A new proposal for increased police funding in Michigan, with more misleading rhetoric from the GOP
Earlier this month, there was proposed legislation that would provide an additional $250 million for policing in Michigan.
According to a November 12th MLive article:
The $250 million supplemental budget proposal, House Bill 5522, is focused on recruitment and retention, community outreach and equipment upgrades building on an earlier $80 million plan approved by the House in May.
Michigan’s House Speaker, Jason Wentworth was quoted in the MLive article as saying:
“Michigan’s men and women in uniform deserve to know that they are a priority and that their work is important to us. In an era when far too many people are attacking law enforcement and looking for ways to defund the police, we chose to stand with them and find solutions together.”
This statement from from Rep. Wentworth is misleading, in at least two ways. First, the fact is that police budgets at the state level and the local level have not been reduced at all over the past 18 months, despite the push in numerous cities to defund the police. In fact, in some cities, like Grand Rapids, the funding for police has actually increased.
The second way that Rep. Wentworth provides a misleading comment is when he says that the GOP plans to “stand with them a find solutions together.” Besides the fact that Wentworth provides no concrete solutions, he doesn’t even clarify what the problem(s) are. If the problem is crime, as is usually the case coming from politicians, then they need to demonstrate that police funding actually prevents crime. According to a report by Interrupting Criminalization, police overwhelmingly do not prevent crime.
The MLive reporter also does not verify this claim from Wentworth, although they do point out that not only are Michigan Democrats not pushing to Defund the Police, this Republican proposal is similar to what Gov. Whitmer proposed her Michigan Safe Communities Plan back in July. This point underscores the bi-partisan nature of support for the police, which has been the case for decades, as we noted in a post from last year.
The bipartisan support for police departments is also true based on the amount of money that police unions contribute to both the Republicans and the Democrats. In fact, at the federal level, the Fraternal Order of Police has contributed more to Democrats than Republicans over the past 20 years. The bi-partisan funding is also the case at the state and local level, based on the data provided by the group No More Cop Money.
In Michigan, No More Cop Money has been documenting police union contributions to politicians since 2015, which you can find at this link. Based on this data, Michigan House speaker Jason Wentworth has received $1,250 from police unions, as have the two Republicans who co-sponsored House Bill 5522, Republicans Mike Mueller ($800) and Thomas Albert ($500).
It is worth noting that House Bill 5522 is now headed to the Appropriations Committee, which has rough one third of the members of the Appropriations Committee have received funding from police unions in recent years.
Appropriations Committee members that have received police union contributions:
- R Mary Whiteford $200
- D Joe Tate $1,500
- R Sue Allor $1,000
- R Tommy Brann $2,500
- R Jeffrey Yaroch $150
- R Sara Lightner $250
- D Abdullah Hammoud $250
- D Ronnie Peterson $1,000
- R Greg VanWoerkom $2,000
- D Terry Sabo $3,000
The newly proposed bill to provide additional funding to police departments in Michigan to recruit and retain officers is likely to pass, especially since both political parties are not only supported by police unions, they both have consistently supported police funding. The only major difference is the overtly pro-cop rhetoric that the GOP uses, but make no mistake, support for police departments is a bi-partisan affair.
Jandernoa Entrepreneurial Mentoring: A perfect formula to main the interests of the Capitalist Class in West Michigan
Last week, both of the local business papers – Grand Rapids Business Journal and MiBiz, published articles celebrating the 11th year of Jandernoa Entrepreneurial Mentoring (JEM).
Named after a member of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, Michael Jandernoa, the articles in both business presses covered two main themes. The first theme addressed more of the mission of Jandernoa Entrepreneurial Mentoring. Early on in the Grand Rapids Business Journal article, CEO and founder Michael Jandernoa is quoted as saying:
“Our goal has always been to develop better leaders that would in turn build stronger businesses. Because if we have stronger businesses and leaders, it will benefit West Michigan community members for generations to come.”
Naturally, the reporter for the GRBJ does not question the goal of the mentoring program, particularly how strong businesses benefit community members for generations ton come. I would agree that some members will benefit for generations to come, but most people are not better off because there are strong businesses.
