There is this notion in our society that says, “it’s not what you know, but who you know.” This plays out in many ways, both positively and negatively depending on the circumstances.
At the most recent Grand Rapids Committee on Appointments meeting this past Tuesday one can see how the “who you know” dynamic plays out within City Government. There were several new appointments discussed at the Committee on Appointments meeting, specifically appointments for the Grand Rapids Police Civilian Appeal Board and the Grand Rapids Housing Commission.
Mayor LaGrand proposed to appoint Daniel Savage to the Grand Rapids Police Civilian Appeal Board, which was unanimously approved. Unfortunately there was no discussion or disclosure about Daniel Savage who is a retired Deputy Chief with the GRPD and is currently a background investigator for the Kent County Sheriff’s Office. Seems like important information to discuss at a public meeting. It also seems that Mayor LaGrand wants to further insulate the GRPD from public scrutiny over the GRPD killing of Black residents and their collaboration with ICE.
In regards to the Grand Rapids Housing Commission, it was agreed to continue to have Monica App be on that committee, even though she works for one of the largest developers in this city, Rockford Construction. The other appointee to the Grand Rapids Housing Commission was Josh Lunger, who is the Senior Vice President of Advocacy at Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce.
On the appointment of Lunger there was some pushback, specifically from 3rd Ward Commissioner Marshall Kilgore. You can watch/listen to his comments beginning at 7:50 in the video at this link. Commissioner Kilgore had two main objections, one being that the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce opposed the City’s Climate plan and the fact that the Chamber supported the two ordinances that the City adopted that essentially criminalized the unhoused.
On top of all of that, it is important to note that Josh Lunger was also the main GR Chamber of Commerce person who initiated the discussion around the “problem” of unhoused people in downtown Grand Rapids. In the summer of 2022, Lunger sent a letter to the Grand Rapids City Commission on behalf of the GR Chamber of Commerce about how business owners and some residents of downtown GR were upset about the “homeless, which you can read here.
Josh Lunger then took the next step on behalf of the GR Chamber of Commerce in December of 2022, where he sent another letter that proposed the City of Grand Rapids adopt ordinances that would criminalize the unhoused in downtown Grand Rapids. Lunger and the GR Chamber got over 100 of their friends to endorse the proposal to criminalize the unhoused, which can read here.
In the summer of 2023, the City of Grand Rapids then adopted two ordinances that essentially fulfilled the GR Chamber’s proposal intent, despite their being significant public opposition to the ordinances.
What was interesting is that Commissioner Ysasi then stated (12:50 into the video) that she needed to set the record straight by saying that the ordinances that the City adopted in 2023 and were supported by Lunger and the GR Chamber of Commerce did not criminalize “homelessness.” In fact, Ysasi says she was proud of that vote. To set the record straight 4 of the 5 commissioners that did vote to adopt the two ordinances that will punish and criminalize the unhoused, have all receive campaign contributions from the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce. Commissioner O’Connor $750, Commissioner Ysasi $1250, Mayor Bliss $1350, and Commissioner Robbins $10,500.
Later that day during the regular City Commission meeting there was further discussion about Josh Lunger being appointed to the Housing Commission, since Commissioner Kilgore was a dissenting vote in the Committee on Appointments. At 12:50 into the City Commission meeting you can hear again Commissioner Kilgore’s objections, which were pretty much the same thing he said earlier that day.
Mayor LaGrand responded to Commissioner Kilgore’s objections by saying, Josh Lunger has done an extremely large amount of work on dealing with the unhoused (15:25 into the video ) and transformative work with care housing, although the Mayor offers no concrete examples of how Lunger has done transformative work.
Mayor LaGrand goes on to say that he thinks it is not a good idea to not appoint people to committees because of the relationship they have with their employer. Here LaGrand is not only defending Lunger, but he is defending the GR Chamber of Commerce. This tracks considering that the GR Chamber of Commerce was one of the largest contributors to his campaign to get elected as Mayor of Grand Rapids giving $2000 to his campaign in 2024.
Mayor LaGrand then says that he thinks that making blanket statements about the GR Chamber of Commerce is problematic and that they have demonstrated real investment in housing issues in Grand Rapids. Again, the Mayor doesn’t substantiate his claims about the GR Chamber of Commerce, which of course he can’t because the GR Chamber of Commerce offers no concrete support in addressing the current housing crisis.
In fact, the GR Chamber of Commerce role has been to insert itself in the housing issue by promoting market based solutions to housing, which is exactly why there is a housing crisis, since housing is treated as a commodity and not a right for people. The GR Chamber of Commerce created the group Housing Next, which has inserted itself into the housing issue and offered only false solutions to the housing crisis.
