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.
US 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 not 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.
Editor’s Note: This article was written and submitted by Jack Prince, former GREA member and current GREJ member.
I. The 2026 Onslaught
Democracy is not a spectator sport!
What an amazing display of anti-Trump sentiment gathered in the streets of Grand Rapids this past weekend as part of the No Kings protests. The crowd size was estimated at twelve thousand, but the protesters‘ animation and passion was its real hallmark, unmistakably felt by all who attended.
It is of considerable importance to focus on one tributary of this resistance so vital and indicative of the systemic attack against democracy: the attack against public education. This attack has many facets including book banning, history editing and eradication, privatization proliferation, teacher ridicule and harassment, and a general insidious degradation of our universities and intellectualism itself.
We live in the geographic Mecca of that attack formulated by Betsy DeVos, the single greatest opponent to public education. Along with her husband, Dick DeVos, who recently founded the Michigan Forward Network to turn our state into a 2026 Republican stronghold, Betsy remains the architect. Since leaving Washington, she has accelerated her onslaught, funding the “Education Freedom” movement and publicly advocating for the complete dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education.
The conservative penchant against anything public has long found residence in the DeVos family and has festered here in West Michigan. Betsy’s grandfather was against public schools decades ago and her brother has attempted to privatize the military with the formation of the mercenary private army initially called Blackwater.
When Trump appointed DeVos as his Secretary of education, there should have been ubiquitous mass GREA-led teacher protests across Michigan. Now that the family machine is back in our backyard, I implore you, the GREA, to answer the bell.
II. The Protest Tradition
Historically, the effectiveness and impact of American protests hinge directly on crowd size and, more importantly, its solidarity and coalition manifestation. This exhaustive list of protests speaks of a democratic right extending back to the Boston Tea Party. To shatter all previous attendance records, in light of momentous past iconic protests such as the four million students who protested after the Kent State shootings, is noteworthy!
We add the prodigious protests against Nixon’s escalation of the Viet Nam war, which this author was privileged to attend.
This tradition continues through the 2017 Women’s March, the 2020 uprising after the brutal murder of George Floyd, and the March on Washington for Gaza. Like the Million Man March or the 2014 People’s Climate March, these events prove that our voices are most effective when they are raised together.
III. The Debt & The Political Union
We have been the benefactors of improved living standards, safety requirements, and adequate pay standards thanks to the former willingness of unified protest with union support. This struggle for the common man extends back to the great New York rent strike and into the memories of my family in Detroit, who fought in the streets with the unions for 40 hour work weeks and pregnancy leave.
Thanks to Woody Guthrie, we know of the Ludlow Massacre, where strikers’ families were murdered hiding in their tents as the men with the miners’ union fought against greedy mining companies.
Thanks to historian Howard Zinn, we know of the 1921 Battle of Blair Mountain, where 10,000 union coal miners fought against company-hired thugs to change horrific work conditions and paltry pay.
I find it incredible that the ridiculous adage that unions like the GREA shouldn’t be political still exists. It needs to be stressed that the nexus of teachers’ unions and the recent Trump protests have occurred elsewhere in the country. The massive 200k No Kings protest in Minneapolis showed large union involvement, including the National Education Association (NEA), in addition to AFL-CIO, SEIU, and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and encompassed celebrities with tremendous global recognition. This proves that our grievances are most powerful when they are unified.
The great Civil Rights Movement, which was won primarily on the backs of cannon-sprayed and dog-attacked Black protestors, had great union involvement. The NEA joined with the American Teachers Association (ATA). Their combination was instrumental in bringing integration to the South.
On March 25th, 1911, 146 women burnt to death in a garment factory behind doors locked by a company foreman; after the fire, public outrage took to the streets and the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union (ILGWU) was formed. They politically forced the city for safety standards and pushed for higher wages, shorter hours, and extra pay for overtime. We need that kind of resolution from the GREA today.