West Michigan is known to have a significant entrepreneurial history, yet large portions of the population have not benefited from strong businesses. The poverty levels have been hovering between 20 – 30% overall since the beginning of the 1960s. These numbers have been higher for BIPOC communities, with 30 – 40% living in poverty.
These statistical dynamics are consistent with what the CEO and Founder of Jandernoa Entrepreneurial Mentoring program, Michael Jandernoa, has been involved with for the past four decades.
Michael Jandernoa has been the CEO of numerous companies in West Michigan over the years, such a Perrigo and 42 North Partners. In addition to making significant profits for the shareholders of these companies, Jandernoa has been deeply involved in furthering the political ideology of the Capitalist Class. Jandernoa has done this in three ways.
- First, Michael Jandernoa has been a significant campaign contributor to Republic candidates running for local, state and federal officers. In an article published on the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, Jandernoa had contributed $592,000 in 2017 for the 2018 election cycle, making him the 15th largest contributor in the State of Michigan at that time.
- Second, Jandernoa sits on the boards of key organizations that influence both economic and public policy in West Michigan, such as the West Michigan Policy Forum, Business Leaders for Michigan and Spectrum Health.
- Third, like many of the other members of the Grand Rapids Power Structure, Jandernoa has his own foundation, the Jandernoa Foundation. The Jandernoa Foundation provides funding to entities that are ideologically aligned with his interests as a member of the Capitalist Class, meaning they either promote the same goals or they provide charity, which never disrupts power.
The second major theme of the articles in the local business press have to do with the fact that Jandernoa Entrepreneurial Mentoring is now offering their mentoring services to non-profit directors. Well, not all non-profit directors, only those who have a budget of $2.5 million or more.
The Grand Rapids Business Journal lists three non-profits that have already had their CEOs or members of the administrative staff, which have participated in the Jandernoa mentoring program – Mel Trotter Ministries, Kids Food Basket and The Storehouse. What is consistent with all three of these non-profits, is the fact that none of them address root causes of poverty or inequality, plus they all practice in a form of White Saviorism.
Therefore, what Michael Jandernoa and Jandernoa Entrepreneurial Mentoring have accomplished is what other successful members of the Capitalist class have achieved. Jandernoa and his mentoring program have achieved the perfect formula of making massive profits for a small sector of society, then use part of that wealth to influence public policy and to fund non-profits, which will never disrupt the wealth gap in their community, but provide just enough charity to pacify people who, if organized, would be the biggest threat to the Capitalist Class.
Request for GRPD Transparency on all Equipment & Weaponry
On Tuesday, I sent a letter to City Manager Mark Washington, Mayor Bliss and the six City Commissioners. The letter, included below, is requesting that the GRPD make public all the equipment and weaponry they have at their disposal.
The motivation for my request is fold. First, I believe that since people who reside in this city pay taxes, they have a right to know how their tax dollars are being spent. Second, I believe that the public should be aware of the types of equipment and weaponry the GRPD possess, since it could be used against them someday. Lastly, I think it is important to acknowledge that many people – activists and particularly BIPOC and Queer residents – have directly experienced the use of equipment and weaponry against them in recent years.
Now, I do not expect any response to this letter, since many of us in this community who communicate with City Officials on a regular basis, rarely receive responses from those who claim to serve us. The continued failure to practice basic aspects of democracy, such as communication, further demonstrates that City officials would rather not confront systemic injustice in this community, which ultimately makes them complicit in the systemic injustices many of us are attempting to dismantle.
Here is the letter I sent on Tuesday, November 9th:
After searching the Grand Rapids Police Department section and the Office of Oversight and Public Accountability, I was unable to find information on the equipment and weaponry that the GRPD has available for use.
In the interest of transparency, the public has a right to know the different types of equipment and weaponry that the GRPD has access to, along with the quantity of each. The public has a right to know this because, 1) the public pays for it all equipment & weaponry, and 2) the public should be aware of the kinds of equipment or weaponry that may be used against them. 
I am requesting that the City of Grand Rapids, the Grand Rapids Police Department and the Office of Oversight and Public Accountability make this information public and accessible on the City of Grand Rapids webpage. This information should be easy to find and easy to navigate.