Mayor LaGrand failed to mention Lunger’s role in assisting the 2023 ordinances that criminalized the unhoused in Grand Rapids or the fact that Lunger helped to lobby state legislators to change a law that will allow developers to use public dollars when converting former office space into housing, housing which primarily caters to the professional class and is unaffordable to most people.
Mayor LaGrand ended his comments by endorsing Lunger to be on the Grand Rapids Housing Commission, thus dismissing Commissioner Kilgore’s thoughtful objections and simultaneously demonstrating his allegiance to the Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce.
Dreading Tax Day: Why our tax dollars should not be used for death and militarism, but for basic human needs
While Henry David Thoreau was sitting in jail for refusing to pay a poll tax because of his opposition to slavery and the US invasion/war against Mexico, his friend Ralph Waldo Emerson asked “Why are you here?” Thoreau simply responded by saying, “Why aren’t you here?”
There is that old saying – the only things certain in life are death and paying taxes. I would like to amend this statement to say – if you are paying taxes then you are paying for the US military to kill civilians.
A great deal of our federal taxes are used to fund the US military, which always translates into the killing of civilians around the world. For example, in just the past 4 weeks because of the US military bombing of Iran the US has killed 3,636 Iranian people since the war erupted. The U.S.-based rights group HRANA said 1,701 of those were civilians, including at least 254 children.
The US has been providing military aid and weapons to Israel for decades, but between October of 2023 and October of 2025 at least 70,000 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli military.
According to a spokesperson for the National Priorities Project the average taxpayer shelled out over $4,000 for war and weapons last year. Put another way, you spent about 50 days working and paying taxes last year just to feed the war machine—and 23 days working to pay those Pentagon contractors and their millionaire CEOs.
According to the War Resister League since WWII roughly 50 cents of every tax dollar goes to pay for the US military, which also includes paying off the cost of previous wars. This obsession for military spending is so entrenched in the US that regardless of who sits in the White House or which party controls Congress the US military budget keeps increasing from year to year. According to the National Priorities Project every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $116.43 million for Pentagon & War.
Let’s be honest, US military spending has complete and total bi-partisan support. So what can we do to oppose this reality and resist US militarism around the world?
First, we need to education ourselves on the cost of war/militarism by checking out sites like the National Priorities Project, the Cost of War Project and the War Resisters League.
Second, we have to stop voting for politicians who vote annually for the massive US military budgets. We also need to engage in massive resistance to these same politicians by disrupting business as usual and occupy their offices.
Third, we can withhold our federal tax dollars. You can find out how to do tax resistance by going to this link.
Fourth, anti-war movements need to not operate in silos, but connect to BIPOC led social movements, environmental justice & climate justice movements, racial justice movements, feminist movements, queer and trans movements and labor movements to see how US militarism is connected to all of these movements.
Fifth, we need to identify private military contractors in our community and begin campaigns to shut them down.
Sixth, we need to resist military recruiters in our communities, especially those that are given access to our schools in order to prey on our children and get them to join the US military.
Seventh, we have to build anti-war movements that have the capacity to disrupt business as usual and shut down systems of power if we truly want to reduced the brutality that is being done on a daily basis around the world in our name.
Eighth, at the local level a large percentage of our City and County taxes are used to fund the police, the Sheriff’s Department and the Kent County Jail, all of which are used to brutalize people in this community, particularly BIPOC communities, immigrants and those being left behind by Capitalism. We need to demand that the City of Grand Rapids, Kent County and the Grand Rapids School Board adopt participatory budgeting so that all residents can have a say in how our local tax dollars are being used.
As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stated in his speech entitled Beyond Vietnam – “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.”
Doug DeVos and his associates are creating more religious justifications for using AI
Last month I posted an article entitled, AI and data centers are not a problem if God is involved, says Doug DeVos and his fellow believers. In that article I stated:
“In his concluding remarks Doug DeVos says, “This will be a challenge, not least because so many Americans have fallen away from faith. But that should only stiffen our spines to fight for AI done right.” Like the billionaires behind the recent data center push in West Michigan, we need to recognize the DeVos family has more in common with the tech billionaires than they do with working class families that will struggle to survive in greater number when AI/Data Centers come to dominate more of our economy and our lives.”
Well, Doug DeVos is at it again, specifically through his online journal called Believe!, which is named after his late father Rich DeVos. In the April 10th online Believe! journal there were two articles that further developed a Christian view of AI.
