Now I'd like to call to order the special session regarding the uh solar energy development project.

Three contracts before us.

Uh Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Councilmember Scott Benson.

Scott Benson, I.

Councilmember Letitia Johnson.

Councilmember Denzel Anton McCampbell.

Here.

Councilmember Renata Miller.

Councilmember Gabriela Santiago Romero.

Present.

Councilmember Mary Waters.

Present.

Councilmember Angela Whitfield Calloway.

Present.

Council President Pro Temporal Coma A.

Yon II.

Thanks for putting that pro-tepore on the air.

Here.

Also President James Tate.

Mr.

President, you have a quorum present.

Thank you, ma'am.

We have a quorum present, which means we're now in session.

We'll like those who I already mentioned for those who are in the committee of the whole, if you would raise your hand if you would like to provide public comment to this body for those who are at home.

You also have the ability to raise your hand right now because I'm going to be closing off the collection of public comments very shortly.

Please raise your hand now if you're at home on Zoom and you would like to speak before this body during public comment.

I'm going to give you a chance to raise your hand going once, going twice, going three times.

Collection of public comments have now concluded.

Mr.

Huff, I know you're back in the back.

How many hands do we have uh online, sir?

Yes, seven hands raised, Council President.

Okay.

All right, we're going to give everyone a minute and a half for uh public comment.

And we have uh 15 uh in person and seven online.

All right.

So we're gonna start with our first three speakers.

Dr.

Lois Thomas.

Uh second speaker will be Diane Van Buren.

Speaker number three, Diane Chocik.

And I apologize if I mispronounced any of these names.

Uh once your time has expired, please remove yourself from the seat and allow the next person to take that spot because we want to move expeditiously but justly.

We're gonna start uh in the inner portion of the table uh through the outer portion.

And we have a minute 30 on the clock.

Uh Dr.

Lois Thomas, the floor is yours.

And if you want to push the button in front of on the microphone, there's a button in front.

Uh turn the red, push that button to the red turns green.

And then it is now officially your turn.

You may proceed.

Good afternoon.

Thank you, Council President Kate.

I estimated I'm Dr.

Elois Thomas.

I am president of SEAL Solutions for Energy Efficient Logistics, and I am here to offer my support of this project in support of DTE.

Um, what I appreciate most about the project is that this initiative delivers immediate benefits to the community.

While the arrays are long-term investments for the city, it also provides immediate savings and comfort to the residents.

As energy efficiency implementation contractors, we work throughout the state.

We're headquartered here in Detroit.

We have over 145 residents of Detroit that represent our organization, and we've been doing energy efficiency work since 2009.

What this project brings is affordability and accessibility to clean energy in our city, and so we're excited to partner and support this opportunity.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Ms.

Diane Van Buren.

Hello, uh, City Council.

Um, you've seen me before as part of the Green Task Force.

Hello.

Uh well, Ms.

Councilman Benson.

Don't have much time.

But uh I represent also D2 Solar and the Renewable Energy Committee.

Um, we had a tour out at Van Dyke Lynch um a week ago, and I want to tell you how astounded people were to see the progress of the city of Detroit.

Everybody knows that DTE bills are going up.

Everybody knows the cost of energy is going up.

Everybody knows the negative impacts of fossil fuels.

Everybody knows costs and climate change are not gonna go down, they're gonna continue to go up.

Everybody knows that Detroit has vast amounts of vacant land, 40 square miles.

We know these facts.

What you have in your packet is the information about what one project so far, the Van Dyke Lynch and what the other projects will do to help reverse these negative trends for Detroiters to the city of Detroit.

But most important, it puts us on the map as being such a progressive leader city in using solar power to combat all those other issues.

Please consider that this is another step forward for the city of Detroit, and that we are going to be progressive, and that we have found a solution, and it's a very good solution for all of us to have clean energy in our homes and safe money for her residents.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Diane Chocik, followed by Duan Ver Jesse, followed by John Gruchala.

And again, I do apologize if I mispronounced any names.

Ms.

Chachek.

Hi, my name is Diane Chaklich, and I'm a resident of District 6.

I'm here to voice my support for the revised solar contract.

Going solar is one of the most effective ways to fight climate change, which continues to be a crisis, even though the federal government doesn't like talking about it anymore.

350 parts per million of carbon in the atmosphere is the upper limit to sustain life on the planet.