In addition, the public has a right to know if the GRPD is using any equipment or weaponry that has previously been used by or purchased through the US Department of Defense, items that would be considered military surplus.
I am asking for the following information:
Equipment
- Types of vehicles the GRPD has and the quantity of each type, including SWAT vehicles and other tactical vehicles.
- Types of protective gear used by police officers, such as helmets, bulletproof vests, etc, along with quantity of each type.
- Types of surveillance equipment, including cameras, scanners, radar detection, drones, video editing, computers, and any communication devices used while on patrol, along with the quantity of each type.
- Types of bicycles and exercise equipment, along with quantity of each type.
- Data storage, whether we are talking about hard drives, thumb drives, etc. and the quantity of each.
Weaponry
- Types of firearms that the GRPD has available, including pistols, rifles and any other type, along with the quantity of each.
- Types of weaponry that GRPD officers generally carry, such as pepper spray, tasers, clubs/night sticks, handcuffs, zip ties, mace spray, and any additional weapons, along with the quantity of each.
- Crowd Control weapons, such as tear gas canisters, tear gas launchers, stun guns, rubber bullets, water canons, flashing canisters, concussion grenades, etc, along with the quantity of each.
- How many police dogs does the GRPD have at their disposal, which also can be used as weapons against civilians.
I’m sure that there are items not mentioned, which underscores the point that the public does not even know what equipment and weaponry uses or is available to use if they chose to use it.
It would seem that this information is likely to already be part of the GRPD’s inventory, thus readily available in a spreadsheet or in other formats.
Please make this information available immediately, as the public has a right to know what kind of equipment and weaponry can be used against them.
Radical Imagination and funding priorities during a Climate Crisis
As the United Nations Climate Change Summit, often referred to as COP26, enters its last week, most climate activists around the world realize that these gatherings of world leaders do not and will not result in any serious plan to reduce our collective dependence on fossil fuels.
Over and over again, the Climate Justice Movement, particularly in the Global South, have made it clear that the most powerful nations on the planet continue to use lofty rhetoric, but fail to embrace policies and practices that will avert further climate disaster.
As many climate activists have pointed out, world leaders are ultimately beholden to the Neo-Liberal Capitalist economy that drives the push towards global climate disaster.
Many climate activists also have been pointing out for years that we often fail to radically imagine a different world, a world outside of Capitalism and dependence on the use of fossil fuels. One clear example is centering around funding priorities.
Most of us are probably aware of the fact that the fossil fuel industry receives massive taxpayer subsidies.Global giveaways to oil, gas, and coal companies total more than $444 billion per year. That’s nearly $1 million every minute.
In the US, the Environmental and Energy Study Institute reported that direct subsidies to the fossil fuel industry total $20 billion per year, with 80% going toward oil and gas. This is exactly why the fossil fuel industry spends millions every year to contribute to political candidates and to lobby Congress. OpenSecrets.org reported that the fossil fuel sector had already spent $81.9 million on lobby in the first three quarters of 2021, just prior to COP26.
Now, if we were to apply some radical imagination in the US, what could we do with the $20 Billion we give to the fossil fuel industry in subsidies? How much could $20 Billion reduce student debt? How many homes could be built for $20 Billion? What could $20 Billion a year buy in terms of sustainable energy? And remember, this happens on an annual basis.
Another are we could exercise out radical imagination would be in looking at how much money the US spends on militarism and war. In a recent report put out by the National Priorities Project and the Institute for Policy Studies, they provide us with some very clear numbers on what the US has spent on militarism since 9/11.
The US has spent $21 Trillion on foreign and domestic militarism. Here are some numbers these groups provide, that practice a radically imagined use of $21 Trillion that would support life-affirming projects.
For far less than it spent on militarization since 9/11, the U.S. could reinvest to meet critical challenges that have been neglected for the last 20 years:
-
- $4.5 trillion could fully decarbonize the U.S. electric grid.
- $2.3 trillion could create 5 million jobs at $15 per hour with benefits and cost-of-living adjustments for 10 years.
- $1.7 trillion could erase student debt.
- $449 billion could continue the extended Child Tax Credit for another 10 years.
- $200 billion could guarantee free preschool for every 3-and-4-year old for 10 years, and raise teacher pay.