The first article, entitled Why AI Needs Faith, was written by Pat Gelsinger who is the Executive Chair and Head of Technology at Gloo. Glesinger, who used to be CEO at Intel, wants to make it his mission to advance Christian principles in Silicon Valley.
In order to achieve this goal Glesinger is committed to two things.
First, AI models must be trained to understand faith with the same seriousness they apply to science, history, or literature. Not to preach, but to accurately and respectfully engage with the worldviews users actually hold.
Second, there must be benchmarks that measure this rigorously. Without measurement, there’s no accountability. Without accountability, there’s no improvement.
Ok, so what Glesinger wants is to create AI systems to understand the nuance of religious beliefs, which are not based in fact or logic. In addition, some how AI will be better because it understands Christian beliefs and inserts these beliefs into how AI will function and that will magically make AI less harmful?
The second article is even more absurd, which is titled, What the Biblical “Battle of AI” Teaches Us About Faith in the Age of AI Agents. This article was written by Mark Johnson, who is a co-founder and partner at Michigan Software Labs.
Johnson begins his piece asking the question – As we use these AI agents, are we still serving as agents of God? His answer is:
Just as each technological era reshapes how we work and connect, it also tests whether we will obey God amidst change. We don’t just need to decide how we use these new tools. Even more than that, we need to ensure that we seek His direction first.
In most of the rest of the article Johnson uses bible quotes to justify using AI and at one point compares the roads that the apostle Paul used to spread the “good news” with AI. Johnson argues that the are both just tools, then states:
Our challenge is to recognize this while making the most of this amazing tool. God’s plan for his people has always involved technology. He equips His people with resources – roads, printing presses, the Internet, now AI – and asks us to steward them faithfully.
What I find interesting about these DeVos associates and fellow believers is that despite all of their appeals to morality and obedience to God, they never raise the question of using AI as a threat to humanity, of displacing workers, nor the creation of data centers, which have immense ecological, economic and social implications that threaten communities and ecosystems alike.
Therefore, when Doug DeVos says that he wants good Christians to run and manage AI and Data Centers – not secularists – we should be looking at what the DeVos family of Christians and his associates have been doing for decades and discern whether or not they have a moral leg to stand on in regards to the consequences of AI and its use in the world. Anyone who believes that the DeVos family made billions because they are obedient to God while thousands of families in the Grand Rapids area are struggling to survive has a pretty fucked up notion of faith.
Rep. Scholten’s recent statement further demonstrates her hypocrisy on US foreign policy matters
Last Thursday, Rep. Hillary Scholten posted the following message on her Facebook page:
While I’m relieved a larger catastrophe was avoided last night, President Trump’s erratic rhetoric and unpredictable actions are exactly why Congress must take back its constitutional authority over war decisions. A two-week ceasefire is not enough. Costs are sky high and the lives of 13 American services members have been lost, with so many more put at risk. I’m once again calling on my Republican Colleagues to support a War Powers Resolution and give the American people their power back over this reckless war.
There is a great deal to unpack with this statement, but I’ll focus on just a few things. First, I want to address the issue of Congress and its constitutional authority over war decisions. Rep. Scholten is pointing out a procedural matter regarding the need to have Congressional approval in order for the US to go to war. Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in 1973, so gaining Congressional approval is a relatively new thing, but the reality is that the US Congress has rarely ever voted to approve war or other forms of direct US military intervention in another country. Therefore, Rep. Scholten can get off her high horse about Congressional approval and do something concrete to resist the US military’s assault on Iran.
Second, Rep. Scholten tries to show some defiance by saying that a two week ceasefire isn’t enough. Again, these are just platitudes with no concrete demonstration that she or any member of Congress is willing to actually resist the US assault on Iran.
Third, Scholten then refers to the lives of 13 American services members have been lost. Of course this is tragic, but why doesn’t Rep. Scholten mention the number of Iranian civilians who have been killed because of US military bombing in Iran? According to the U.S.-based rights group HRANA said 3,636 Iranian people have been killed since the war erupted. It said 1,701 of those were civilians, including at least 254 children. Here Scholten uses what Ed Herman used to refer to as worthy and unworthy victims, with US military members as worthy and Iranians as unworthy.
Fourth, for Rep. Scholten to call on her Republican colleagues to support a War Powers Resolution is just stupid. Of course they won’t, since they have demonstrated repeatedly that they endorse whatever the Trump Administration is doing. Instead of wasting time appealing to GOP members of Congress, Rep. Scholten should be supporting many of the national groups that are opposing the US assault on Iran, like Code Pink, plus should should have spent time in Grand Rapids last week when Congress wasn’t in session to meet with her constituents to find out what they think about the US war on Iran and how that is taking money away from working class families.