Our current level is 431 parts per million, causing the Earth's system to start to break down.

And we're seeing evidence of that here in Detroit.

We've had three 500 year storms in the last 12 years, dumping extreme amounts of rain that's caused flooding of our war roads and basements and overloaded our sewer system, causing raw sewage to be dumped into our Detroit River.

Extreme heat is also a problem.

We've already had two heat advisories from 90 plus degree weather this spring, before summer even started.

And climate change fueled wildfires in Canada have made Detroit's air so smoky and hazardous that at times we've had the worst air quality in the world.

Detroit City Council wisely set carbon emissions targets in the 2019 greenhouse and gas ordinance, and the municipal solar project is the best way to achieve those targets.

The solar work at Van Dyke Lynch is going according to plan and is a model for the rollout at the other communities.

Please keep this work, this good work going and approve the revised solar contract.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you.

Our next speaker.

Okay, I pronounced it correctly.

Thank you.

Hit that button in front of you and then that green, the red turns green.

Thank you for allowing me to speak.

My name is Dewana Vergesse.

I work at Walker Miller Energy Services.

I've been in the industry 14 years.

And out of those 14 years of implementation, working on the implementation, this was by far one of the most successful programs.

As the program manager and being a boost on the ground and working with the neighbors, I can honestly say the feedback overall from the neighbors.

We're positive.

The community is thankful for having a voice throughout the process, blessed to be one of the chosen communities and appreciative of extra resources that DT provided.

I was a program manager as mentioned on the Van Dyke Lynch project.

Those neighbors also shared how exciting it was to see multiple homes in the community taking advantage of the program.

It created a sense of pride and collective progress.

Participants appreciate how the program made it approachable.

Residents mentioned the visual impact of the solar panels across the neighborhood that signaled a commitment to sustainability and clean energy.

Many members I'm sorry, many neighbors value the trans transparency and the education that was provided throughout the process.

And if I can lead to with one additional thought, we had two grandpayers and two.

Thank you so much, ma'am.

Our next speaker, John Gruchala, followed by Jared Rogers, followed by Evangela Thomas.

Mr.

Gruchala.

Good afternoon.

I'm kind of excited to be here because I was at the first meeting in my neighborhood when this plan was hatched.

And because we had questions, we were invited to the second meeting.

At the second meeting, we voiced some oppositions, and I never got an invite to come to any other meetings.

I've been a resident of this neighborhood for 53 years.

I live on the block.

And all the I've lost one lot in and um through eminent domain, have had no meeting about just compensation.

And if anybody can help me, I spent 30 years reclaiming the land, ran award-winning agricultural programs, etc.

etc.

In 1972, you'd know me as an economist.

I was a young, bright, 22-year-old person with a degree in economics.

But and people say, why did you why'd you not become an economic or why'd you study?

I says, I knew I didn't have any money, and I wanted to find out who had the money and why.

So I thought I'd be a union electrician would be a better salary, so I became a uh electrician for local 58, 20 years in that, retired.

I happen to also be a CD Detroit electrical inspector.

Thank you so much, sir.

And thank you so much.

I had a thick book of codes.

Thank you so much.

So again, everyone please be mindful.

Everyone, I know, I'm sorry.

Everyone's got to please be mindful of that clock, and I have to give everyone the same amount of time based on state law.

Our uh next speaker, Jared Wogers, followed by Evangela Thomas, followed by Misha Parker.

Um Mr.

Rogers.

Um, yeah, hi, my name is Jared.

Uh uh resident in the uh State Fair neighborhood.

And just wanted to share uh a little bit just about what a headache, you know, this whole process has been so far.

Um you know, in theory I'm supportive of solar project, but uh yeah, so it's basically like after having I haven't had any work done.

I've I've been told I'd you know get these upgrades, I haven't had a single thing done yet, and have had probably 15 or so contractors walk through my house.

Um after a year, they finally tell me that I they need my financial information to even finish the qualifications for the work, which took about a year to even learn that.

And then since excuse me, since getting that info in, I haven't heard anything else, and uh yeah, uh just it's just been a headache.

I I canceled traveling for you know out of town for work for eight months at one point because they told me the work was gonna start at any time.

Um so just hoping to uh share a bit of that and hopefully get at least get what I'm promised soon.

Um that's it.

Thank you so much.

Uh our next speaker, Evangela Thomas, followed by Misha Parker, followed by uh Donnis uh Anthony's my name is Evangeletta Thomas to the uh council.

