GRPD uses their podcast program to disseminate misinformation about their plans to purchase and use drones
In their ongoing effort to dictate the narrative around the use of drones, the GRPD podcast, Behind the Badge, interviewed Chief Winstrom about the Police Department’s plan to purchase and utilize drones.
The podcast was recorded on June 4th and posted on the GRPD’s Facebook page late Monday evening. The podcast is 31 minutes long, with the host lobbing nothing but softball questions at Chief Winstrom. In fact, the host was openly endorsing the GRPD’s plan to purchase drones with public money.
What follows is a summary of the podcast, with the questions highlighted. One can easily see how there was nothing that challenged Winstrom, since the show was designed to provide Winstrom with yet another platform to control the narrative about why the GRPD wants to purchase drones and how they would use them.
What is the interest in drones from the GRPD? Winstrom said that the “culture here in Grand Rapids is skeptical of government surveillance.” The Chief of Police essentially was arguing that since other police departments already have them, the GRPD should too.
Do you have stats or success stories from other cities where drones are being used? Winstrom very matter of fact said, “We are using drones, like the recent case of a shooting, where the Kent County Sheriff’s Department brought their drone to help us evacuate a building quicker.” Winstrom went on to say, “Whether or not we get approval to obtain drones, we are going to use them, since we have relationships with other law enforcement agencies in the area.”
Lots of other industries use drones, so why not the GRPD? Winstrom agreed with the intent of the question, but then spoke about some of the people who are opposing police use of drones. Winstrom said there was about 10 people who spoke against drones at City Commission meeting. Actually, there were 28 against and one in support who spoke during the public hearing on April 25th. Winstrom then went on to say that he supports their right to free speech, but then went on to share that a local news outlet spokesperson came over during that City Commission meeting, and told him they had two drones in their vehicle. Like this matters or makes sense. News agencies do not enforce the laws of the state, like cops do, which often involves using force.
Winstrom then talked about how one objection is that drones could chill free speech, like at protests, which they have already been using to monitor large protests after Patrick Lyoya was killed (by the GRPD) but never to identify people or read sign messages. Winstrom claims that drones used during protests are to reduce the need for cops and to assist in determining protest march routes. Of course there is not verification or evidence to support such a claim, because the public does not have access to what was filmed by the drones during said protests.
Winstrom did say that they have civilian oversight and public accountability, which is Brandon Davis’ office. Davis will look at the footage and make a determination if the drone footage is used unconstitutionally. Again, the public has no say and there is no real transparency.
If I saw a drone fly over my house, there must be a reason for it? Winstrom said that some places are using drones in response to 911 calls. The GRPD wouldn’t be using them for this, but for specific ways to respond quicker to certain circumstances and as a tool for public safety, whether it is the Riverbank Run, a protest or a 4th of July event. Winstrom then said that It also keeps cops safer, without any real concrete evidence to support such a claim and of course the host never asks, “shouldn’t the goal be to keep the pubic safe?”
We are not here to invade your privacy, it’s to catch the bad guy, right? There was talk about helicopters being used for surveillance, etc, but Winstrom essentially said, ee just want to put a camera in the sky.
Does Brandon Davis’ office engage the community? Winstrom said that his office does, but never states how. The Police Chief then went on to announce the public form at Lifequest Church on June 6th.
Take the protests – if you protest peacefully – when they see drones, what are they going to do with them? Here Winstrom engages in some serious misinformation and outright lies, when saying that in the protests since the officer involved shooting (which is code for GRPD cop shot Patrick Lyoya in the back of the head), Winstrom said there has been no real violence, no property destruction and no arrests. In fact, there have been numerous arrests made by the GRPD against those protesting the murder of Patrick Lyoya.
So you are just waiting for City approval? Winstrom says yes and that if approved there would be initial costs, with about $120,000 annually for training and updates. However, Winstrom did not provide a clear timeline for when this might happen.
Hope this conversation provides answers for the public. Drones would just be another tool in your toolbox? Winstrom agrees.
Final comment from the host…..You should probably throw away your phone if you are concerned about surveillance. Winstom chimes in as well about date mining etc, which are real issues. However, when the State engages in surveillance and data mining it can often lead to the harassment, arrest, imprisonment and even death of members of the public, particularly members of the public that considered a threat to the interests of the State.