Fifth, when Rep. Scholten says that getting Congress to support a War Powers
Resolution that it would give the American people their power back, does she naively believe this to be true? Congress choosing to support a War Powers Resolution will not give any of us our power back, since the US electoral system is not even remotely design to give the people power. If Rep. Scholten – or anyone else for that matter – believes that voting for candidates that have already been vetted by members of political parties who have the most power and candidates that are already compromised by campaign contributions is equal to giving the public power then they are delusional.
Besides these five talking points Rep. Hillary Scholten is nothing more than a hypocrite. Scholten has consistently voted for the annual US military budget, which is just shy of a trillion dollars. Rep. Scholten unconditionally supported the Biden Administration’s military policies in the Ukraine and Israel’s genocidal campaign against the Palestinians.
Rep. Scholten has also been completely silent about Israel’s genocide under the Trump Administration, along with Israel’s bombing of Lebanon, primarily because she is bought and paid for by the Israeli lobby. To the degree that she is critical of what the Trump Administration is doing to Iran is because it is an anti-Trump position and not an anti-war position, since Scholten has already made it clear that she believes that Iran is a terrorist state.
We can’t let the people in power in Grand Rapids dictate the narrative about the 250th anniversary of the US
Last year Grand Rapids celebrated the 175th anniversary of it’s founding, where they got to dictate the narrative about how this city was founded on settler colonialism.
Since then Grand Rapids has created a committee called GR A250, which stands for the Grand Rapids America 250th anniversary of the US founding. I have written about this group, who makes up that committee and how they kicked off attempting to dictate the narratives about the founding of Grand Rapids and the US, with Doug DeVos and Mayor LaGrand giving talks about their sanitized version of the US.
The GR A250 group also has a Facebook page, where they primarily focus on celebrating the history of famous people and those in power. I have also written numerous critiques about what they are choosing to celebrate and contrasting that with a people’s history of Grand Rapids.
In one example the GR A250 wrote the following on their Facebook page:
The name “Grand Rapids” seems pretty obvious, but have you ever thought about what was here before our beautiful bridges and sleek skyscrapers?
It’s widely known we were called after the Grand River, now popular for fishing and tourism, which was vital for floating logs for the lumber industry in the early 1800’s. The area was dubbed “Grand Rapids” by the settler Louis Campau in 1831 when he purchased the land and the village was officially given it’s title in 1838.
Here was my response.
The point is that we cannot sit by and allow the likes of Doug DeVos and Mayor LaGrand to dictate our collective narratives about this history of Grand Rapids or the US, since we all know what kind of narratives they have already attempted to impose on us and will continue to impose on us if we don’t provide counter-narratives.
When it comes to the dominant narrative about the founding of the US, we all know what we were taught in grade school, particularly about the Revolutionary War. The Zinn Education Project has been working hard to provide teaching tools for educators and the community at large so that we can challenge the dominant narratives about the history of the US, specifically as it gears up for the 250th anniversary of the founding of this country.
The video below is a great example of how to create counter-narratives and the person who is speaking is the amazing Professor Kimberlé W. Crenshaw, founder and director of the African American Policy Forum.
Professor Crenshaw begins by saying:
The African American Policy Forum is proud to support Zinn Education Project’s Decolonize 1776 initiative. As our nation prepares to celebrate 250 years of the American Revolution, one thing is certain: however loud the fireworks are sure to be, the silences will be louder.
We’ve been reading from the same script for generations, a heroic story of brave colonists achieving liberty against all odds. But from the perspective of Black and Indigenous peoples, that script has always been written over a void.
According to a recent article on Crain’s Grand Rapids Business, the DeVos-owned Fox Motors is set to acquire auto dealerships in the Kalamazoo area, known as the Maple Hill Auto Group.
The Crain’s article is fairly straight forward regarding the acquisition by Fox Motors, with the only source being that of the CEO of the Maple Hill Auto Group. However, the Crain’s article does provide some other useful bit of information such as:
Fox Motors ranks No. 44 on Automotive News’ list of the Top 150 dealerships based in the U.S., with 22,289 new vehicles sold in 2024. The group, which generated just over $2 billion in revenue in 2024, has several domestic and import stores in lower Michigan and in the state’s Upper Peninsula along with a Ford store in Chicago.
The CEO of Fox Motors is Dan DeVos, who is one of the four children that Richard & Helen DeVos had, along with Dick, Doug and Cheri. According to the Fox Motors website the company owns 47 locations throughout Michigan, which includes All Powersports that consists of a Harley-Davidson dealership and other stores that specialize in jet skis and off road vehicles.