IV. The Strategy of Solidarity
One attendee at the Grand Rapids march exclaimed, “I might not be able to change Trump’s world, but I’m sure as hell not going to let it change me!” That kind of individual resolution was demonstrated in Poland, emanating from the shipyards by a single leader in 1980. Against terrible threats and imprisonment, Lech Wałęsa led a small contingent of brave strikers against the teeth of the Soviet Union. He grew his diminutive group into the “Solidarność” (Solidarity) movement, consisting of 10 million union member protestors that freed the entire nation from the iron hand of Russia.
Lech Wałęsa and the early organizers realized that the state’s greatest weapon was atomization – keeping people isolated so they felt alone in their dissent. Wałęsa realized that the only chance for victory was solidarity. He preached that when they protested, they needed banners extolling their diverse unity. That kind of broad solidarity would win, he insisted.
We need this today! We need banners that boldly state WE THE TEACHERS OF GRAND RAPIDS PUBLIC SCHOOLS STAND IN UNISON AGAINST DONALD TRUMP AND THE ATTACK ON PUBLIC EDUCATION! The teacher’s unions need to singularly identify with other labor unions and march shoulder to shoulder!
The individual issues from various groups are welcome, and the moniker of protests is not limited to a single heading, but all fit under the umbrella of solidarity. The First Amendment right of free speech is being threatened. Its safety is strengthened with exercise. We need to join together in this tenuous hour. Our voices together are a formidable force!
“People have a right to use deadly force in the defense of others,” Becker said. “It doesn’t matter that the people who actually were maybe in the danger — as the person perceived it — didn’t fire. You still have a right to use immediately deadly force when you perceive that it may be necessary to protect the lives of others, and that’s what these three officers were doing. They thought their fellow officer (was) in danger. …. One of the officers said, ‘He’s pointing the gun at me.’ And so they reacted at that point in time.”
The above comments came from Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker during a Press Conference he held in 2024, comments which resulted in not charging the GRPD with wrong doing in the death of Hank Wymer.
At Thursday’s Press Conference, Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker essentially said the same thing regarding the two GRPD officers who were directly responsible for the death of Da’Quain Johnson. What is important to note is that Christopher Carlson, the GRPD cop that shot Da’Quain Johnson multiple times also shot and killed Hank Wymer. The GRPD cop who released the police dog was Austin Diekevers, a police dog that mauled Da’Quain Johnson, just before Christopher Carlson shot him.
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.
The mother of Da’Quain Johnson knew this, since she stated clearly in her reaction to the prosecutor’s decision that she knew that the cops would not be charged in the death of her son.
The system isn’t broken, it is designed this way
According to https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/, police in the US have already killed 268 people in 2026, and that only includes up to March 18th. The same day that the GRPD killed Da’Quain Johnson on February 18th, the police had killed three other people across the US. And let’s be painfully clear, Black people are nearly 3 times more likely to be killed by police than white people.
As I have written previously, the DeVos family alone contributed $89,600 to Chris Becker over the past 3 election cycles, which is small change for them, but it still makes their family the single largest contributor to Becker’s campaign. There is one point about the contributions in 2020 and 2024, which I believe to be relevant as well, as it speaks to the longterm interests of Billionaires like the DeVos family.
The DeVos family has all of their foundation offices, their financial investment firm, RDV Corp, Windquest and a slew of hotels they own, all of which are located in downtown Grand Rapids. The Capitalist Class has vested interests that must be protected by the state and Becker has not disappointed in the cases he presided over regarding property destruction during the riot/uprising of 2020.
It is deeply troubling that Chris Becker has relied on the DeVos family and other members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure to get elected to the Prosecutor’s Office, and that their contributions increased after their investments were threatened by protestors in 2020 and the continued resistance since then up until today.