Lastly, it is important to have access to resources that provide a counter-narrative to what the GRPD and Grand Rapids City officials have been saying about drones. Here is a link to an excellent toolkit put together by the autonomous, grassroots group Defund the GRPD.
Diane Yentel, president and CEO of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, wrote on Twitter that the agreement is “cruel and shortsighted,” pointing to the work requirements and real-term cuts to rental assistance “during an already worsening homelessness crisis.”
Over the weekend, President Joe Biden celebrated what he called a bipartisan success by passing the debt ceiling deal, which not only will do tremendous harm to working class people, it will further entrench Neoliberal economic policies.
The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, also known as the debt ceiling bill, will benefit some of the following groups of people:
- Defense Contractors, because of the increased amount to an already bloated Pentagon Budget
- Millionaires and Billionaires, who will continue to cheat the public by not having to pay a reasonable amount of taxes on their wealth.
- Fossil Fuel companies, who are given more flexibility to extract oil and gas, along with new pipeline construction, such as the Mountain Valley Pipeline project, which will not only be devastating for those who along the proposed pipeline route, but it will add to the already dismal record of the Biden Administration on Climate Change policies.
The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, also known as the debt ceiling bill, will be a detriment to some of the following groups of people:
- Working Class people will be impacted, since they will be required to cover more of the tax burden than the wealthiest people in the country.
- People who are food insecure – since it will be even more difficult to access food assistance, plus the new work requirements for people seeking food assistance.
- Tenants, which will face even more reductions to rental assistance, despite the fact that millions have not financially recovered since the beginning of the pandemic.
- Families and communities who will be devastated from new oil and gas pipeline projects, such as the Mountain Valley Pipeline project.
- Students, who will not have to pay back their students loans.
The reality of the vote on the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 in the House and the Senate, before it was signed by Biden, is that most Democrats supported it. In Michigan alone, every Congressional Representative supported the legislation, except for Rep. Tlaib. In addition, both Michigan Senators, Senator Peters and Senator Stabenow voted for the legislation. In a statement released on June 1st, Senator Gary Peters said, “Allowing our nation to default would have been catastrophic, risking an economic crisis and significant job losses, higher prices, and Americans’ hard-earned retirement savings.” Peters, like so many loyal Democratic politicians, are either unaware of or in denial over how this legislation will hurt hard working Americans.
David Sirota speaking on Democracy Now! Interviewed yesterday said,
Well, the losers are everybody else. The losers, in particular, very, very poor people. Again, as you discussed, the changes to the food stamp program, to make it harder for lots of people to access food stamps, at a time of an affordability crisis, that’s a big loss. I think student debtors, where, again, in the middle of an affordability crisis, you’ve got student debt payments that are going to start up again. So, basically, the working class of this country was deeply harmed by this bill.
I wonder how this kind of legislation, which will negatively impact working class people, how it will impact voters in the 2024 election. More importantly, will the continued bipartisan commitment to neoliberal economic policies be enough to push people into the streets and to make revolutionary demands of the rich and reduced public funding of Capitalist entities like military contractors and fossil fuel companies?
Additional sources and analysis:
https://www.commondreams.org/news/senate-mountain-valley-pipeline
https://theintercept.com/2023/05/26/deconstructed-debt-limit-economy/
Mike Pence and Betsy DeVos talk conservative values, but the 2024 Election is the immediate goal
Last Wednesday, at Meijer Gardens, the Russell Kirk Center hosted a conversation between former Vice President Mike Pence and former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. The theme of the conversation was, What Do Conservatives Believe?
All four of the major daily Grand Rapids-based news agencies, MLive, WOOD TV8, WZZM13, and WXMI 17, all covered the event. There were two main points in the local news coverage, the first of which was what Mike Pence had to say about what conservatives believe. In one example, from WOOD TV8, Pence stated: “First and foremost, I really do believe that free enterprise and a free market, has created the greatest standard of living in the history of the world. Ensuring and preserving a limited government is an essential element to preserving the free market.”
In all four of the news agencies coverage, there was no attempt at verifying or questioning what Pence had to say. For instance, when Pence said, “that free enterprise and a free market, has created the greatest standard of living in the history of the world.” There was no effort by the channel 8 reporter to verify such a claim, which is patently false. In 2022, US News & World ranked countries with the best quality of life, where the US came in 21st.
2024 Presidential Election Endorsement?
However, the topic that all four news outlets spent the most time on was the fact that Mike Pence had announced that he was running for US President in 2024, with much of this coverage framed as the standard horse race election coverage. Some of the local news agencies also include some polling amongst the announced 2024 Republican Presidential candidates.