Uh appreciate this opportunity to speak.

I've been born and raised um on the east side of Detroit.

I'm 65 years old.

Uh went to Kettering High School, bought my first home at 40 on a uh 8141 Elmont, which is the Lynch Road uh project.

And being there, raising my children, I'm still there.

Um, when the program was introduced to me, I thought it was a great idea.

Um the program was well organized, it was held at Exodus Missionary Baptist Church around the corner, and they had structured meetings.

Uh they informed us very well of what was about to happen, and I I just was just amazed, it was God sent.

I got uh a new roof, new furnace, new hot water tank, and they insulated my attic.

And that would have cost me a way a lot of money.

But when the program was introduced, I was I was appreciative of it.

They were very nice, very kind, and the program is an asset to the to the community.

So I mean, they need to keep it going because there's homeowners that need help.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Misha Parker, followed by Donnis Anthony, followed by Jordan Smith.

Hello, everyone.

My name is Misha Parker.

I am the president of Carrie Neighborhood Block Club in District 4, and I'm here on behalf of myself and my community.

I I was one of the ones that did get some um help with the um project that's going on.

I did get a roof like she was saying.

I have um a new washing machine and dryer.

I have a new refrigerator, I have um window um blocks on my windows in the basement.

I thank God for them coming to me because I am low income, and they did help me with the roof because I it was leaking, and then they helped the neighborhood by tearing down the houses.

It looks so beautiful over there and looks so clear and clean now.

And um, I'm here to say keep the project going because a lot of people is coming to me and they looking forward to getting their homes done by the project um stopping.

They haven't gotten their um work done to their homes, and um, I'm here on their behalf to say it's a great project, so keep it going.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Donnis Anthony, followed by Jordan Smith, followed by Byron Osburn.

Good afternoon, members of the city council.

My name is Donna Anthony.

I'm here to ask the city council to let our community continue to develop and grow with the solar field project.

I would like to see our community continue to grow in a positive way.

This solar field project has helped remove 23.2 acres of blight in our community in our neighborhood.

I would like to see our community move forward in renewable energy.

From District 4, thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Jordan Smith, followed by Byron Osborn.

Uh followed Osbourne, followed by Yvette Williams.

Mr.

Smith.

Hello, my name is Jordan Smith.

I'm a resident of District 7.

Um, I'm a five-year IBEW member and uh apprentice, currently working at the uh Castle Solar Farm.

Um I think it's uh I mean uh speaking of support of it and uh lift uh panels up by torque down, I uh connecting jumpers, and um I think it's a real good first opportunity job for apprentices.

So it's like not only it's a good thing for the uh Detroit, but it's also good for supporting the uh entire sort of electrician trade as a good foundation point.

Um I think uh that's about it.

I want to speak in support of it.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Byron Osborne, followed by Yvette Williams, followed by Ronda Williams.

Good afternoon, Council.

Byron Osburn, District 5 resident, lifelong Detroiter, and business agent for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

This these projects are opportunities, as we all know.

Dealing with the skill trades task force, working together, you know, with uh with Councilman Waters, Councilman Campbell, Councilman Miller, I mean Councilwoman Miller.

We have been able to reach out to a record number of Detroiters, and moving this contract over to DTE gives us opportunity to open up our apprenticeship, which we just had applications all last week.

We're vetting through those.

Um I don't have the numbers of Detroiters that did respond, but knowing that meetings that we've gone to and the interest is at an all-time high.

I'm a hundred percent positive that we can grow our numbers of Detroit residents exponentially with this project going over to DTE.

These opportunities, like Jordan was speaking of our boots on the ground, skill set, uh, workforce engagement, workforce readiness.

Myself, I'm going to speak on July 1st to introduce the trades to a group of young people on the east side who are gonna take them through Castle.

Uh, we've got Motor City Electric, one of our largest employers of Detroit-based business right over on Lynch Road.

They're involved uh heavily in this project.

So, of course, Local 58 is speaking in support of moving this agreement over to DTE.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next speaker, Yvette Williams, followed by Rhonda Williams, followed by Joanne Board.

Thank you for having me here today.

Um, in hearing the comments throughout the room, it really disheartens me being born and raised here.

My mother built our home that I'm fighting for against the use restrictions.

And just to hear that a minority city has to take the crumbs of corporate America to stay in their homes.