I can’t help but believe that the DeVos family continues to have conversations with Grand Rapids and Kent County elected officials over the potential threat to their downtown interests in the aftermath of the GRPD murder of Patrick Lyoya and now Da’Quain Johnson. After all, this is how systems of power function and we need to come to terms with this. The legal system in Kent County is not broken, it is doing exactly what it was designed to do – protect property and the financial interests of those with power. Once we understand this, we can develop more effective strategies of resistance.
The mother of Da’Quain Johnson arrived at the Michigan State Police headquarters on 4 Mile Rd in Walker, Michigan, just minutes before the Press Conference that Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker would be presenting his ruling on whether or not to charge GRPD officers in the death of her son.
Upon entering the lobby Angelica Johnson was greeted by a Michigan State Police officer who promptly told her that she would not be allowed in the room as it was a news media-only event.
Angelica was dumbfounded by their refusal to allow her in and she didn’t hesitant to voice her anger and frustration. Joined by friends, family and community members, people were forced to watch the Press Conference live on their smart phones, even though the Press Conference was taking place on the other side of the wall.
Kent County Prosecutor showed more video footage during the Press Conference and issued his ruling that the two cops involved in the shooting of Da’Quain Johnson did nothing wrong.
While watching the Press Conference the mother of Da’Quain Johnson was filled with emotion, both from the video that the prosecutor showed and because of his decision to not charge the GRPD officers. Friends and family offered up commentary and shook their heads in disgust at Becker’s decision.
A few minutes after the Press Conference Angelica decided to leave the building. The local news media immediately followed her out of the building and pleaded with her to give them a response to the prosecutor’s decision.
What follows is an unedited response from Angelica Johnson. It was windy while I video taped her response so you night have to turn the volume up to listen.
Now, after listening to what the mother of Da’Quain Johnson had to say, here is what MLive, WOODTV8 and WZZM 13 reported. You can see that there is no comparison between the unedited response from Angelica Johnson and how the local news used just a couple of sound bites from her response. This is what we call constructed news, which is a gross misrepresentation of what this grieving mother had to say.
Researching ICE contracts in the greater Grand Rapids area found millions worth of contracts
Last week I participated in an online webinar on researching ICE contracts in your community. The webinar was put on by the group Littlesis, which does great research and also does power analysis work.
The webinar was not only full of all kinds of information, but great resources on how to find ICE contracts in your community. The workshop began with an overview of the Department of Homeland Security and all of the federal agencies that operate under its umbrella, which are shown in the graphic here below.
Next, the facilitators took us to one of their link entitled, Six Steps for Researching the Corporate Enablers of ICE. This link provides links to various tools for research and covers six area of interest, including:
- Corporate Leadership
- Government Subsidies
- Contracts with DHS and ICE
- Corporate Partnerships & Philanthropic Giving
- Donations to Politicians
- Investors
In this part of the workshop we all looked at good articles and resources, such as an article by Eric Blanc, Claire Sandberg, and Wes McEnany entitled, Want to Stop ICE? Go After Its Corporate Collaborators. In that article, the authors make the following point:
ICE relies heavily on the private sector to help carry out its Gestapo-like crusade against immigrants and their allies. Without the logistical, financial, and political support of business, its capacity to terrorize our communities would crumble.
Another good resource was an article that looked at 5 ways to target ICE contracts, which looked at targeting deportation flight contracts, flock cameras, car rental companies like Enterprise (which has a huge contract with ICE), hotel companies like Hilton where ICE agents stay, and retail companies like Target, which has a contract with ICE.
Next, we were presented with really good tools for research, all of which were government sites or accountability/transparency sites such as:
https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/leasing
https://subsidytracker.goodjobsfirst.org/
https://www.sec.gov/search-filings
Ultimately, the Littlesis group provided us with a document that lists most of the current ICE contracts involving leasing of space across the country, where you can search by state and city. For Grand Rapids, what I found is listed below, which sometimes provides the entity that has the contract, when the contract began and how long it goes to, along with how much the contract is worth. Go to this link to download the ICE Contract in the US document.