Then there is the fact that Betsy DeVos appeared with Pence. The DeVos family approval of candidates carries substantial weight, especially in Michigan, where they have been the leading campaign contributor to the GOP for the past several decades. While Mike Pence was speaking at an event organized by the Russell Kirk Center, it was days before his official announcement as a candidate for President in 2024. Having the approval and the endorsement of the most powerful family in West Michigan would benefit such an announcement with many of the GOP faithful.
Betsy’s brother-in law, Doug DeVos also had Mike Pence on his podcast show, Believe, last November, when Pence was out on his book tour. GRIID wrote about Pence being on the Believe podcast show. Here is a bit of what we wrote in response to their conversation about what leadership was:
The first thing that Mike Pence said about leadership, was that it was a gift “we get from God.” Pence then went in to talk about his foundation of leadership, which is knowing who one is. For Pence, he is first a Christian, then a Conservative and lastly a Republican.
Pence then said that he aspired to embrace a servant leadership model. DeVos then chimed in saying that leadership is having a sense of humility. Ok, how it it that these two rich, white, deeply privileged people can say shit like this with a straight face. Are they just saying it because this is what those who look up to them want to hear, or do they really believe this crap?.
More recently, Doug DeVos had another GOP Presidential candidate on his podcast, someone who is not nearly as well known as Mike Pence. Vivek Ramaswamy spoke with Doug DeVos in late April, and like most of the guests on Believe, Ramaswamy is an entrepreneur who is deeply committed to Capitalism and Conservatism. Just look at his Presidential campaign site, specifically his platform, what he refers to as America First 2.0 – Vivek’s 25 Policy Commitments to Take America First further than Trump.
It is worth mentioning that in 2016, the DeVos family was not a fan of then candidate Donald Trump. The DeVos cartel decided to throw their support behind another political dynasty, by backing Jeb Bush to become the 45th President. However, the GOP faithful chose Trump, primarily because he provided them with an open license to embrace and practice White Supremacy and White Nationalism.
Just days before the 2016 Election, Trump came to West Michigan to hold a rally. Another member of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, Peter Secchia, spoke that day and sent a message to the DeVos family and other major GOP donors, saying: “I have a message for the Bushes and Mitt Romney, If you don’t want to support Donald Trump: Shut up! If you don’t know where you are today, you’re a loser.”
This was a bit of a jab directed at the DeVos family, but Secchia also knew that the DeVos family had already put their substantial financial resources behind the GOP Presidential nominee, Donald Trump. The DeVos family did the same thing in 2020, where they contributed $1,162,000 to federal candidates, which included Donald Trump and Trump endorsed candidates. What this has taught us is that even if the DeVos family doesn’t get to finance a Presidential candidate that is aligned with their ideological values, they will still put money behind the GOP nominee.
We don’t know for sure how much the Mike Pence conversation with Betsy DeVos was about creating the necessary optics in West Michigan to lay the ground work for a Mike Pence Presidential run. And since other members of the DeVos family have provided a platform for other GOP Presidential candidates, they may simply be providing opportunities for Republican candidates to talk about the things that are most important to them – God, Capitalism and Country. One thing is for certain, the DeVos cartel will end up backing whomever wins the GOP Presidential nomination in 2024.
A brief history of Pride in Grand Rapids
Pride Month is once again upon us and I thought it might be useful to share the history about the fight to celebrate Pride in Grand Rapids, primarily through the words of those who did the work to make Pride celebrations possible in this city.
The Lesbian and Gay Community Network of Western Michigan, along with Dignity and Aradia organized the first ever Pride Celebration in Grand Rapids in June of 1988.
The event featured speakers, poetry, music and numerous Lesbian and Gay organizations, which were tabling at the event. The Pride Celebration was held at the old Monroe Amphitheater in downtown Grand Rapids.
In this video you will hear Bryan Ribbons read a proclamation, since the Mayor at that time, Gerry Helmholt, refused to recognize and support the first ever Pride Celebration.
The video also documents that there were a small group of religious extremists, which came to the event to harass and intimidate those who came to celebrate with pride.
In 1989, The Network tried again to get a Mayoral Proclamation and again Helmholt denied such a request. Members of The Network attended a City Commission meeting on June 6, 1989 asking for the 
proclamation. The Network Newsletter documented that event and cited several members who spoke during the commission meeting.
