Detroit City Council Meeting: Gyanga Suspension Appeal - November 18, 2025

The Detroit City Council convened on November 18, 2025, to hear an appeal regarding the Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) interim suspension of demolition contractor Gyanga Company LLC and its owner, Brian McKinney. The suspension was issued due to allegations that unapproved and contaminated fill dirt was used in residential demolition sites. The hearing focused on whether the OIG abused its discretion in issuing the suspension, a decision requiring a two-thirds majority vote by the Council to overturn. Extensive public testimony and legal arguments were presented regarding environmental safety, payment disputes, and the integrity of the investigation process itself.

Consent Calendar

• No specific consent calendar items were detailed in this transcript as the session moved directly to public comment and the hearing.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Carla Osborne (Former Gyanga employee): Expressed full support for holding the contractor accountable, stating she was fired for whistleblowing on the use of contaminated dirt and alleging the contractor treated workers poorly and used toxic fill. She demanded the contractor be banned from doing business in the city.
• Michael Viegas (GNM Contractor): Expressed concern and sought accountability regarding unpaid invoices totaling approximately $274,000. He asked for clarification on why no bond was required for the project, noting his inability to collect funds despite passing inspections.
• Charles Miles: Expressed strong support for using local Detroit contractors rather than outsiders for city projects, arguing that local contractors care more about the city's well-being.
• Sheila Dappermont (Owner, 3D Wrecking): Expressed full support for the allegations against Brian McKinney, stating he betrayed her, destroyed her equipment, and used her free dirt to build his company while throwing her under the bus.
• Charlie Leduff: Expressed full support for immediate legal action, citing that 60% of a random sample of sites filled by McKinney were too toxic to touch and comparing the situation to the Flint water crisis. He opposed the contractor's reinstatement pending the investigation.
• Leon Petty (City Abatement): Expressed full support for holding McKinney accountable for $611,000 in owed payments, noting that the city had already paid significant funds directly to the contractor.
• Benny Johnson (Former Gyanga employee): Expressed opposition to the public comments of Leduff and others, stating he never saw unethical behavior from McKinney and characterizing the current critics as disgruntled, terminated employees seeking negative publicity.
• Mike Chaudry (DMC Group): Expressed concern regarding contracts awarded without bonds and the financial risk to subcontractors who were laid off due to the project's status.
• Peter Kavanaugh (Attorney for Kayla & Sons): Expressed full support for the OIG's findings, questioning why no payment or performance bonds were required for Gyanga despite proposal requirements, and noted the lack of response to FOIA requests.
• Stephen Grady: Expressed support for holding the contractor accountable, citing a history of bad backfill issues and questioning why other contractors who received contaminated dirt were not penalized.
• Carolyn Hughes (Virtual Caller): Expressed full support for a comprehensive study on the city's toxic dirt and demanded an ordinance to protect residents, stating the city has failed to protect neighborhoods.
• Virtual Caller (Anonymized): Expressed full support for holding the council accountable for enabling the situation, alleging mismanagement and disregard for neighbors' safety.
• Cindy Dara (Virtual Caller): Expressed full support for the claim that tearing down houses created a housing shortage, leaving the city with toxic dirt that cannot be seen, and criticized the idea of building on contaminated ground.
• Tahira Ahmed (Virtual Caller): Expressed full support for holding the Mayor and Mr. McKinney accountable, calling for a study on health impacts and jail time for those responsible for poisoning the community.
• Caller 482 (Virtual Caller): Expressed full support for the accusation that elected officials have been stealing millions and enabling the contractor's actions.

Discussion Items

• Legal Standard of Review: Deputy Corporation Counsel James Nosita clarified that the Council must determine if the OIG's suspension was an "abuse of discretion," a high standard defined as a decision that falls outside the range of principled outcomes or evidences "perversity of will." He noted a two-thirds majority is required to overturn the suspension.
• Gyanga's Defense (Adam Clements, Perkins Law Group): Stated that the investigation was flawed and lacked due process because the appellant was not interviewed for five months. They argued that the dirt used came exclusively from "public sources" (approved city sites like Iron Horse) and provided financial documents to support this. They contended the OIG's allegation regarding the Northland site was false since the owners of that site denied any business transaction with Gyanga. They asserted that the OIG failed to follow proper investigative procedures compared to previous cases.
• OIG's Position (Kamal Meral): Argued that the suspension was reasonable based on credible evidence, including tests showing 62% (29 of 47) of tested sites exceeded safety thresholds. He stated the investigation is ongoing, the suspension is temporary to protect public safety, and the information regarding the dirt source comes from a self-reporting system that has been found to be unreliable. He refuted claims of racial bias or differential treatment, citing the precedent of the Denman contracting case.
• Subcontractor Payments: Councilmembers Callaway and Santiago Ramiro inquired whether the city owes money to Gyanga for work performed on non-contaminated sites and if those payments should be processed. It was noted that while the suspension cancels new contracts, approved invoices for prior work may still be paid, though payment on contaminated sites is a subject of the investigation.
• Investigation Scope: Councilmember Benson and Durhawe pressed on the definition of "public sources" and whether the Council could expand the hearing to address broader liability, but Legal Counsel maintained the hearing was strictly limited to the abuse of discretion regarding the interim suspension.

Key Outcomes

• The Council voted to uphold the interim suspension, finding that the OIG did not abuse its discretion. This required a vote in favor (supporting the suspension) rather than a two-thirds vote to overturn.
• No specific vote tally is explicitly recorded in the transcript, but the resolution was approved without objection after a motion by Councilmember Johnson was seconded and discussed.
• The OIG's investigation remains active and ongoing; the suspension is a 90-day interim measure that may be extended in 30-day increments.
• The Council is required to render its decision by December 5, 2025 (within 10 days of the hearing), though the vote appears to have been concluded during this session.