- US Attorney’s Office of Western Michigan, 330 Ionia Ave., NW, Grand Rapids – 9/29/2019 through 9/19/2029, $52,108.42.
- US Attorney’s Office of Western Michigan, 330 Ionia Ave., NW, Grand Rapids – 10/8/2024 through 10/7/2039, $706,292.51
- US Attorney’s Office of Western Michigan, 330 Ionia Ave., NW, Grand Rapids – 4/17/2015 through 4/16/2028, $1,752,378.17
- CWD Building 50 Louis Street NW, Grand Rapids – 6/1/2023 through 5/31/2038, $242,500.08.
- CWD Building 38 W. Fulton St., Grand Rapids – 6/1/2020 through 5/31/2030, $424,336.93.
- United States Government office 800 Monroe NW, Grand Rapids – 1/1/2015 through 12/31/2027, $43,735.45.
- Office unknown 4665 Broadmoor Ave SE, Grand Rapids – 6/1/2010 through 5/31/2026, $149,432.06.
- Akal Security 1 N Division Ave, Grand Rapids – 10/1/2016 through 9/30/2026, $1,557,912.19
- U.S. Internal Revenue Service 3251 EVERGREEN DR NE, Grand Rapids, 1/9/2009 through 1/8/2027, $811,680.37.
- Social Security Administration 3045 Knapp Street NE, Grand Rapids – 8/30/2024 through 8/29/2039, $606,436.65.
- CWD Building 125 OTTAWA AVE NW, Grand Rapids – 11/21/2022 through 11/20/2032, $128,379.02.
- ICE Office 517 Ottawa Ave NW, Grand Rapids – 12/17/2018 through 12/16/2033, $281,602.88.
- No listed address other than Grand Rapids – 3/1/2010 through 11/7/2030, $718,041.13.
- Agency unknown 1925 BRETON RD SE, Grand Rapids – 5/17/2019 through 5/16/2029, $664,731.87.
Combined, the ICE contracts with entities in Grand Rapids, is roughly 7 million dollars and that is just for office space leasing. We know that BI Incorporated, a subsidiary of the GEO Group, also has a contract with ICE and they are located at 545 Michigan NE in Grand Rapids. We also know that BI Incorporated has a new contract with ICE to use bounty hunters to assist in tracking down immigrants for ICE.
Lastly, there is the issue of the Kent County Sheriff’s Department holding immigrants for ICE at the Kent County Jail. In the past they had a contract with ICE to compensate holding immigrants at the jail for ICE, but we are unable to verify if the Kent County Sheriff’s Office has a contract with ICE or if they are being compensated for holding immigrants at the jail, since the Kent County Sheriff is not being transparent about their relationship with ICE.
Responses from Grand Rapids City officials on the matter of the GRPD killing of Da’Quain Johnson and sanctuary policies
On Tuesday night during the Grand Rapids City Commission meeting there were at least 20 people who spoke during public comment period about the GRPD killing of Da’Quain Johnson and the 6 sanctuary policies that Movimiento Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE have been demanding for the past 15 months.
Those who spoke covered a lot of ground, with some talking about witnessing the GRPD collaborating with ICE, while others listed the demands that the mother of Da’Quain Johnson has put forth. There was also one important question put to the City Commission and the question was – Who’s decision was it to give these police officers their anonymity?
You can watch for yourself in the video of Tuesday night’s meeting all of the responses from Grand Rapids City officials, beginning at 1:55:40.
Commissioner Kilgore – I don’t take what was for granted, what people said tonight. I went to the No Kings Rally. He also claims that action will come later this summer around the issue of officer involved shootings.
Commissioner Knight – I appreciate the voices that are lifted up. Wish we could make things happen with a snap. We want justice to be served, but we have to wait patiently to see what is next. Grateful for the Officer Involved Shooting presentation earlier today.