Network members reminded the Mayor that this was the then 20th Anniversary of the Stonewall uprising and that Gay and Lesbians deserved equal rights and recognition. Rev. Bruce Roller responded to Helmholt’s denial for a Mayor Proclamation by saying, “I’m real angry and real tired of having our God’s name used to oppress lesbians and gays.”
In that same issue of the Network News the group pointed out that Mayor Helmholt had granted at least 119 proclamations since the group’s first request in 1988. Among the groups/events that Helmholt wrote proclamations for were: Michigan Beverage News Week, Family Sexuality Education Month, Polish Heritage Month, National Roofing Week and Bozo Show Day.
Here is a WOOD TV 8 interview with Mayor Helmholt in 1988 who stated that he denied proclamations to other groups besides Gays and Lesbians, namely Nazis.
In 1990, the Grand Rapids Pride Celebration invited AIDS Quilt founder Cleve Jones to speak about his work to educate the public about HIV/AIDS.
Jones, who was a close friend of the late Harvey Milk, spoke with Bryan Ribbens about his experience of being in Grand Rapids in the video below.
Another example is this powerful video of a Network event in 1992 billed as a discussion about the lessons learned from Stonewall. In this video (below), Holly VanScoy and Dennis Komack facilitate a discussion, which covers a whole range of topics, such as the Lesbian influence in the local movement, how Grand Rapids responded to the AIDS crisis, dealing with the reactionary right in West Michigan and the evolution of Pride events.
At one point in the discussion, one of the participants makes the point about “necessary radical thought.” This comment stands out in many ways, because what the person was saying is that it is absolutely necessary that we not only continue to reflect on where we came from as a community, but that we continue to challenge our understanding of who we are and where we are going. Movements for social change are resilient to the degree that they can embrace the idea of necessary radical thought.
Here is this powerful video from 1992 that should inspire all of us to continue to reflect and challenge what it means to be liberated in a world that either despises us or wants to co-opt us.
Eventually, the Pride celebration became too big for the Monroe Amphitheater and moved to Calder Plaza, then to Riverside Park, eventually making its way back to Calder Plaza. Grand Rapids Pride has indeed evolved over the years, but there always seems to be members of the Religious Right who want to disrupt the celebration and engage in spiritual violence.
Lastly, for those who have not seen our documentary on the history of the LGBTQ community inn Grand Rapids, you can view it here below and share it with your communities. #thefirstpridewasariot
Last week MLive posted an article with the headline, Sales tax fund would help Michigan police fight violent crime. The article states, “Democrats in the legislature want to divert millions of dollars of sales tax revenue to fight violent crime in Michigan’s worst-affected cities,” even though there are no sources cited in the article to support the increase in violent crime.
As for the legislation itself, the MLive article states:
House Bills 4605 and 4606 would create a “public safety and violence prevention fund” to give monthly payments to municipalities proportional to their share of violent crime in the state.
These two bills proposed by Michigan Democrats primarily focus on how the sales tax funding would occur, but nothing about violence prevention or public safety is included, since there is bipartisan belief that police actually prevent crime and stop violence. The problem with the belief that more funding for cops leads to less violence is; 1) more funding for cops means less funding for housing, education, health care and other basic necessities for communities; and 2) research has shown that more policing does not lead to safer communities. See the excellent report by the group Interrupting Criminalization entitled, Cops Don’t Stop Violence: Combating narratives used to defend police instead of defunding them.
The MLive article is just another example of how commercial news outlets don’t question or challenge systemic issues and how to combat them. In addition, if one reads the MLive story and then reads the Media Release from the Michigan House Democrats, there isn’t much of a difference in what was reported and what the Democrats wanted the news to know. This type of journalism, which is called stenography journalism, not only is lazy journalism, it does the public a tremendous disservice by not being more combative of those in power.
Lastly, this decision by Michigan Democrats to propose legislation to get more funding for cops in nothing knew, since the Democratic Party has for decades been equally committed to funding the police as their GOP counterparts have been, as we have shown in previous GRIID articles.
3rd Anniversary of the Uprising in Grand Rapids – Violence against property vs Structural Violence
It has been three years since thousands of people rose up against police violence in Grand Rapids, which was just one of the hundreds of protests that took place across the globe after a Minneapolis cop killed George Floyd.