Of course this recent DeVos family acquisition doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Controlling more of the auto dealership market in Michigan is rooted in several dynamics.
First, the new acquisition means the family will be able to expand their wealth. Second, the DeVos family, which is the largest single contributor of campaign contribution in Michigan since 1990 will benefit from the politicians they own who will not pass laws to expand mass transit options throughout the state.
Third, the DeVos family has funded numerous entities that either deny Climate Change or push to de-regulate certain industries like fossil fuels and auto manufacturers, groups like:
- American Enterprise Institute
- The Heritage Foundation
- The Mackinac Center for Public Policy
- The Action Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty
You can look up which of the DeVos foundations have funded the above groups by going to this link, which has been tracking their foundations since 2013.
Regarding the Acton Institute, in 2005, Mother Jones magazine listed the Acton Institute among a group of organizations who had received funding from ExxonMobil, pointing to a $155,000 donation. ExxonSecrets reports that the Acton Institute has received at least $315,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.
The former Indymedia site Media Mouse wrote in 2007:
“the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty, a think-tank located here in Grand Rapids, Michigan, brought global warming skeptic Fred Smith to Grand Rapids for a lecture as part of the Institute’s 2007 lecture series. Fred Smith is the founder of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a rightwing think-tank that promotes free-market ideals over human concerns and opposes government regulations on everything from fuel economy to pesticides. However, both Smith and the Competitive Enterprise Institute are most known for their role in attacking the idea of global warming. In its opposition to government regulation and opposition to global warming, the Competitive Enterprise Institute has much in common with the Acton Institute. While the Competitive Enterprise Institute has received attention for being given more than $2 million by ExxonMobil to fund its operations, the Acton Institute has received $160,000 from ExxonMobil.”
Like all DeVos acquisitions, the decision to acquire more auto dealerships is strategic, since it not only expands their wealth, but does so within industries that they have a great deal of control over as it relates to public policy.
Mayor LaGrand attended a goodbye party for Chief Winstrom two days after the GRPD killed Da’Quain Johnson
To date Grand Rapids Mayor David LaGrand has been silent or evasive about the GRPD killing of Da’Quain Johnson, but he has also been consistent in his support for the GRPD.
In response to the Kent County Prosecutor’s decision to not prosecute GRPD cops responsible for Johnson death Mayor LaGrand stated:
“The loss of Mr. Johnson remains a profound tragedy, and I continue to mourn alongside his family. My commitment to transparency and the highest professional standards does not end with this decision. I will continue to evaluate our policies and practices to ensure the safety of all as I remain acutely aware of the dangerous nature of police work and the split-second decisions officers must make in the interest of public safety.”
The Mayor’s defense of the GRPD should not come as a surprise as he has long been a supporter of policing and even as a State Representative voted to increase funding for police at the same time that the Movement for Black Lives was calling for the defunding of police departments across the country.
Mayor LaGrand further demonstrated his allegiance to the GRPD and outgoing GRPD Police Chief Eric Winstrom by attending a his goodbye party.
There was also another police apologist in attendance at Winstrom’s “I’m leaving Grand Rapids because of the anti-police sentiments in this city” party, mainly the founder of the group iCI Nation, Jennifer Franson.
GRIID first wrote about iCI Nation in 2021, even though the group had formed in 2015 as a way to show appreciation for what the police do in this community. However, it is no coincidence that iCI Nation formed as a direct response to the Movement for Black Lives, which had gained national attention by 2015, mainly because of the growing number of cases where police were killing Black people.
I have written other pieces about the iCI Nation, like the post I did in 2022 that was in response to a story that WZZM 13 did that unquestionably featured a pro-police bias.
In March of 2023 I did another story about the police apologist group, which centered on their relationship with the far right think tank the Acton Institute. In an interview with the Acton Institute, the founder of iCI Nation stated, “that the FBI has a community outreach specialist (which Jennifer Franson met) and said they are interested in having the iCI work with them to build relationships.”
In that same interview with the Acton Institute, Franson also stated that iCI Nation meets monthly with the 35 Chiefs of Police in this area that “keep me blissfully ignorant of how they keep me safe.” Franson also said that these Chiefs were already planning for how to respond to the outcome of the trial for the former cop, Christopher Schurr, who shot and killed Patrick Lyoya.
The iCI Nation has also partnered with other police apologist groups to do things like “fishing with the Po Po” and co-sponsoring so called unity walks, which are nothing more than pro-police events.