Commissioner Perdue – She responded to the question “where have you been and do you care? I have been here and I do care. I work on policy and advocate for changes. List of accomplishments in the private and public sector. Sanctuary City conversation – will be putting the city in more dangerous for affected people if adopting Sanctuary City status. Called for changes on Civilian Review Board and Canine Unit practices…….. My point is that it is impossible for you all to keep up with what we do. I do 3rd Ward talks in order to have conversations.
Commissioner Belchak – we need to start talking with each other as if we were actually people. We need to grow into a leadership roles, in all kinds of ways. We have to hold tension. We need to not jump to conclusions. We have to listen to each other and I’m sorry if it feels like a brick wall. If we want trust, then we need to resolve trauma. We need to open our minds to accept another possibilities.
City Manager Mark Washington – thanks the GRPD for their presentation on officer involved shootings. People got to be reasonable. “We can’t expect police officers to be fired upon, charged with weapons and not respond. It is unrealistic to do that. They have the right to use deadly force when they feel like their lives or others are at risk.”
Mayor LaGrand – He talked about owning a radar gun to track speeds in Grand Rapids for about 2 minutes, but said absolutely nothing about the GRPD killing of Da’Quain Johnson.
On the matter of the six sanctuary policies, the Mayor said that a couple of those don’t apply to the city. Those are really county or jail policies. We don’t have 287g policies and we can’t have them. City officials could not even sign off on a 287g policies. (This is the first time that the Mayor has made this claim, yet he provides no concrete evidence that it is true.) We have non-cooperation policies with ICE. (Here he is referring to the Foreign Nationals policy, which does include language about cooperating with ICE if public safety is at risk) If people think they see violations of this then they can go to OPA and those complaints will be investigated. We do indeed have sanctuary policies, with similar language to cities that are sanctuaries and I would be happy to talk to anyone about that.
What Mayor LaGrand said on Tuesday was similar to what he said in January in response to pressure from the community to adopt the 6 sanctuary policies. (See those policies below)
Look politicians can use whatever rhetoric they want, but this means little while immigrants in this city and this county are living in constant fear, while immigrant families are being separated in this community, while immigrant children are being traumatized by seeing a parent taken away, and while immigrant families find themselves in a position of economic hardship, because the primary income earners have been taken by ICE.
Equally important is the fact that members of Cosecha and GR Rapid Response have witnessed the GRPD and the Kent County Sheriff’s Department cooperate and collaborate with ICE, along with documented evidence, reflected in the photo above. You can engage in as much rhetoric as you want and have police policies that the city decided on, but the reality is that the City and the County are collaborating with ICE on a regular basis and that collaboration is causing real harm.
Lastly, the evolution of how Mayor LaGrand has responded to these demands to adopt 6 sanctuary policies is instructive. In January of 2025, when the community generated over 3,000 letters to the City, LaGrand said that he wasn’t hearing from the immigrant community. This is absurd, since Cosecha’s members are part of the immigrant community.
In March of 2025, during another GR City Commission meeting, the Mayor said he didn’t want to give immigrants a false sense of hope.
In May, during the annual May Day march that Cosecha organizes, the GRPD threatened people with arrest before they marched and the arrested two people who were doing crowd safety.
In June, the GRPD showed up to harass and threaten members of GR Rapid Response to ICE that showed up when ICE arrested 8 people going to their appointments at the ISAP office at 545 Michigan.
In late July, people spoke for 2 hours during the City Commission meeting and then engaged in street theater and other forms of disruption, where Mayor LaGrand threatened to have people arrested if they didn’t leave. In September, Mayor LaGrand said some awful stuff about Cosecha and the sanctuary policy demands, which was followed up by a forum hosted by Cosecha where all City and Kent County Commissioners were invited to hear directly from immigrants affected by ICE violence. Because the low commissioner turnout, Cosecha then began a campaign to boycott the businesses owned by Mayor LaGrand beginning in October. This action was followed up by a second action that was at another Long Road Distillers location in November.
