murder.”
So, a representative from Flock will provide their narrative about this technology to the Public Safety Committee, then be followed by GRPD Chief Trigg. The local chapter of the ACLU asked to be allowed to speak during the Public Safety Committee Meeting, specifically to address matters of state surveillance, but they were denied the opportunity.
The public can attend the Public Safety Committee meeting at 12:30pm on Tuesday, but there are no opportunities for public comment. During the 7pm City Commission meeting people will have a chance to address Flock cameras, the GRPD sharing of Flock camera data with ICE and mass surveillance.
I just want to end with an excerpt from a recent Crimethinc article that puts mass surveillance in proper context:
Flock is not the only surveillance company, and cameras are not the only form of surveillance. There are many other corporations waiting to fill the role that Flock cameras are playing, and many other means by which those who aim to dominate us seek to monitor and control our activities. It is good to compel local governments to cancel Flock contracts or directly disable Flock cameras, but the movement against Flock must become a movement against all of the interlocking structures of domination or it will only function as a pressure valve as those structures tighten their grip on our lives.
Many people use a discourse about “privacy” to explain their opposition to surveillance cameras, as if the problem were simply that the cameras interrupt the isolation of the atomized individual—casting light on what would otherwise take place in obscurity. But anyone who reflects for a moment can see that the real problem is that the cameras enable the powers that be to impose an authoritarian order that benefits the wealthy at everyone else’s expense. Ubiquitous surveillance is only “necessary” in a social order that concentrates power in the hands of an elite class while impoverishing everyone else. A profoundly unequal society requires continuous policing and violence to maintain the gulf between the wealthy and the poor, and surveillance cameras are just one aspect of the control apparatus.
The danger is not only that rogue police officers will use Flock cameras to stalk their ex-partners, but that the state itself will be able to consolidate the abusive relationship that it imposes upon all of us.
Lots of celebration on socials about the Benson/Brinks ticket but what does it actually mean for working families in Michigan
Over the past 36 hours there has been a constant buzz on social media over the choice of Winnie Brinks to be the running mate for Jocelyn Benson in the November Election. This will be a pairing of the current Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson and the Majority Senate leader Winnie Brinks.
It’s a feel good story that features two women. However, I prefer to look at what their voting record has been, what Benson’s platform for Governor looks like and who Brinks and Benson have relied on to fund their previous and current campaigns for office.
Voting records
The only elected position that Jocelyn Benson has held is her current position as Secretary of State. As Secretary of State she does not have a vote on public policy, thus no voting record.
Senator Brinks has a track record as both State Representative and State Senator. Brinks served as State Representative from 2013 – 2018, then was elected to represent the 29th State Senate District where she served from 2019 to the present. In 2023, Brinks became the Senator Majority Leader in Lansing.
Most liberal commentary on Brinks labels her as a progressive, which I find to be a shallow term that doesn’t have much teeth. The minimum wage in Michigan has been grossly inadequate and current sits at a ridiculously low $13.73 an hour. People can’t live off of such a wage, let alone find secure housing. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition in order for someone to afford a 2 bedroom apartment they would need to make $25.53, which only covers the cost of housing.
On the matter of housing, groups like the Grand Rapids Area Tenant Union and the Rent is Too Damn High have been pressuring Senator Brinks for several years on adopting a Tenant Bill of Rights, which would include ending the ban on Rent Control in Michigan. These groups have pressured Brinks in Lansing and at her home to adopt policies that would actually center working class families. In July, I wrote a piece critical of the claims from Senator Brinks that she is fighting for affordable housing when in fact she has fought for making it easier for developers to build housing and to direct massive public funds to developers, which is nothing more than public subsidies.
For years the immigrant-led group Movimiento Cosecha, along with other immigrant justice groups in the state have pressed Senator Brinks on passing Drive Safe Bills, which would allow undocumented immigrants the opportunity to obtain a Michigan Driver’s License and reduce the chances of being abducted by ICE. Cosecha visited Senator’s Brinks’ office on numerous occasions in 2023 when the Democrats had a trifecta in Lansing and were promised by the Michigan Democratic Party that they would pass the Drive Safe Bills. Cosecha visited Senator’s Brinks’ office in March of 2023, in September of 2023 and in November of 2023 with no commitment from her office to pass the Drive Safe Bills.
