MLive introduces the Grand Rapids 1st Ward Candidates, but doesn’t challenge or question any of their responses from a candidate survey

Yesterday, MLive posted a story about the four candidates running for a seat in the 1st Ward, a seat that will be vacated by John O’Conner at the end of 2024.

The article provides some introductory information about each of the four candidates, with links to their campaign websites. However, the bulk of the article includes candidate responses to 4 questions that were compiled by the League of Women Voters. The four questions are: 

1. What in your experience makes you the most qualified candidate for this position?
2. What are your goals should you be elected and how will you work to accomplish them with currently limited resources? 
3. What are the most important challenges facing our community, and how do you propose to address them? 
4. What will you do to support a vibrant economy in our community?

In many ways, these question are the typical types of questions that are asked by groups like the League of Women Voters, often vague or so broad that it doesn’t often address the most pressing issues that communities are dealing with. I will respond to each question and discuss some of the responses, along with what was not said and why all of these candidates are promoting variations of business as usual.

Question #1 – Asking people why they are the most qualified was already answer to some degree when MLive provided a summary of each candidate’s resume. None of their answers are compelling, in that they all say things like “listening to the community,” being a long-time or life-long resident of the 1st Ward and being “a voice for the people.” These are all vaguely meaningless, since none of them have every been elected previously.

Question #2 – Again, the answers are broad, without any real qualifiers, except for a few examples. People can say they want safe neighborhoods and more housing, but no one is really offering any new ideas or ideas that are outside of the mainstream. For instance, when it comes to housing the candidates say they want more affordable housing, but only within the current housing market framework. No one was talking about ending massive subsidies to developers or the so-called transformational project and use those millions for affordable housing. In addition, none of the candidates talked about the need for rent control of a renters bill of rights to deal with the outrages cost of rent in this city. Dean Pacific said he wants more cops for the GRPD, but the MLive article fails to inform readers and potential voters that Pacific had already received $12,500 from the Grand Rapids Police Officer’s Association PAC in April.

Question #3 – Responses to this question varied, but they all still stuck to acceptable responses that don’t really challenge or change how to address major issues in Grand Rapids, like housing, economic disparities and policing issues. One candidate said more community policing, which is just code for more of the same and doesn’t address the root causes of issues, like more resources going to the community. Again, the responses to housing are the standard market-based solutions, such as “additional housing units at all price points.” This is a false solution that not only avoids talking about the massive wealth gap in this city, plus there is no acknowledgement of social housing, which is one of the many demands coming from the statewide coalition known as The Rent is Too Damn High.

Question #4 – Here the responses are frustratingly framed within the Capitalist system, such as the city needs more entrepreneurs, find money for start up businesses, or expand neighborhood business districts. Again, this is business as usual thinking that will not address the massive wealth gap that exists in Grand Rapids. Not one candidate talked about paying people a living wage, which would be like $35 as hour. The National Low Income Housing Coalition says that Grand Rapidians need to make $25.50 an hour in order to afford the average rent costs in this city. All the candidate talks about job creation, but never mention wages or the increased cost of living. Lastly, no candidate addresses the so called Public/Private partnerships in this city which really means the private sector gets richer, but uses public money for their pet projects.

After reading the responses from candidates I was not only frustrated but disappointed that none of them engaged in radical imagination, nor did they center the thousands of families who are struggling to just survive, especially in a city that elevates business people and rarely acknowledges the working class people who do all the work. I still believe in the social movement phrase that came out of the Global South that another world is possible, but it won’t happen through electoral politics, especially with candidates that don’t have the courage to challenge systems of power and oppression.