- $25 billion could provide COVID vaccines for the populations of low-income countries.
In 2020, Senators Markey and Sanders proposed legislation to cut the $740 Billion US Military Budget by 10%, thus diverting $74 Billion to social programs. The Senate voted against such a proposal by a vote of 77 – 23, with both Michigan Senators voting against reducing the US military budget.
When people ask how can we pay off the student debt in the US, Medicare For All, or any number of project areas that would improve millions of lives of US residents, it is never a question of money, rather it is always a question of priorities.
This is one of the arguments that the Defund the Police Movement has been making. Since there is no serious evidence that policing prevents crime and violence in the US, what if the money we currently spend on policing was diverted to programs and projects that specifically benefit BIPOC communities.
These are not only the kinds of questions we need to be asking ourselves, but we need to practice radical imagination in our organizing work so that other people can see how they would benefit from these kinds of priority shifts, along with the fact that our planetary future depends on it.
One item on the October 26th City Commission Agenda, from a recommendation through the Fiscal Committee (pages 9 – 10), was a $120,000 grant to be awarded to the GRPD from the US Department of Justice.
The DOJ grant came from their FY 2021 Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness Act program. According to the Fiscal Committee’s Agenda packet:
The award in the amount of $120,000, will enable the GRPD to implement a universal in-service mental health wellness training for sworn officers and eligible civilian staff. The project will address risk factors that can damage public trust, with goals to build community trust and transform departmental culture around mental health. The award period for this grant is September 1, 2021 through August 31, 2023, with no match required.
The Fiscal Committee Agenda Packet then has the following additional information in regards to the Law Enforcement Mental Health and Wellness grant money:
GRPD’s strategic plan emphasizes building community trust within the framework of neighborhood-based policing, with one strategy emphasizing officer wellness. This project focuses on mental health wellness because repeated exposure to trauma and occupational stress can pose significant risks to officers’ mental health. Poor mental health can lead to poor judgement and poor performance, which damages public trust. This first major initiative of GRPD’s fledgling wellness program will acquire expert trainers with a background in first responder/military background through competitive bid. The curriculum will focus on resilience, stress management, PTSD, sleep hygiene, and first responder needs and culture. Eight (8) one-day workshops will be arranged to accommodate the patrol schedule, and peer support will promote the training as a positive wellness activity. The Wellness Coordinator will review surveys and other data with the Wellness Committee to track skills utilization and identify needs that may influence the design of the wellness program.
It is problematic that the person who will be doing the mental health and wellness training for the GRPD will be someone “with a background in first responder/military background.” Why do they need people with this kind of background to offer training for those who would potentially be dealing with PTSD?
Equally problematic is the language around how all of this mental health and wellness training is critical for building community trust. The statement above says, “Poor mental health can lead to poor judgement and poor performance, which damages public trust.” While there may be some truth to this dynamic, the fact is that whenever the GRPD engages in cases that have received some media attention and calls for community accountability, the Chief of Police always says that the GRPD officers involved always “acted appropriately.” If the Chief of Police is saying that his officers acted appropriately, then it would be reasonable to say that it has little to do with cops who have poor mental health and are using poor judgement.
Let us look at a recent case where the GRPD acted appropriately, but falsely arrested a Black man, simple because he “fit the description.” On September 3, the GRPD responded to a call about a breaking and entering. Several police officers stopped a Black man who “fit the description,” and then called for backup, simply because the Black man who was falsely accused, did not obey the cops. The Chief of Police defended the action of the officers who arrested the Black man who was falsely accused, saying once again that these officers followed protocol. It should be stated that the Kent County Prosecutors office dropped the charges last week against the Black man who was falsely arrested on September 3rd.
In this case, like so many others, the people who are in need of mental health and wellness support, are the people who are being harassed, intimidated and arrested – often at gunpoint – by the GRPD. Why are there no US Department of Justice funds being made available for the victims of how the GRPD does policing in this community?
In addition, if the GRPD emphasizes the need to build community trust, these kinds of cases, along with so many others, will do nothing more than create even more distrust between the GRPD and the community, particularly Black and Brown communities.
Despite this recent history, the City Commission approved the $120,000 grant from the Department of Justice to help cops who regularly stop Black residents at gun point.