From the very beginning, Grand Rapids City officials sought to control the narrative about what happened on May 30th, 2020. Those with political power sought to demonize those who engaged in property destruction and differentiate peaceful protesters from violent protestors.
In addition, for the first time since the 1967 riot, Grand Rapids City officials called for a curfew and brought in the Michigan National Guard to protect property in the downtown area. In addition, the Grand Rapids-based commercial news media also mimicked the government narrative, elevating government, police and business voices over those who took to the streets during the uprising. On top of that, members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure also used the May 30th uprising as an opportunity to engage in their own form of propaganda.
In a Grand Rapids Business Journal article on June 1st, Sam Cummings, one of the partners with CWD, provided his reaction to Saturday’s uprising in Grand Rapids. The article was entitled, CWD Real Estate sees silver lining in aftermath of violent protests, with Cummings stating:
Sam Cummings, managing partner with CWD, said he was “mad as hell” Saturday night and Sunday morning, but witnessing the community outreach and cleanup afterward restored his faith in West Michigan.
“That is not who we are, and that was confirmed by talking to some folks on the police force,” Cummings said. “Who we were was (Sunday).”
“The peaceful gatherings are a justified, honorable and rightful thing to have occur,” Cummings said. “Those things should be protected, but when they escalate to damaging small businesses — we got guys who have had their entire inventory wiped out — when they escalate to damaging other people’s property or their employees, it’s not acceptable.”
GRIID wrote a response to the bullshit that oozed from the mouth of Cummings in an article entitled, One of the biggest looters in Grand Rapids has a problem with the recent protests.
Over the past three years, these kinds of narratives have dominated any and all discussion about the 2020 uprising in Grand Rapids, always making sure that the attention centers on the issue of property destruction as opposed to the structural violence that exists in Grand Rapids, particularly for Black, Indigenous and other commentates of color. Even Grand Rapids Police Chief Eric Winstrom, even though he did not get hired until 2022, has made it a point to frame the 2020 uprising as a violent protest, such as he did in an interview this part March.
Property Destruction vs the daily forms of structural violence in Grand Rapids
Before we talk about Structural Violence in Grand Rapids, it is important for us to establish a working definition of what Structural Violence is. One of the best definitions I have come across is from an online site called Structural Violence. Here is their definition:
“Structural violence is one way of describing social arrangements that put individuals and populations in harm’s way… The arrangements are structural because they are embedded in the political and economic organization of our social world; they are violent because they cause injury to people … neither culture nor pure individual will is at fault; rather, historically given (and often economically driven) processes and forces conspire to constrain individual agency. Structural violence is visited upon all those whose social status denies them access to the fruits of scientific and social progress.”
Now that we have a working definition of structural violence, lets look at ways in which structural violence manifests in Grand Rapids, especially when, historically given (and often economically driven) processes and forces conspire to constrain individual agency.
- There are a handful of billionaires in GR, along with one quarter of the population living in poverty. One example is from an article we wrote pointing out how the wealth of Hank and Doug Meijer grew by $6.7 Billion in the first 18 months of the pandemic, while thousands in Grand Rapids became even more impoverished.
- There are thousands of people who don’t make a living wage and can’t afford the cost of rent in most neighborhoods. We point this form of structural violence in an article entitled, The un-affordability of housing in Grand Rapids.
- Thousands of families are food insecure in Grand Rapids and have little or no health insurance. The structural violence of food insecurity is stark in Grand Rapids and is often perpetuated by food charity groups that do not address the root causes of hunger and food insecurity.
- There are countless families who have to decide on paying rent each month or paying their utilities, transportation or health care costs. This kind of structural violence is one of the more insidious forms of violence, where people are forced to make these kinds of difficult decisions.
- People who still live in places with lead-based paint or lead in their drinking water, is also a manifestation of structural violence.
- People who can’t afford to own a car and who don’t have a bus route near their place of residence is a form of structural violence, since limited mobility options are by design.
- People who are forced to live near the City owned incinerator, a toxic waste site or other areas that disproportionate have more pollution is form of structural violence, often called environmental racism.
- People who can’t find work or a place to live because of a past criminal record. When people are marginalized because of criminal history, they are not afforded a second chance and end up in a cycle of structural violence.
- People who live in neighborhoods that are disproportionately policed by the GRPD. As Alex Vitale, author of The End of Policing makes clear, “The origins and function of the police are intimately tied to the management of inequalities of race and class. The suppression of workers and the tight surveillance and micromanagement of race and class. The suppression of workers and the tight surveillance and micromanagement of black and brown lives have always been at the center of policing.”