Why hasn't there been any increase in evaluation?

Our homeowners' rates are through the roof, and we're gonna really have a hard time getting trying to get the homes insured with a solar panel farm.

Not viable buyouts, not knowledge about what a use restriction is.

A use restriction is when someone takes non-possessory interest in your property, and they can take possession of your property and use it.

They can put easement, open up easements for utilities, poles, lines, pipes, and it's gonna drop the evaluation from anywhere from 10 to 40 percent.

So therefore, the homes are going to be worthless.

And they're in and the information is not going out to the public.

And then we have to sit up here and say, then you uh you change the deep restriction.

Deep restrictions are of the community rights under the deed from 1971 through the developer.

It runs with the land.

So when you take a citizen's rights, a homeowner's rights, that would be like taking going out to Birmingham, telling them, oh, this is not a residential neighborhood anymore.

This is going to be a commercial industrial.

So, yeah, we have many corporations here talking about the benefits.

But that's about it.

The benefits for them, but the burden on the home.

Thank you, Ms.

Williams.

And our final in-person speaker, Darren McCleskey.

Ms.

Williams.

So thank you for having us here.

My family and I have lived in the Greenfield Park area, District 3, since 1971.

So for 55 years, we have been waiting for that area to be redeveloped, waiting for that area to be cared for, to be nurtured, and to actually appreciate its residence.

It's long-term residents.

Instead, we are seeing fields being knocked down.

Now there's been vacant homes, there's been burned down homes, that's been creating that blight.

And we know that the city could have cleaned those things up.

But now with this initiative, you are land down land, but now you are taking away the actual cre of a proper zoning for that area and turning it more into and more of an industrial area, which means that my family, the property itself, is useless.

You could not sell that property to anyone else as a home.

It has to be converted to something else.

So instead of looking for equity, which, as we're seeing downtown, that equity and those opportunities is not going to our neighborhoods.

We have not gotten proper notification.

There was a hearing that was on Juneteenth that them never did happen.

It was switched over to another day.

So this whole rollout has been quite hostile to our family and to our neighborhoods.

It's been very stressful.

And we want to see this done properly.

Thank you, Ms.

Williams.

Amen.

Next speaker, Joanne Warwick, followed by Darren McCleskey, who'll be our final speaker in person.

Ms.

Warwick.

Good afternoon, everyone.

I uh brought for you a copy of a basically a press release from the Department of Justice.

How in uh February of 2026, there was a court ordered uh civil penalty of a hundred million dollars against DTE energy company at subsidiaries for violation of the Clean Air Act.

And you were just saying about uh the switch up of the port authority, whatever.

Mr.

Whittaker said maybe we don't want to work with people who got bad reputations like that.

Well, same thing with DTE.

We all know the grid goes down, etc.

etc.

Um, also there's no solar plans in the master plan, the current master plan, the delayed master plan, uh, but you're shoving it out in many weight, not everybody.

Uh Diane Van Buren in the Green Energy Task Force did a video with Miss Trisha Stein, and they said we're not selling the renewable energy credits.

Oh, but did you tell us about the renewable energy credits?

That's what this is really all about, isn't it?

But we uh what we don't know are the fire risks of of and it's not properly cited.

Boyle Heights solar warehouse fire in LA started last week, Wednesday.

It's still burning.

There was a state of emergency declared, they're giving people air purifiers, and they move the kids out to go to school.

People and the New York Times today said people are suffering toxic diasma.

So everybody, yes, Miss Burr, everybody knows we have vast amounts of land, but everybody should know that trees do carbon capture, and this is not progressive to do eminent domain, and you haven't done your environmental due diligence.

You're violating the chart.

Good afternoon again, counsel.

I'm gonna summarize this project very quickly.

You guys were offered renewable energy tax credits, they became transferable with the Biden administration.

Your predecessor, Duggan said, Hey, how can we use this?

After decades of disinvestment in these neighborhoods, you guys decided to pave the way for commercial and industrial solar farms in the middle of residential neighborhoods.

You said where could we pull the seed money?

Mr.

Ski, that power plant still stands.

It's never been answered.

Where is the 10 million dollars?

Why is it not remediated?

You're reusing the money, you're misplacing it.

How can we convince the neighbors?

Offer them money, offer them upgrades.

The upgrades could have happened anyway.

This didn't have to go this way.

You didn't have to have solar to get energy upgrades to residents of Detroit.