More funding for the GRPD approved
In the City Commission Agenda packet for the November 9th meeting (pages 13 & 14), there are additional items for the GRPD that the commissioners approved for funding. The first item was a new low light camera for $11,599, to be purchased from Crime Point Inc., a company that specializes in surveillance.
A second item for the GRPD that was approved was 2 radar speed trailers for the Mobile GR department from Kustom Signals, Inc. for the total amount of $24,824. Kustom Signals Inc. has their own blog, with content which is always from a pro-cop perspective, such as their post about Riot Police and Crowd Control.
A third and final item that was approved for the GRPD for the purchase, delivery, and installation of exercise equipment for the Police Department from Strengthio Fitness for the amount of $47,838.20.
So it seems that the GRPD, despite their ongoing harassment of activists and their policing practices that disproportionately target Black and Brown neighborhoods, has received lots more taxpayer money to use against the residents of Grand Rapids and to provide even more support for cops, even if those cops traumatize members of the community.
In anticipation of Whitmer veto, Michigan GOP has begun a petition campaign to allow the use of public money for private and religious education
Last week, it was announced that the Let MI Kids Learn ballot committee was forming, in order to begin collecting signatures for a ballot campaign that would essentially support the very legislation that Gov. Whitmer plans to veto.
On October 24, we reported on the Senate and House bills that passed in the Michigan Legislature, bills that will do what Betsy DeVos has been attempting to do since 2000, with her failed school voucher ballot initiative.
In the article from late October, we laid out 4 tactics that the DeVos family has been using to get public money to support private and religious education. Those tactics include – the financial backing of candidates who would embrace such policies, to attacked public teacher unions, to utilize the expertise of far right think tanks in Michigan, and to create their own education-centered non-profit, the Great Lakes Education Project.
“The passage of this legislation was a test for Governor Whitmer: she could stand with families and children, or she could stand with special interests. Sadly, but predictably, Whitmer chose the special interests – as she always has. But Michigan’s constitution gives voters a recourse, and our petition drive will allow voters to expand opportunities for children, even if Whitmer won’t.”
The above comment comes from Rep. Bryan Posthumus, one of the state legislators that the DeVos family has provided thousands of dollars in campaign contributions. The DeVos family, especially through the group the West Michigan Policy Forum, has continually attacked public teacher unions, which is the second tactic they use. The DeVos-led effort around these bills also has the support of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, which is the 3rd tactic they employ. Lastly, the DeVos-created Great Lakes Education Project (GLEP) has been a major champion of these bills and will likely support the ballot initiative that the Let MI Kids Learn organization is moving forward with.
Let MI Kids Learn needs to collect 340,000 valid signatures from registered voters for both petitions in six months.
Spokesperson for Let MI Kids Learn, Fred Wszolek was quoted in the Detroit News as saying, “This exciting legislation gives new opportunities to learn to children, and new choices to tens of thousands of Michigan parents. But Gov. Whitmer stands in the schoolhouse door with her veto pen, determined to strip families of any choice, and deny children the money they deserve for educational opportunities. We’re just as determined to veto Whitmer’s veto with our petition.”
Wszolek is the co-founder of the Lansing-based organization know as Strategy Works, has worked on numerous GOP candidate broadcast ad campaigns, but specializes in the passage and defeat of ballot proposals.
Fred Wszolek recently headed up a ballot initiative for Unlock Michigan, which is a campaign to prevent the Governor from adopting certain emergency policies, like we saw in 2020, when Gov. Whitmer mandated lockdown orders as a means of minimizing the harm of the COVID virus.
Interestingly enough, the address for the Unlock Michigan campaign – 2145 Commons Parkway, Okemos, MI 48864 – is the same address being used for Let Mi Kids Learn campaign. The 2145 Commons Parkway, Okemos address is also the address for Doster Law Offices, PLLC. Doster Law Officers was founded by Eric Doster, who was longest-serving General Counsel in the history of the Michigan Republican Party, having served in this position from 1992 to 2017.
It would seem that the GOP is well organized for the Let MI Kids Learn campaign. It will be interesting to see how the Democratic Party, the MEA and those who are committed to public education respond to the Let MI Kids Learn campaign.