- Black, Brown, Indigenous and other communities of color that face structural racism on a daily basis is a manifestation of structural violence.
Ok, so here are just 10 ways in which Structural Violence exists in Grand Rapids. At this point we should ask ourselves, if Grand Rapids City officials really want to reduce violence, and why is the GRPD not policing or arresting employers who don’t pay a living wage, landlords who exploit tenants, businesses that pollute the water, air and soil, those who control a food system which keeps people malnourished and sick, billionaires for being, well billionaires, and politicians who vote on policy that benefits the rich and punishes working people, especially BIPOC people?
Aren’t all of the things I have listed an urgent, daily form of violence that plagues our communities? Why is the GRPD not urgently trying to figure out ways to stop these forms of violence? Two reasons. First, because the GRPD, which is part of the system of power and the enforcement mechanism of state violence, doesn’t care about Structural Violence, they only want to respond to street level violence, because it disrupts business as usual. Second, the GRPD will not stop structural violence because it is by design. Think about it. Every time workers go on strike, the cops are there to protect the company or corporation. Every time there is a protest against landlords or property management companies, the cops are always there to protect landlords and property management companies. Every time there is protest against an oil pipeline that will run through Indigenous land, the cops are always there to protect the oil companies. Every time there is a protest against corporates that knowingly pollute, the cops are there to protect the corporations from the public. Cops don’t give a shit about the every day violence that is structural, because that is not their function within the system of power they operate in. We should never expect this dynamic to change, which is exactly why the GRPD should be defunded and abolished. #Justice4Patrick
Additional Sources:
The George Floyd Uprising, edited by the Vortex Group
No More Police: A Case for Abolition, by Mariame Kaba and Andrea Ritchie
In Defense of Looting: A Riotous History of Uncivil Action, by Vicky Osterweil
After Black Lives Matter, by Cedric Johnson
Another video of GRPD Chief Winstrom dismissing people who challenge policing in Grand Rapids
A video interview that MLive did with Grand Rapids Police Chief Eric Winstrom on March 7th of this year, has been circulating on social media quite a bit during the past week. This is primarily because activists who have been critical of the GRPD have shared it on various social media platforms.
The 2 minutes and 11 second video that MLive posted on March 7th, simply features Chief Winstrom talking about how there are loud people who come to City Commission meetings just to get attention. Winstrom claims that people are at City Commission meetings just to insult Grand Rapids City officials, which is just not the case. Sure, some people might be a bit snarky, but the people who have been coming to City Commission meetings are there because they have an important critique about policing in Grand Rapids and because they have a deep commitment to issues like racial equality and housing justice.
Chief Winstrom goes on to say that he asks those who challenge Grand Rapids City policies, particularly how the GRPD function, if they want to talk. Winstrom says they don’t want to talk they just want to get on TV and that that is their end goal.
In fact, the rest of the video Winstrom essentially wants to convince those who watch this unedited, unfiltered video from MLive, that there is a small minority of people who are unreasonable, just want to get more social media clicks and have no policy suggestions. Clearly Chief Winstrom wants to marginalize these activists who have been calling for the Defunding of the GRPD since June of 2020, just weeks after the uprising in Grand Rapids. But the fact that he says that “these people” have no policy suggestions is ridiculous. Here are just a few things activists have been saying since June of 2020:
- Calling for a reduction of the GRPD Budget to the 33% of the City’s Budget, as was adopted in the 1995 Grand Rapids City Charter Change.
- Once the GRPD budget is reduced it should be redirected to issues like housing, health care, education, particularly in communities most impacted by policing, specifically Black and Latinx communities, which was presented in April of 2021.
- Activists demanded that Federal Funds that came to Kent County NOT be spent on the ShotSpotter technology for the GRPD, a campaign that they won.
- Activists have denounced the use of the GRPD to harass, intimidate and clear out unhoused encampments, like the encampment that the GRPD shut down at the Heartside Park.
- Activists have demanded that the City of Grand Rapids stop targeting BIPOC organizers who have been publicly challenging the function of the GRPD in recent years, specifically after Patrick Lyoya was murdered by a GRPD cop, a demand that even a group of local clergy has endorsed.