Even during the Lame Duck period in November/December of 2024, the Democrats had a chance to once again pass legislation that would give immigrants the ability to obtain a driver’s license. They failed to do so. I saw the disgust, disappointment and disbelief on the faces of the Cosecha Michigan members, because despite all of the promises from State Legislators and from Governor Whitmer’s office that they would pass the Drive SAFE bills after they won the trifecta during the 2022 election, they failed to make that promise a reality.
Benson’s Campaign Platform
If you look at Benson’s campaign platform you will find a great deal of rhetoric with little concrete plans to implement policies that would benefit working families in Michigan. Under her Affordability section all of her proposals are bandaid solution to systemic problems. Benson does not address the wealth gap in Michigan nor how the system of Capitalism ultimately benefits a small percentage of people, but leaves most Michiganders having to live paycheck to paycheck.
Under the section on Data Centers Benson wants to play the “we have have data centers as long as it doesn’t negatively impact communities” game. Data Centers are inherently bad and are run by tech giants that are driven by increased profits.
In Benson’s environmental section there is also lots of rhetoric without any serious corporate accountability measures, which includes not eliminating Line 5, no plan for a robust mass transit system, no mentions of the use of nuclear power and no mention of mining in the UP, like the awful copper mining in the UP.
Benson’s platform also omits other major issues such as immigration, ICE and policing in Michigan, which have been critical issues over the past decade. Not taking a stand on these issues should tell you something about the Neo-liberal platform of the Benson/Brinks ticket.
Follow the Money and Campaign Finances
Check out campaign financing for Jocelyn Benson since 2017 and this most recent election cycle as a candidate for Governor. Benson has given her campaign over half a million dollars, with lots of union support (mainstream unions give millions to the Democrats, but how has that translated into real benefits for working class families) corporations and wealthy individuals.
The top contributors to Winnie Brings since 2017 have been Democratic Party Committees, various unions (mainstream unions give millions to the Democrats, but how has that translated into real benefits for working class families) and corporations like the Meijer PAC, Michigan Association of Health Plans, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan PAC, Comcast Corporation, Delta PAC, Cms Energy Corp Employees for Better Government, DTE Energy Company PAC and the Molina Healthcare Inc Michigan Political Committee.
The voting record of Winning Brinks, the platform for gubernatorial candidate Jocelyn Benson and the campaign finance records of Benson and Brinks reflects a business as usual approach to electoral politics, where corporate interests are protected and working families will continue to survive, living paycheck to paycheck. I for one am not celebrating the Benson/Brinks ticket.
The Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce celebrates GR Planning commission decision to not require a public hearing for new development project
At a recent Grand Rapids Planning Commission they were making some decisions on the $185 million proposed development project on Monroe Ave North, just north of the 6th Street Bridge.
According to a recent article in Crain’s Grand Rapids Business:
“Plans for the 160-room hotel, 20-story apartment tower, and 500-space parking deck closely align with the types of projects city planning officials envisioned for the Monroe North area as they crafted a new citywide master plan.
Aside from the anticipated tax incentives approval process and potential special land uses for commercial tenants, the developer will have no requirements to hold any public engagement involving the project’s design, said Grand Rapids Planning Director Kristen Turkelson.”
The Grand Rapids Planning Director says there is no need to involved the public, even though he acknowledges that there will be tax incentives, also call subsidies, for this new development project. I’m sorry, but anytime there is a major development project on the table, with millions of public dollars be used, you can’t just side step the public hearing process. Especially since this is also a riverfront development project, where the public needs to be able to ask questions about the potential impact such a project might have on the Grand River.
There are some people who are happy that there will be no public hearing for this development project in the North Monroe district. On the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce website, under their “This Week in Local Government” posting for August 14, the primary organization representing the interests of the Capitalist Class in GR wrote:
The City in this case has clear land use requirements that were set with already extensive public engagement processes. The Chamber continues to push for certainty in the development process and this is a great example of progress to reduce delays.
According to the GR Chamber of Commerce holding public hearings on matters that involve the use of public dollars is, a delay in the development process. Such sentiments are standard within the Capitalist Class as they believe they know what is best for everyone else. Besides, the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce says their mission for over 100 years has been, A thriving and prosperous West Michigan for all. How many on West Michigan feel like they are thriving and being prosperous?
Last Tuesday, August 11, there was an open event at the Intersection hosted by Voice for the Badge. The event was billed as a meet and greet with the new Grand Rapids Chief of Police Joe Trigg.
After the more formal community gathering people milled about, such as Mayor David LaGrand, who is seen here below with the founders of the two citizen-led pro-police groups in Grand Rapids – Voice for the Badge and iCI Nation.