Who's in the way?

The property owners.

How do we take care of them?

Eminent domain.

That's what you guys came up with.

And guess what?

I got involved because you wouldn't put reversion clauses.

You wouldn't say, if it's not solar, the land goes back to the owners.

That was my line that you crossed.

So you took hundreds of properties, you're leasing it to a private company.

You guys concocted a false narrative on social media.

This ain't that fam, as Tefair Rushton said.

All this could have happened.

You could have put the solar on your own land.

You already had the land.

You could have done that.

And this does not contradict anything that any of these wonderful people have said today.

There'd be all the benefits fighting global warming.

Thank you so much.

You didn't have to take private property.

And now transition to our online callers.

First caller is going to be Didante Semester.

All right, caller, the floor is yours.

You have a minute 30, general public comment.

I want to say I appreciate you, Cole Meoung, because I feel like you knew you were throwing me a bone earlier when you said uh when you spoke about the Maroon and Bobble Island.

So I just made a call and I got more information about the 15-year-old deal that the Maroons have about Bablo Island, how they haven't paid taxes, and they have a hundred-year deal for land that they don't pay taxes on.

But when it comes down to solar and this whole deal here, I stand with everything Joanne and Darren both said.

And I also feel like uh when it comes down to renewable energy, we definitely need that.

We definitely need to um make sure we're getting our green footprint as big as we can get, but we don't need it to be at the expense of residents.

We don't need to take private land.

We could have put this on top of city-owned buildings.

We could have put this in vast acres of city-owned land that would not have disturbed people that would not have used eminent domain.

Also, we have uh I'm gonna call it the exhumation of uh vacant lots that have contaminated dirt right across the street from the uh Van Dyke Lynch Solar Project on Eldrin Street in Van Dyke, which is right by kids.

So they not only do they have to contend with the the solar farms looking outside when they go.

I seen them have I seen some people over there having a party.

They had to party outside of solar farms.

Also, they have contaminated dirt, so they have two environmental hazards.

Also, these use restrictions are gonna be there forever.

The zoning is forever changed.

Think that's really ridiculous.

Why you would change this zone in forever and ever and ever um for this deal that can be pulled out on the other end from the developers from DTE, but we have no recourse if they do.

This is a terrible deal in the way that is done and wasting a lot of city assets and city funds on this deal.

We need to do better when we plan these things and city money.

All right.

Next caller, please.

Our next caller is going to be William M.

Davis.

William M.

Davis, the floor is yours.

Minute 30, general public comment.

Uh, good afternoon, can happy here.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Uh, in general, I am a very strong advocate for renewable energy.

I think that the city church should be doing more wind, high road, there, thermal, and uh all sorts of other energy um that does not pollute.

Um, I'm I'm also thinking that the city should be doing more solar on city land and city buildings and city whatever, where they could get direct benefit to the to the buildings.

I think that we also need to be more careful as it relates to intimate domain about taking people's property and taking uh giving them restrictions on their property that they for future use.

I I think we need to be thoroughly reviewing what we're doing and thoroughly know what's going on.

Also, I think when you do stuff like this, especially with city funds are being used, you know, the the improvements to people's homes should not just be in that general area, the improvements should be citywide, the city funds are doing this.

You know, so far too often you might do a project in whatever district, but they need to be doing stuff to help more city to trade residents than what's going on now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next caller, please.

Next caller is Sandra Turner Handy.

Sandra Turner Handy, the floor is yours.

Minute 30, general public comment.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Uh, as the executive director of the Denby neighborhood alliance, I am in support of transferring the contract over uh on solar, due to the fact I'm here in the Houston Witty or Hayes area.

Our residents are in full support of this.

They're wondering why they have not received their upgrades.

And I'm having to explain to them the transfer of the contract.

The city moving towards solar is one of the best things we could do because it helps to uh reduce health disparities from greenhouse gases.

It moves us into renewable energy that is so needed.

I've worked in the environmental field for over 15 years and have advocated for more renewable energy in the city.

But what I advocate for the most is that we with this project make our residents hold.

The city cannot promise residents that they're gonna do these upgrades that they probably can't afford, and then turn around and stop in the middle of a project.

Our residents are our greatest assets.

We have to support, and we have to come through on promises that we make to our residents.

So I am support of the transfer.

Next caller, please.

Our next caller is going to be Mr.