I recently received the following E-mail from Senator Peters:
The Great Lakes are more than an economic engine and ecological treasure: they are simply in our DNA as Michiganders. That’s why I was alarmed when the Coast Guard told me that they were unprepared to deal with oil spills that occur in freshwater environments – and that more science and research was needed around the issue. This puts the Great Lakes, and the businesses and communities that depend on them, at risk.
As a result, I set out to create a new Coast Guard National Center of Expertise – to help us learn more about cleaning up oil spills in freshwater. After my bill establishing the Center was signed into law, I secured the funding needed to get the Center up-and-running.
On the Senator Peters’ website, it states that he secured $4.5 
million for this project, which will be a collaboration between a few universities and the US Coast guard. Nothing is his E-mail or his post from October 21st, says anything about the Enbridge Corporation and its history of previous oil spills in the Great Lakes region, particularly the massive Enbridge oil spill in the Kalamazoo River in 2010.
The Detroit News reported on Peters securing $4.5 million for the Coast Guard, plus they cited Peters as saying that the new research center had to “be near critical crude oil pipeline infrastructure.” However, once again, the Enbridge Corporation is not mentioned in the article.
MLive also reported on the new research center and did mention Line 5, but made no mention that it was owned and operated by the Enbridge Corporation. The article does quote a few environmental groups, along with a comment from Whitney Gravelle, chairperson for Bay Mills Indian Community, who stated:
“While I am happy that they’re undertaking the work, I think it also highlights the current dangers that we are in, which is that we don’t have a proper response to oil spills in freshwater here in the Great Lakes, and yet we have a pipeline running through our waters in the Straits of Mackinac.”
What is instructive about the MLive post from October 20, is the fact that it doesn’t mention the action that took place on the same day, where an activist actually shut down Line 5 before being arrested.
For years there has been an effort to shut down the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline in Michigan, which has wide support throughout the state. If Senator Peters really wanted to do some good, why is he not calling for the complete shutdown of Enbridge’s Line 3 and Line 5, both of which will negatively impact the Great Lakes and further the climate crisis. Securing another military contract will do nothing to reverse course in the fight against Climate Change. We don’t need to be better prepared to respond to Enbridge oil spills in the Great Lakes, we need to prevent them from ever happening again. The only way to do that is to shut down Line 3 and Line 5 immediately.
Which Grand Rapids residents will get to decide how to spend $2 million in the City’s Participatory Budgeting project?
It has been roughly 5 months since the City of Grand Rapids announced that residents will be able to have a more direct say in how to spend $2 million.
In June, the City of Grand Rapids announced it would begin a participatory budgeting pilot project, using $2 million in funds, money from the federal government’s American Rescue Plan Act.
At that time, we asked the question of whether this process would be a way to practice radical democracy or would it simply be another form of managed democracy. We pointed out that the funding already has some pre-determined parameters for how it could be used, that City Commissioners would appoint 2 representatives from each ward to act as steering committee members, and a short timeline.
In August, we wrote a follow up story about what sort of progress the project members had made. We noted that the City staff who were involved in the project admitted that the initial timeline was grossly in adequate and that in order for there to be a participatory budgeting process it would take time. We also noted that there wasn’t any consensus amongst City Commissioners on what the pilot project would ultimately look like. For instance, during the August Commission discussion, the issue of how to get people to participate came up. It was argued that not only is it critical to have people participate, but to have people who are not normally engaged to participate in the decision making.
The City now has a more realistic timeline, with public input beginning in January of 2022, project proposals developed in February/March, and project voting in April of 2022.
However, the big issue is still centered around the matter of who is actively being recruited to participate and what plans does the City have to get substantial participation?
The Grand Rapids Business Journal ran a story about the project on November 1st, but there hasn’t been lots of other commercial media coverage, now that the timeline has been firmed up. Plus, the Business Journal generally isn’t read by people who are the most marginalized in the community, people you want input from.