As a side note, earlier in the day during the Grand Rapids City Commission meeting members from Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE confronted the Grand Rapids City Commission meeting over recent GRPD action where they assisted ICE and the GEO Group (which runs the largest ICE detention center in the midwest) by preventing activists from trying to stop the transport of an immigrant that had been abducted by ICE in late July. A few days later, during a community forum, Chief Trigg denied there was any collaboration between ICE and the GRPD.
This brings us back to the forum hosted by Voice for the Badge on August 11th and the picture of Mayor LaGrand with the leaders of two pro-police organizations. The Mayor seems to be all smiles in this exchange. This is in stark contrast to immigrant and Black organizers who have attempted to engage LaGrand since he began his tenure as Mayor in 2025.
But who exactly are these two pro-police groups and what does it mean for the Mayor to be in friendly conversation with them?
Voice for the Badge was formed as a response to the Movement for Black Lives, acting as sort of defenders of cops. The founder of the group (pictured in the photo above) Johnny Brann Sr. owns Brann’s restaurants, but uses the restaurant as a shrine for cops. I have written numerous articles about Voice for the Badge and have noted that they have been either silent when the GRPD has killed people like Patrick Lyoya or Da’Quain Johnson. Johnny Brann Sr. has also used his wealth to back candidates in Grand Rapids that are also pro-police. Voice for the Badge is a very nationalistic and racist organization and often posts content on their social media like this one from June of 2025, where a Florida Sheriff was responding to protests by saying:
“Throw a brick, a firebomb or point a gun at one of our deputies, we will be notifying your family where to collect your remains at. Because we will kill you graveyard dead. We’re not going to play.”
iCI Nation was founded in 2015 by a woman named Jennifer Franson. iCI Nation does more behind the scenes work where they often throw parties or have breakfast events in order to “provide a healthy environment for the Community to build trust with law enforcement.”
Mayor LaGrand was also all smiles with iCI Nation founder Jennifer Franson at a going away party for former GRPD Chief Eric Winstrom. This event was just two days after the GRPD had killed Da’Quain Johnson, but both LaGrand and Franson seemed quite happy.
For me, the fact that Mayor LaGrand is friendly with two white-led pro-police organizations in Grand Rapids, organization that vigorously defend policing should tell you something, especially when you juxtapose his antagonistic relationship with groups like Movimiento Cosecha, GR Rapid Response to ICE and Black organizers demanding justice for Patrick Lyoya and Da’Quain Johnson.
Muir will succeed Sheriff LaJoye-Young with the same racist practices and ongoing collaboration with ICE to detain immigrants at the jail
In mid-July when the local news was reporting that Kent County Sheriff Michelle LaJoye-Young announced that she was retiring, most news sources stated that Undersheriff Bryan Muir would be her successor.
It is no surprise that this is what has come to pass. It is also not surprising that the local news has not provided any context for the appointment of Muir, meaning they gave the undersheriff a free pass.
What is omitted in the coverage and what the public generally doesn’t know about Muir are some of the following:
- He resided as UnderSheriff over the ongoing racially driven jail population in Kent County. Based on a data from a report by LincUp, most people in the Kent County Jail are there for non-violent offenses, most of those in the jail have not been found guilty of a crime, and there is a disproportionate number of Black and Brown people in the Kent County Jail. For instance, in Kent County Black people make up 10% of the population, but they make up 47% of the incarcerated population.
Additionally, as a result of UnderSheriff Muir’s testimony during a recent trial of four people that were contesting the Kent County Jail’s policy of collaborating with ICE by holding immigrants for ICE, Muir stated the following:
- First, when asked by defense attorneys if what he said to the defendants at the time of the arrest was caught on his body camera Muir said no because his body camera “wasn’t working or wasn’t charged.”
- A second interesting comment from Muir was while he was being cross examined by defense attorneys about whether or not the Sheriff’s Office shares Flock camera information with ICE. Muir said they share Flock camera images with all federal agencies that request them for a criminal investigation. Muir would not name ICE as being a federal agency, even when pressed on the matter, but by saying all federal agencies he admitted that includes ICE.
- Third, the Under Sheriff also revealed that their department has what he called the Real Time Intelligence Center, which essentially monitors everything happening at the buildings the Sheriff’s Office is in charge of (which includes the Kent County Jail), along with any interaction Sheriff’s officers have with the public and drone footage when drones are used. Muir shared this bit of information because he said that his officers were also monitoring Movimiento Cosecha’s livestream from inside the lobby of the Sheriff’s Office on the day of the action/arrest on January 5th and the post arrest video they did in the lobby of the jail with the defendants. Under Sheriff Muir essentially admitted that the Sheriff’s Office engages in surveillance of Cosecha, which means they likely do this to any organized efforts to challenge systems of power in Kent County.
Under Muir’s leadership as Sheriff we can expect the same business as usual approach, where a disproportionate number of BIPOC people will be incarcerated, where the Sheriff’s Office will be monitoring the public without their knowledge, and where the Kent County Sheriff’s Office will collaborate with ICE by sharing Flock camera images and engaging in ICE holds at the Kent County Jail. Remember this in the November Election with a ballot initiative to ask taxpayer for more money for the jail!
Rep. Hillary Scholten is a militarist that has supported US Imperialism since she joined Congress in 2023
In a recent Straight Talk with Scholten video, Congresswoman Hillary Scholten talked about the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, the annual US military spending bill.
More accurately, Rep. Scholten talked less about what is in the proposed trillion dollar US Military bill and more about 6 amendments she got passed in the House version of the bill. Those 6 amendments are:
- Expand access to child care for military families.
- Improve the diagnosis and treatment of blast-related brain injuries.
- Explore innovative medical technologies that could reduce recovery times for servicemembers.
- Address shortages in the aviation maintenance workforce.
- Strengthen domestic tool and die manufacturing capabilities.
- Study next-generation vessel materials to improve durability and readiness.
A superficial look at these amendments and one would think that these all sound very nice. However, Rep. Scholten doesn’t provide sufficient context for what is deeply problematic about her amendments. Besides child care access for military families – all working families deserve free access to child care – these amendments are all operating on the premise that the US military is a force for good and the annual US military budget is beneficial to the majority of people living in this country.
Rep. Scholten omits the fact that the US military has about 180 bases around the world, acting primarily as occupying forces in order to maintain global dominance. Scholten also fails to say anything about US weapons sales abroad, US military advisors, direct US military intervention and a whole host of other dynamics that the US military is contributing to the killing of thousands of civilians on an annual basis. Add on to that the fact that the US military is one of the largest consumers of fossil fuels, so large that they burn fossil fuels more than most countries do in any given year.
Besides the child care access amendment, the other amendments either provide medical dollar for research and treatment or more funding for the Military Industrial Complex. There are two easy solutions to these amendments, stop putting US soldiers in situations where they would get injured and stop subsidizing the US military industry that is one of the major driving forces in the massive annual military budget.
Another thing that Rep. Scholten said in her weekly video was to voice her objection to the Trump Administration’s proposal to change the US Department of Defense to the US War Department. Rep. Scholten failed to mention that was the original name that George Washington used, a name which stood until 1949 when President Trump signed the National Security Act. Calling it the US War Department would be more honest, since the US military has primarily been used for war as opposed to defending this country.
Rep. Scholten then says the name change would cost $125 million, but whayt she said most was rather telling. In Scholten’s objection to spending $125 million on the name change she said, “Think about what we could do with that money?”
The irony of this statement is lost on Rep. Scholten. The statement – Think about what we could do with that money – is what anti-war and anti-imperialists have been saying for near two centuries. Since Rep. Scholten joined Congress in 2023, she has voted for the annual US military budget, which has been between $800 billion to $ trillion. Rep. Scholten has voted for over $3 billion in military aid to Israel, plus additional funding to support Israel’s genocidal slaughter of the Palestinians and billions more to Ukraine in their war against Russia.
Rep. Scholten’s missive, where she invites us to think about how we could spend money for something other than US militarism is something that she and her fellow Democrats should embrace. Imagine if half of the US military budget – $500 billion – where withheld. What could we do with $500 billion?
- We could provide affordable housing for everyone who is housing insecure today.
- We could provide free health care to everyone in the US.
- We could invest is efficient and clean mass transit.
- We could invest in a sustainable energy infrastructure.
- We could provide financial and legal support for undocumented immigrants to welcomed into this country instead of subjecting them to ICE. Thus, we could abolish ICE, which Rep. Scholten has made clear she is opposed to.
In the end we have to recognize that Rep. Scholten, like most members of Congress, has consistently voted for US militarism and US imperialism through the annual National Defense Authorization Act. Rep. Scholten is a staunch defender of US Empire and will not deviate from that, since the Democrats are equally committed to militarism and imperialism.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 