Getting back to Mayor LaGrand, it will be interesting to see where he and other members of the Grand Rapids City Commission will say when talking about the upcoming FY2027 city budget. My money is on LaGrand and the rest of the commission to continue to maintain a larger portion of the City’s budget to be allocated for the GRPD, likely over $70 million.
Last year the Grand Rapids City Commission approved over $69 million for the GRPD and that was just days after the County Prosecutor decided to not re-try the former GRPD cop who shot and killed Patrick Lyoya. Mayor LaGrand and his fellow commissioners have given no indication of reducing the GRPD, despite increased demands to do so after the GRPD killed Da’Quain Johnson.
Two weeks ago I wrote a piece about all of the proposed data centers in Kent County in an article entitled, More data center coverage dominated by a corporate perspectives in West Michigan.
In that article I wrote:
For instance, Microsoft purchased 340 acres in Gaines Township for a proposed data center, 272 acres in nearby Dorr Township and is pursuing a 237-acre property in Lowell Township. Those three combined would mean that Microsoft will own and control 849 acres in Kent County, all land that is either currently unused or farmland.
In this article I want to talk about a recent Crain’s Grand Rapids Business article which has information on what the Microsoft Corporation is now proposing to Gaines Township and the data center they hope to build. The Crain’s article headline reads, Microsoft’s data center faces a key vote. What is the company committing to in Gaines Township?
The headline is accurate, since they article only cited a spokesperson for the Microsoft Corporation, along with a memo from the corporation and what they are “committing” to in the Gaines Township proposal.
Here are the 14 points that Microsoft is committing to:
- Not seek local property tax abatements from Gaines Township
- Use setbacks of at least 150 feet from property lines;
- Improve and donate approximately 9.5 acres of land for open space and trail connections
- Limit site use to a data center, and that construction must commence within 10 years, which could be extended with township board approval
- Pay for any needed power grid upgrades to avoid shifting costs to residential customers
- Use backup generators only during power grid emergencies
- Pay to upgrade water and sewer infrastructure as necessary
- Draw water from the Byron-Gaines water system instead of pump groundwater for operations, such as cooling
- Use water-efficient design, which could include a closed-loop system, air cooling that avoids water use, or a combination of those systems, or any other emerging technology
- Comply with environmental laws and stay in compliance with local, state and federal standards for air emissions and water quality
- Take responsibility for safely shutting down the facility and any on-site cleanup if the data center is decommissioned
- Limit noise on site, up to 65 dBA at property lines next to residentially zoned parcels during normal operations, and up to 85 dBA during emergency generator use
- Visually screen the site from nearby homes with at least 8-foot-high landscaped berms or other visual screening where allowed
- Eliminate light shining directly onto residential lots, or screening lights from residential properties
These bullet points, or what Microsoft is calling their commitments, are often what developers refer to as community benefit agreements (CBA). These agreements are not necessarily legally binding, unless that is demanded by the community or whichever entity has reached an agreement with said developer.
As community benefits agreements go, these so-called commitments are pretty weak. I say weak, since many of these commitments are already either 1) obligatory – such as following local or state environmental standards, site and noise ordinances; or 2) low hanging fruit, like paying for any power grid upgrades or donating land or connecting trails. The low hanging fruit commitments are small, but they are meant to demonstrate Microsoft’s benevolence.
The national group Power Shift Action refers to community benefit agreements as:
Community Benefits campaigns help strengthen the muscles and institutions we need for healthy democracy. These campaigns bring together stakeholders from across the community, including (and especially) those who are most impacted but often least listened to, to build a shared platform and negotiate directly on behalf of the community with the real decision makers. They enable community members to practice democratic co-governance, as they oversee the delivery of community benefits and hold developers and other key actors accountable to their promises. They broaden the scope of who gets to be at the table when big decisions get made about our communities’ futures.
The notion of CBAs, as presented by Power Shift Action, is fundamentally different than the “commitments” that the Microsoft Corporation is offering to Gaines Township. Now, the Crain’s article doesn’t elaborate on whether the Gaines Township government, the residents of Gains Township or the Microsoft Corporation initiated these “commitments”, but my money would be on the Microsoft Corporation, or at best a collaboration between Gaines Township and the global tech company.
The Microsoft Corporation “commitments” do not include hiring local contracts for the project, paying livable wages for the construction and operating of a future data center, providing significant money investments in affordable housing and environmental projects that would benefit the residents of Gaines Township or other long-term investments in that community.