The City of Grand Rapids has online information about the Participatory Budgeting project, along with ways for people to sign up to be involved. The City also has a Facebook page specifically for this project, but the City has not shared their plans for how to actively recruit people to be involved in the decision making process with this money. Will the City of Grand Rapids provide a stipend to people for their participation, particularly for those whose voices are the most marginalized in this city? Will there be transportation provided, child care, food and other incentives that would demonstrate to people how committed the City is to getting as much input as possible? On the City’s Facebook page for this project, they are asking people to share the information, but there is no additional information or plan on how to get people involved.
On last thing to point out about this project it the fact that the timeline has people voting on the proposed project ideas in April, with submitted proposals going to the City Commission for approval in May/June 2022. This raises two question for me. First, the City of Grand Rapids usually has public hearings around the same time for the City’s Budget. Will the timing of the participatory budgeting process divert attention away from the larger City Budget process for residents and will the City promote public input on the annual budget on top of the participatory budgeting pilot project? The second issue gets to the question of who ultimately decides. It seems that City Commissioners will either approve or reject proposed projects. Why not let the public vote on the proposals for each city ward, instead of giving all the power to commissioners? Again, do we want managed democracy or a more radical democracy?
For more insight into radical municipal politics, we encourage our readers to check out the book, Fearless Cities: A Guide to the Global Municipalist Movement, along with a fairly recent report on how Participatory Budgeting is spreading across the world.
When community activists and organizers demand justice, the response from the City of Grand Rapids is further GRPD repression
On October 11, the Grand Rapids Area Tenant Union (GRATU) sent a letter to the Mayor of Grand Rapids, all 6 City Commissioners and City Manager Mark Washington.
The letter, which is included in its entirety below, was sent to Grand Rapids City officials because GRATU members were appalled at the ridiculous number of GRPD officers deployed because GRATU was holding a Press Conference with several tenants who live at the Grand View Place apartments.
GRATU Letter
On Wednesday, September 29, members of the Grand Rapids Area Tenant Union (GRATU) were invited by tenants of the Grand View Place apartments located at 936 Front Ave NW here in Grand Rapids.
GRATU had been working with tenants on issues such as safety, sanitation and threats of eviction that the property manager was using against tenants any time they made formal complaints.
GRATU was invited by tenants on September 29th to participate in a Press Conference to talk about the concerns mentioned previously.
Shortly after GRATU members arrived and met tenants outside of the building, they were approached by the property manager and a GRPD officer. GRATU members were asked to leave the property, even though we were there by invitation of the tenants. GRATU members did move to the public sidewalk, where they planned on holding the Press Conference.
Within minutes of being asked to leave the property, GRATU members witnessed 4 additional GRPD cruisers pass by, with one parking across the street next to a building, in order to observe what GRATU and the tenants were doing.
The police officer who had been with the property manager was leaving the property in his cruiser, but before leaving, pulled up and asked what we were doing. GRATU members stated clearly that they were simply holding a Press Conference with the tenants who wanted to share their grievance with the news media.
GRATU members are well aware of the ongoing discussion about GRPD funding and their claims of being short staffed. However, upon seeing 5 different GRPD cruisers show up to a GRATU/tenant press conference we have to ask why were so many police cruisers dispatched to a press conference?
If the GRPD is so short staffed, why would they dispatch 5 police cruisers to a press conference, where tenants were sharing their grievances with Grand View Place apartments to news media?
Several tenants expressed their frustration with having the police show up for something that was not only legal, but for something they had every right to participate in. Tenants from Grand View Place apartments also felt intimidated with such a heavy police presence.
GRATU members are asking for answers as to why so many GRPD cruisers were dispatched to deal with tenants who were involved in a press conference. This incident not only made tenants feel intimidated, it demonstrated that the GRPD acted on whatever message that the property manager of Grand View Place apartments without considering the concerns of some of the tenants.
Not only was the GRATU Press Conference purely an informational event, there was nothing about it that warranted police presence at all. However, as we have documented in recent years, anytime that activist groups hold meetings, press conferences or other informational events, the GRPD has been sending a significant number of cops to harass and intimidate activists. One example, is GRPD officers coming inside a church, where Movimiento Cosecha GR was holding a Press Conference in 2018.
GRATU sent the letter on October 8, some three weeks ago, and has only received one response so far. The one response, which came from Mayor Bliss’s office on October 11, was actually not much of a response. The message was from Mayor’s assistant who wrote, “I have relayed it to her directly and she has asked the City Manager to follow up with the Chief regarding this matter.”