In December, Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE attended an event hosted by Mayor LaGrand, which resulted in him giving a verbal commitment to talking with city commissioners about adopting sanctuary policies. Now Mayor LaGrand is saying that the city is fulfilling some of the demands from Cosecha. So, what’s next? Will the Mayor start claiming that he and the GRPD are actually keeping immigrants safe from ICE?
In her most recent “Straight Talk with Scholten”, the 3rd Congressional District Representative says she will not vote for another “penny for ICE funding until we have reforms.”
Before we get to the reforms that Rep. Scholten is calling for, she also said near the end of her weekly video – these reforms are already what the American public are asking for. Actually, what many Americans are calling for is to ABOLISH ICE. All across the country, especially since ICE murdered several people in Minneapolis, there is a growing call for ICE to be abolished, especially from immigrant-led groups like Mijente, United We Dream Network and Movimiento Cosecha, Other groups calling for the abolition of ICE are: ACLU, American Friends Service Committee, NAACP, Amnesty International, Detention Watch Network and CASA.
Here are the so-called reforms that Democrats are calling for:
- Requiring a judicial warrant to enter private property (as the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment already requires) – this sounds nice, but ICE tactics have been to wait til people they are after leave their house/apartment and then apprehend them and send them to a detention center.
- Verification of non-citizenship before detention and banning racial profiling and profiling based on job, language, and accent – again, this sounds nice, but immigrants from the global south have been racially profiled ever since the US passed the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882. US immigration practices is rooted in racial profiling and simply verifying non-citizenship will not stop ICE from racial profiling.
- Prohibiting immigration enforcement officers from wearing masks and requiring them to wear ID and body-worn cameras – this is all about optics and does nothing to stop ICE from terrorizing immigrants. Making ICE have badges and not covering their faces makes white people feel better, but will do nothing to prevent ICE from arresting, detaining and deporting immigrants.
- Prohibiting arrests at hospitals, schools, daycares, churches, polling places, and courts – a nice sentiment, but why limit ICE from arresting immigrants at just these locations? Terrorizing immigrants at their homes, their workplaces or when they are out shopping and going to the pharmacy are equally cruel. Again, this demand is about optics and makes white people feel better about ICE .
- Allowing states to investigate potential crimes committed by DHS and to sue DHS over detention conditions, and requiring state coordination for large-scale operations – This isn’t a bad idea, but how will this be enforced? Also, we know that local police are cooperative with ICE all around the country, so will people/communities be able to sue local police departments for assisting ICE in their terrorizing of immigrants?
- Safeguards including immediate access to attorneys for detainees, allowing states to sue DHS for violations, and unlimited congressional access to ICE facilities – also not a bad idea, but why didn’t Democrats demand this during the Biden and Obama Administrations? Immigrant detainees were being mistreated and many of them died under those administrations as well.
- Prohibit tracking and databases of individuals engaged in activities protected by the First Amendment – Again, these activities have happened under Democratic Administrations, plus government surveillance of people in the US has been happening for a very long time regardless of who sits in the White House.
- Codification and enforcement of a use of force policy – Use of force policies by ICE and local law enforcement always protects the cops. This is why groups like Cosecha and GR Rapid Response to ICE use the phrase – ICE and Cops go hand in hand. The carceral state has always used the threat of force to manage populations, especially BIPOC populations, so simply codifying use of force policies will provide even greater legal protections for ICE and local cops.
What Rep. Scholten and the Democratic Party want is for ICE to operate the way it did during the Obama and Biden Administration’s, which was to arrest, detain and deport immigrants by the millions. The Democrats don’t have a problem with ICE, they simply don’t like how the Trump Administration uses ICE. Do you actually think for a second that undocumented immigrants and their families that have been terrorized by ICE since 2003 when that agency was created want to reform ICE or abolish ICE?
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 