- There have also been numerous policy demands made by activists since the GRPD murdered Patrick Lyoya in April of 2022, like Kent County Prosecutor Chris Becker should recuse himself from prosecuting the former cop who murdered Patrick Lyoya, since Becker has received campaign contributions from GRPD police union.
Lastly, it is important to note that the demand to Defund the GRPD is also part of a larger, more longterm goal of police abolition, which has been a clear policy demand that the Movement for Black Lives have been calling for since they produced their Defund the Police/Fund our Communities Toolkit. Chief Winstrom fails to point out these facts, since doing so would undermine his efforts to marginalize those who want to hold him and the GRPD accountable.
On Tuesday, the Grand Rapids City Commission adopted the 2024 City Budget, which according to their 2024 Budget document is a total of $634,553,651. To access budget information, go to this link, which provides the entire budget and a Resident’s Guide to the Budget, which is a much shorter document.
Interestingly enough, the headline that MLive posted on the 2024 City Budget reads, Affordable housing a priority with $644M Grand Rapids budget approval. After reading the headline I quickly read through the article to see how much affordable housing was a priority. The MLive article states:
One focus area receiving additional money is the Affordable Housing Fund, which helps fund vetted affordable housing developments and homelessness prevention programs in the city.
Roughly $5 million was allocated to the fund for the next fiscal year, which will boost the grand total to about $11.5 million.
This means that $5 million is being allocated for affordable housing in the 2024 Grand Rapids City Budget, which is the only number that is worth noting regarding the priorities of the 2024 Budget. If one thinks about what $5 Million means in regards to the $644 Million City Budget, then affordable housing is 0.78% of the total 2024 City Budget. Now, I’m not a math genius, but it seems to me that 0.78% of the City’s budget is hardly a priority.
Looking at this graph below which is from the City’s 2024 Resident’s Guide to the Budget, you can see which categories are the real priorities, like policing.
GRIID pointed out the issue of priorities in an article we posted on May 15th, where we stated:
“During the May 9th Grand Rapids Committee of the Whole meeting, there were numerous 2024 budget items that were excepted without question, all of which centered around business development or business districts. Here is the breakdown for these 2024 budget items, which you can read in detail at this link. Number 7 on the Agenda for the May 9th Committee of the Whole meeting says:
Overview of FY2024 budgets for boards and authorities administered by the Economic Development Department and Downtown Grand Rapids, Inc. with appropriation requests totaling $45,375,682.”
This means that the $45 Million is going to business districts, for improvements that will benefit the Business Community, along with continuing to emphasize making Grand Rapids a “destination place”, which means they want tourist dollars. Again, compared to only $5 Million for affordable housing, the business districts are significantly more of a priority than the intent to provide safe and quality housing for people who do not make a livable wage.
Lastly, it is worth noting that City Manager Mark Washington was quoted in the MLive article stating, “There’s often more challenges than there is funding. Those are tough choices we have to make and we continue to evaluate both resources as well as issues. I’m looking forward to the continued implementation of the budget.” Like a true politician, Washington laments the lack of funding, but the reality is that it’s not about how much money the City of Grand Rapids uses, it is always about priorities. In the 2024 City Budget, the City of Grand Rapids prioritizes funding for cops and businesses over affordable housing.
GRIID Interview with Rita Vogel: Proposing a Malcolm X Day in Mason, Michigan, pushback and Institutional Racism
On Saturday, GRIID conducted an interview with Mason City Council member, Rita Vogel. In February, Rita proposed that the City of Mason adopt a Malcolm X Day of Observation.
Malcolm X spent two years in Mason, Michigan, after his father was murdered and his mother was send to the Kalamazoo State Hospital. After Malcolm’s father was murdered, his mother struggled with not only making ends meet to support Malcolm and his siblings, but also the trauma of having her husband murdered by White Supremacists. Malcolm and his siblings were place in white family homes and Malcolm ended up with being sent to a white family living in Mason, Michigan.
The day that Rita Vogel proposed that the City of Mason adopt a Malcolm X Day of Observation, it was voted down, with a 5 – 2 vote. Since then, there has been significant push back against City Council member Rita Vogel, from fellow city officials and from other white people in the city that object to honoring the legacy of Malcolm X, which we discuss in the interview.
Southpaws Radio Show had been speaking with Rita Vogel, in order to set up an interview with them. The radio show had found a location to host the interview and Press Conference, which then canceled. Southpaws then found a church in Mason that was willing to host the show with Rita, but then backed out of their offer after there was pressure from political forces in the City of Mason. Finally, a person who had a private recording studio in a town adjacent to Mason, offered Southpaws Radio Show an opportunity to use their space and to record the show.