GRATU responded immediately by saying, “We would like feedback, from the Chief and the Mayor on how they could justify sending so many cruisers to an event that was so non-threatening.”
Since the GRATU response of October 11, there has been no response from the Mayor, other City officials, not the Grand Rapids Police Chief.This lack of response has come to be the general response to City officials, when they are confronted by community-based groups that are making demands.
This kind of non-response is similar during City Commission meetings, where they have made it clear that City Commission meetings are not the time to have a dialogue about critical issues in the City of Grand Rapids. Activists are repeatedly told that this is how it has always been done. This means that the regular forum to practice participatory democracy, City Commission meetings, is not the time nor the place for dialogue.
The question then is, when is the time for City officials to really practice participatory democracy? It seems to this writer that the answer is never. Sure, there have been a few commissioners who have said that they are available to meet and discuss issues with people before commission meetings, but those discussions happen behind closed doors. Those discussions are not public and are not recorded or broadcast through the same means that regular City Commission meetings happen. Again, my answer then is that the Grand Rapids City Commission is NOT interested in practicing real democracy, since they provide no forum for this to really take place.
This is one of the reasons why community activists and organizers have been engaging in a variety of tactics and strategies to confront City officials on their failure to meet the demands of the community. Activists and community organizers have confronted the City on issues related to immigration status & ICE, on the unhoused, lack of affordable housing and gentrification, and on the way that the GRPD practices policing in this city. In each of these cases the City has always had a clear response, which has been to send lots of GRPD officers to harass, intimidate, monitor, arrest and abuse those who have no other real options for which to make their demands known to City officials. The sad thing is, that this response from the City of Grand Rapids has nothing to do with democracy, it has to do with power, plain and simple.
Peter Meijer, Campaign Finances and the 2022 Election: Corporate paymasters and GR Power Structure member contributions
As of last weeks quarterly campaign finance reporting, Rep. Peter Meijer has raised $1,083,457 for the 2022 election cycle.
The Democratic Party has yet to announce a challenger to Meijer, but looking at who has already contributed to his re-election campaign, any challenger will have a difficult task in trying to unseat the son of the wealthiest family in West Michigan.
According to the Center for Responsible Politics, there are three clear campaign contribution categories for Rep. Peter Meijer, corporate contributions, wealthy individuals who are part of the Grand Rapids Power Structure and Political Action Committees (PACs).
Here is a list of some of the major corporate contributions to Peter Meijer’s re-election campaign so far:
- Meijer Inc. – $23,500
- Edward C Levy Co. – $23,200
- Ford Motor Company – $13,700
- Bissell Inc. – $11,600
- Dempsy Ventures – $11,600
- Gordon Food Services. – $11,600
- Wolverine Oil & Gas. – $11,600
- Blue Cross/Blue Shield. – $10,850
- New York Life Insurance. – $10,000
- Gerson Lehman Group – $10,000
Political Action Committees, often referred to as PACs, are some of the most aggressive campaign contributors in recent decades. Here are a few that have contributed to Peter Meijer’s re-election bid:
- Future First Leadership PAC – $10,000
- Eye of the Tiger PAC. – $10,000
- Continuing America’s Strength & Security PAC – $7,500
- Ginger PAC. – $5,800
- Unite American. – $5,200
- Cowboy PAC. – $5,000
- New Pioneer’s PAC. – $5,000
- Making America Prosperous – $5,000
- With Honor PAC – $5,000
Lastly, there are individuals and entities that make up the Grand Rapids Power Structure, which have also contributed to Peter Meijer’s re-election campaign:
- Autocam Corp/John Kennedy – $11,600
- Van Andel Institute. – $11,600
- Amway. – $5,000
- CWD Real Estate – $4,583
- Rockford Construction. – $3,271
- Michael Jandernoa LLC. – $2,900
- RDV Corp. – $2,900
- Pamela Roland (wife of Dan DeVos). – $2,900
This is just a partial listing of major contributors so far, but we all know that millions more will pour in before the November 2022 election. In the meantime, it is always important that we follow the money and understand what really drives the US system of electoral democracy.
Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy 