GRAND RAPIDS, MI -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan is calling for an outside investigation into the Grand Rapids Police Department regarding accusations of discriminatory practices.

The ACLU and Michigan Immigrant Rights Center filed complaints with the Michigan Department of Civil Rights after a police captain, accused of racial profiling, was exonerated at the conclusion of a pair of internal affairs investigations.

“The Grand Rapids Police Department cannot police itself," said Miriam Aukerman, ACLU of Michigan senior staff attorney. “There needs to be an independent, impartial investigation, not a white wash.”

Capt. Curt VanderKooi, a 39-year police officer, came under fire after he contacted U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in November 2018 to look up the status of a man arrested at a local hospital for allegedly starting a small fire in a stairwell and gaining access to the facility’s helipad.

The man -- Jilmar Ramos-Gomez, a U.S. citizen and Marine veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder -- was detained for three days for potential deportation due to an ICE error.

The police department first found VanderKooi to be justified in contacting ICE due to a perceived threat of terrorism, but reprimanded him for unprofessional language when he used the term “loco” in an email with an ICE agent in reference to Ramos-Gomez.

A second, eight-week investigation began when the ACLU and local media groups requested communications between VanderKooi and ICE agents. The requests turned up 89 email threads between Jan. 1, 2017 and February 2019, and provided evidence, Aukerman said, that VanderKooi routinely provided ICE agents with names despite the police department denying such a practice outside severe circumstances.

“The initial justification when this first came out, the Grand Rapids Police Department said the only reason Capt. VanderKooi checked on Jilmar’s status was because this was about federal airspace," Aukerman said. "That this was an unusual set of circumstances, that’s why he did that.

“But what we see in the docs, he checked on immigration status again and again. It completely blows that justification out of the water. It absolutely does not hold up and yet he’s exonerated again.”

Redacted copies of the email chains and IAU report were obtained and published by the ACLU through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Of the 87 email chains analyzed by investigators within the department, 26 were initiated by VanderKooi -- the police department’s liaison with ICE.

Twenty-five of those were referrals to ICE for status checks on individuals. Of those 25, 23 were for individuals who committed crimes; one was an effort to identify two homicide victims; and one involved a suspect of domestic violence.

“There is no evidence that Capt. VanderKooi randomly selected people’s names to send to ICE based solely on their name, race, or appearance," reads the Internal Affairs Unit report in part.

The IAU found each referral to be reasonable based on criteria including the severity of crimes committed, suspected gang affiliations, witness and suspect statements, “threats of terrorism" made by the individual, and reasons to believe they are in the U.S. illegally, including types of identification provided to officers or a lack of driver’s license or a “lack of English proficiency.”

“It was also found ... that the far majority of the victims in these cases were people of color and many of the victims of these crimes were determined to be undocumented, or illegal aliens, themselves," the report reads in part.

"These individuals’ names were not referred to ICE, despite Capt. VanderKooi’s knowledge they were illegal aliens. They were not referred because they had not committed crimes and were not a danger to the public.”

The police department said information pertaining to place of birth, country of origin, and lack of English proficiency can be appropriately considered as part of the totality of the circumstances in making a decision to contact immigration officials.

“However, other traits associated with national origin, like race, religion, or treating an individual negatively because he/she is from a specific country or region would be an inappropriate use of traits associated with national origin," reads the IAU report, in part.

That’s where the ACLU and MIRC claim the department violates the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination. Their claim is at the basis of the complaints filed with the state.

“That’s essentially the justification that the Grand Rapids Police Department has used, saying we will look at things like limited English proficiency and these other factors that we think are completely inappropriate to use as a proxy for national origin and possible immigration violations,” said Hillary Scholten, a MIRC attorney.

“Those are things that are completely inappropriate to rely on. You can’t tell someone’s immigration status by looking at them or their level of English proficiency.”

The Grand Rapids Police Department has no written policy to provide guidance about making referrals to ICE. VanderKooi was given no specific training about criteria to consider when contacting ICE, according to the IAU report.

In a May 2018 radio interview with the local station, La Mejor GR, Grand Rapids Police Capt. Geoffrey Collard said local police aren’t interested in immigration status when responding to calls. He said local officers do not seek out immigrants who are in the country illegally, and they’re not actively passing names along to federal agencies, though at times they’re obligated to assist ICE when asked.

The ACLU said emails between VanderKooi and ICE suggest otherwise.

Interim Police Chief David Kiddle said the department is developing a new policy that clearly defines expectation for how Grand Rapids police officers interact with federal authorities. The new policy is expected to be completed “soon” and shared with the community.

The ACLU’s complaints to the Michigan Department of Civil Rights also include a March 11 incident in which a police officer stopped two males, ages 15 and 16, for walking in the street instead of the sidewalk.

When the teens didn’t comply with orders to identify themselves, the officer attempted to arrest them and eventually pulled his gun out and ordered the unarmed teens to the ground.

One teen was arrested for resisting and obstructing a police officer. The police department found the officer’s actions to be justified, but some in the community questioned whether the law enforcement would have been different in a “white neighborhood.”

“Whether the GRPD is calling ICE on a U.S. citizen or drawing a gun on a kid who is jaywalking, what both of these incidents show is that the GRPD treats people of color in ways white people do not have to endure, and then fails to hold itself accountable," Aukerman said.

"There must be an independent investigation.”

The Grand Rapids Civilian Appeals Board will hear an appeal of the IAU’s findings at 4 p.m. Wednesday, May 15. If the board reaches a different conclusion than the police department, the case will go to the city manager for final review.