The interview below was just one of the interviews conducted by Southpaws Radio Show, even through GRIID did the interview with Rita, they conducted an additional interview with a former Mason Public School teacher who was pressured by the school administration to not use Black Lives Matter resources in their classroom. You can listen to that interview, along with the interview with Rita Vogel by going to the Facebook page of Southpaws.
Here is the 25 minutes interview that GRIID conducted with Mason City Council member Rita Vogel.
Editor’s Note: I grew up in Central Pennsylvania and moved to Michigan the exact same day that the Three Mile Island nuclear disaster happened. The public health consequences and environmental contamination of that disaster has had lasting implications for people and eco-systems in Central Pennsylvania.
On Monday, MLive ran an article entitled, Granholm ‘hopeful’ about $1B in federal loans to restart Palisades nuclear plant.
The article, primarily provides perspectives on why funding the re-opening of the Palisades nuclear plant would be a good thing. There are a total of five different people who are cited in the article, with the first four being people who are supportive of nuclear power, including U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm; Nick Culp, a spokesperson for Holtec International, which owns the Palisades plant; Matt Helm, spokesperson for the Michigan Public Service Commission; and Brian Wheeler, a spokesperson for Consumer’s Energy.
The fifth voice to be cited in the article, which was the only critical voice on nuclear power, was Kevin Kamps, radioactive waste specialist for a group called Beyond Nuclear. The Beyond Nuclear perspective was only provided at the end of the article, with an emphasis on nuclear waste, even though there are numerous reasons to oppose nuclear power. For example, GreenPeace provides 6 main arguments against the use of Nuclear power. There is also an excellent article from Beyond Nuclear, which appeared on the site Truthout, which not only refers to the unsustainable nature of nuclear power, but the author makes it clear that even the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is pushing nuclear power, stating:
Embracing or remaining agnostic on nuclear power may also delay the transition to renewables, as running these power plants requires subsidies, starving renewables of funding. There are now even efforts to include nuclear power in state Renewable Energy Portfolios — designed to increase a state’s percentage of electricity generation from renewable energy sources — which will divert available funds away from renewables and to a financially failing industry that is far from “renewable.” Renewables will reduce more carbon emissions faster and for less cost than other energy choices, especially nuclear. Propping up unreliable, financially failing nuclear power plants impedes progress on climate change and is counter-productive to the goals of the GND (Green New Deal).
So why have I not seen any pushback from Climate groups or other Environmental non-profits with this new announcement from Energy Secretary Granholm? I looked at all the major environmental organizations across the state and could find nothing on the plans by the Biden Administration to provide $1 Billion for the Palisades Nuclear Power Plant. Of course, this should not comes as a surprise, since most of these same statewide environmental groups praised Biden’s nomination of Granholm to be the Energy Secretary. GRIID was critical of this choice back in December of 2020, where we provided reasons why Granholm did not have a great track record on major ecological issues while Governor of Michigan. We wrote:
- As Governor, Granholm worked with the Obama administration on the bailout of the auto industry. This led to forcing auto workers to accept further cuts to benefits and wages, but it also meant that the fossil fuel-dependent auto industry would get public money to continue to produce gas guzzling vehicles, thus normalizing fossil fuel consumption.
- Granholm was the Governor in Michigan during the Enbridge Kalamazoo River oil crimes. Granholm was critical of the clean up efforts by Granholm, but there was NO call by the Granholm administration to shut down the Enbridge Line 5 in Michigan. Not calling for a shut down of Line 5 after the disastrous oil crime in the Kalamazoo River basin should give us all reason to not blindly celebrate the Biden nomination of Granholm.
- While some eco-groups are claiming that Granholm opposed the Keystone XL an the Dakota Access pipelines, I am unaware of her actual participation in resisting these pipelines and actively supporting the indigenous-led resistance that continues to this day.
We should also push back against the argument that closing nuclear power plants would necessarily mean bringing on more fossil fuels. For example, New York State is on target to meet its 100 percent zero carbon by 2040 climate goals, despite closing its Indian Point 2 and 3 reactors in 2020 and 2021. This is due to political foresight and planning which saw New York enact “ambitious climate and clean energy legislation” in 2019, which will achieve these goals regardless of a nuclear shutdown, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council.