This is what I mean when I say that the Microsoft Corporation “commitments” are weak, since they are primarily intended to pacify the people of Gaines Township as well as to make sure that the company does not disrupt its ability to continue to controlling more of the data center market and expand their profits.
Lastly, it is worth noting that the Microsoft Corporation has created their own Community-First AI Infrastructure, which removes the public from the equation, but dictating the terms of community benefit agreements and hoping that communities who are confronted with data center proposals will gave to whatever companies like Microsoft present.
A community benefits agreement is an important and necessary strategy for communities who are confronted by future data center proposals. However, the other important strategy would be to tell Microsoft or whatever tech giant is proposing a data center near you that your community will fight like hell to prevent any such projects to happen……period! In recent years it would seem that communities across the US are choosing the fight like hell strategy, since $64 billion in data center projects have been blocked or delayed.
Money for community needs not for war: Why we need to resist the US obsession with military spending and militarism
In Norman Solomon’s book, War Made Invisible: How America Hides the Human Toll of Its Military Machine, the author exposes the human cost of US militarism abroad, stating:
From Iraq through Afghanistan and Syria and on to little-known deployments in a range of countries around the globe, the United States has been at perpetual war for at least the past two decades. Yet many of these forays remain off the radar of average Americans. Compliant journalists add to the smokescreen by providing narrow coverage of military engagements and by repeating the military’s talking points. Meanwhile, the increased use of high technology, air power, and remote drones has put distance between soldiers and the civilians who die. Back at home, Solomon argues, the cloak of invisibility masks massive Pentagon budgets that receive bipartisan approval even as policy makers struggle to fund the domestic agenda.
Every US Administration since WWII has made military spending a priority over meeting the basic needs of those who live in the US. A recent example of prioritizing military spending over human needs is the push to get approval for $200 billion of taxpayer funds to fuel the US war against Iran.
Fortunately there are groups like the National Priorities Project, which not only educates us on the ongoing costs of US militarism, but they also juxtapose that spending with how it could be used to meet the needs of people in the US. For instance, instead of spending $200 billion to continue the war on Iran, the United States could:
- Cover Medicaid for all 14 million people at risk of losing insurance,
- AND cover SNAP for all of the 4 million people at risk of losing food assistance, including 3.5 million due to new work requirements for older people and caregivers,
- AND expand Medicaid to an additional 10.3 million people.
If we wanted to break the $200 Billion for military spending in the US war against Iran at the state level, Michigan taxpayers would be paying out $4,794,000,000. Comparatively, that same amount of money – $4,794,000,000 – could be used to provide the following for people in Michigan:
- 813,000 Michigan residents could receive Medicaid
- 2,303,000 Michigan residents could receive SNAP benefits
If we look at the total US military budget for this year we can see that for every hour, taxpayers in the United States are paying $116.43 million for Pentagon & War. That is an incredible amount of public money going to militarism. If we look at the the state level of taxpayer money going to the US military budget, or the 3rd Congressional District or taxpayer funds from those living in Grand Rapids, it can help us understand the scope of how military spending is prioritized over all other community needs.
- Taxpayers in the state of Michigan are paying $26.66 billion towards military spending annually.
- Taxpayers in the 3rd Congressional District in Michigan are paying $2.01 billion towards military spending annually.
- Taxpayers in Grand Rapids, Michigan are paying $510.86 million towards military spending annually.
In an April 7 Democracy Now episode, a guest respond to the Trump Administration’s proposal to increase the US military budget from $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion. One of the guests on this episode said:
“But if you stop and think about what can we do with $500 billion, if we had the political will, which Trump says he has for war spending — if we had the political will for peace spending, what could we do? Well, we could restore all of the cuts to Medicaid and food assistance in Trump’s prior bill. We could expand Medicare to cover dental, health and vision. We could have universal care for children zero to four. We could double the budget for the EPA. We could invest in affordable housing and end homelessness in the United States. We could restore and expand all of the foreign assistance that’s been cut, which public health experts say will lead to the deaths of millions by 2030. We could invest all of that and more — not one of those things, all of those things and more — with this $500 billion.”
Since WWII roughly 50 cents of every tax dollar goes to pay for the US military, which also includes paying off the cost of previous wars. This obsession for military spending is so entrenched in the US that regardless of who sits in the White House or which party controls Congress the US military budget keeps increasing from year to year.
Let’s be honest, US military spending has complete and total bi-partisan support. So what can we do to oppose this reality and resist US militarism around the world?
First, we need to education ourselves on the cost of war/militarism by checking out sites like the National Priorities Project, the Cost of War Project and the War Resisters League. A good documentary to watch is War Made Easy.
Second, we have to stop voting for politicians who vote annually for the massive US military budgets. We also need to engage in massive resistance to these same politicians by disrupting business as usual and occupy their offices.
Third, we can withhold our federal tax dollars. You can find out how to do tax resistance by going to this link.
Fourth, anti-war movements need to not operate in silos, but connect to BIPOC led social movements, environmental justice & climate justice movements, racial justice movements, feminist movements, queer and trans movements and labor movements to see how US militarism is connected to all of these movements.
Fifth, we need to identify private military contractors in our community and begin campaigns to shut them down.
Sixth, we need to resist military recruiters in our communities, especially those that are given access to our schools in order to prey on our children and get them to join the US military.
Seventh, we have to build anti-war movements that have the capacity to disrupt business as usual and shut down systems of power if we truly want to reduced the brutality that is being done on a daily basis around the world in our name.
Defenders of the Blue law firm was representing the GRPD cop that shot and killed Da’Quain Johnson
Our team is dedicated to protecting the rights of law enforcement officers, standing ready to provide expert legal counsel in high-pressure and high-profile situations. We are not afraid to challenge authority when necessary, and our commitment to officer rights has earned us a reputation as tenacious and reliable advocates.
The above comment is taken from the “about” section for the Defenders of the Blue law firm. This law firm was set to provide legal defense for the GRPD cop that shot and killed Da’Quain Johnson, one Christopher Carlson.
As I reported on April 4th, when Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker ruled that he would not bring charges agains the cops who killed Da’Quain Johnson, I wrote:
One thing that we have to come to terms with is that the police can kill anyone they want to if they feel that their lives are in danger. This doesn’t mean that they are actually in danger, they just have to believe, feel, or perceive that their lives are in danger. This is how the laws around using deadly force are designed, which is to say they are designed to protect cops and to protect the carceral state. In other words, it is by design.
Here is a statement from the founder of Defenders of the Blue, responding to Chris Becker’s decision to not bring charges against the two GRPD cops:
“The Defender of the Blue team supports Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker’s decision not to file charges against the Grand Rapids Police Department officers involved in the recent officer-involved shooting.
After a full and independent review of the evidence, including body camera footage, witness statements, and forensic analysis, Prosecutor Becker concluded that the officers’ actions were legally justified.
This case underscores a critical truth about law enforcement. Officers are routinely placed in rapidly evolving, high-risk situations where they must make life-or-death decisions in a matter of seconds. In this incident, the evidence shows the suspect failed to follow commands to drop the gun and forced officers to respond to an immediate and deadly threat.
Despite these facts, officer-involved shootings are often immediately subjected to intense public scrutiny, media speculation, and premature judgment. The spreading of false narratives by the “leaders” of the community created narratives that ignored the realities officers face and the legal standards governing the use of force.
This prosecutor’s decision reaffirms that officers must be judged based on the totality of the circumstances they are confronted with in the moment, not through hindsight or public pressure.
The Defender of the Blue Team remains committed to standing with law enforcement officers that act within the law to protect themselves and the communities they serve. This outcome reflects what the evidence clearly demonstrated from the beginning: the officers acted lawfully, appropriately, and in defense of human life.”
This statement is a lot to unpack, but in many ways it speaks for itself. The Defenders of the Blue Law firm is committed to representing and defending cops who kill people, because they are ideologically aligned with the carceral state. Their statement reflects a belief in the narrative that cops exists to protect the public, but that they have the right to kill anyone if they believe that the lives of cops are at risk.
The founder of Defenders of the Blue, Marc Curtis, refused to be interviewed by WOODTV8 prior to the Kent County Prosecutor’s ruling in a March 20th channel 8 story. However, Curtis posted on the Defenders of the Blue Facebook page:
What I said to WOOD TV8 that they did not include in the story: “I see no need to go on camera to discuss this false propaganda laced “press conference” by Mr Johnson and Mr. Crump that is nothing more than to try and divide our community. We will await Prosecutor Becker’s independent review of the ACTUAL and FULL facts.”
So, the lawyers representing the Johnson family are out to divide the community? Really, is this what the lawyer who was set to defend the GRPD cop actually believes, or is his statement meant to suggest that anyone who is critical of law enforcement is an enemy of the state? For this writer it would be the latter.
Lastly, it is important to note that the Defender of the Blue were invited recently to present at a conference hosted by the largest and most powerful police group in the US, the National Fraternal Order of Police just last week. In addition, the Defenders of the Blue list police departments that endorse them, which includes the Kent County Sheriff’s Office, which you find at the bottom of their organizational homepage.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 