Foster.

All right, Mr.

Foster, the floor is yours.

You have a minute 30, general public comment.

Oh, good afternoon.

Through the council body, just a few things.

I want to bring to your attention.

Um the number of scandals that's been involved with DT the last four or five years.

We're talking about private jet.

We're talking about to have one billion dollars in profits and pay no federal income tax.

We talk about the Zug Island pollution fine for 100 million dollars.

We're talking about dark money through nonprofit to overturn the governor's 2020 emergency powers.

Right.

These are not the type of people to have our community in the best interest here.

And when we talk about the love of the East Side 10 years strong, then they probably wouldn't be as vulnerable as they are right now to be getting or advocate for somebody that's giving them $1,500 and home repairs.

That's what one of the people have articulated.

No more than $1,500.

Right.

And so we have to do a better job in educating our community.

Um, as far as education goes and politics, as far as these go, every time the city got in the crunch, they called on Republicans.

When we talk about the bankruptcy, you want to got Republican Kevin Orr to come in as emergency manager.

When we talked about crime, you wouldn't got Republican James Craig to come in here and fix crime.

So when you get in front of our community making all these decisions and try to encourage us to vote for Democrats or whoever it is, show us your history and show us your work in these last 10 years.

Next up is owner Papa.

Caller, the floor is yours.

You have two, excuse me, a minute 30, general public comment.

Caller, are you there?

Yes, through the chair, Babby Hurt.

Yes, ma'am.

Good afternoon.

You've heard Mr.

Foster just then tell you that we should be involved in everything.

This contract does what you have before us is fraudulent.

First of all, lights our renewables is not in this contract anymore.

They don't have any right to transfer anything.

The people have the right to transfer to whomever they decide on.

We need a full public hearing on solar and how you are rolling this out because it's been illegal the way you have been uh commandeering, seizing homes.

And and this amended cost of energy 285 per megawatt hours.

If you understood what that means, you'd know that we could never produce that kind.

This is not a sunny uh uh state, it is a state that is gloomy.

It is one of the gloomiest states in the nation.

And when you make people desperate, desperate, because you have been misappropriating C D BG funds, ARPAR funds, which should have gone to the residents to do these things.

You even now misappropriate our tax dollars to clean up freeways.

We could clean up our own quarters without being held hostage by a solar energy project.

You are despicable if you vote for this and you have no idea of what you're voting on, and the contract as it stands in front of us is illegal.

Light star has pulled out since last year.

They should their name should not even be on this docket.

Thank you.

Next caller, please.

Our final caller is going to be Miss Cindy Dara.

Cindy Dara, the floor is yours.

You have a minute 30, general public comment.

Cindy Dara, are you there going once?

Cindy Darrell.

Okay, I'm here.

I'm here.

All right.

Uh I tried to get on public comment, and I guess she don't really want to hear us.

I had so many times over three, where your screen disappeared, the or the sound disappeared, and then it would say the host will uh be back shortly or whatever.

Your little message.

I don't know if other people got that.

But then when I could finally get the thing swipe up to it where I could see the hand erase, well, uh, guess what?

My hand was lowered.

So I kept raising it.

I send you emails when this happens, but whoever is in charge of calling people, evidently they don't they don't always respond to the emails.

But it's it's really kind of I guess uh I just I'm sending another one.

I think we need to have public comment before you vote in the beginning of the meeting.

And by the way, a lot of people uh uh used to you used to have it.

I don't know why you have to cut off public comment other than have people uh you can if you you're getting enough money, you can stay there and listen to these other people taking all our money.

You certainly should be able to let people make their comment whether and and not put a deadline on it and make a comment after you vote so we can tell you how we're don't like what you did, which usually that's the case.

And it's disgusting.

It really so much.

All right, that takes us to the end of our public comments, and just for anybody else who may not be familiar with this process.

If you would like to provide any comments to this body that goes beyond the time that's being provided during the public comment section, please feel free to provide those comments to the clerk's office, and again, they will be placed onto public record um for review.

All right, uh, Madam Clerk uh from the Office of Contracting and Procurement.

Contract number six zero zero nine four three dash A1, 100% city funding to amend terms for phase two solar photolithic energy development on city-owned property in the Houston Whitaker neighborhood.

Excuse me, I'm sorry.

I apologize, I don't have the agenda in front of me.

That works.

Okay.

That works.

And it's can we do also move a 4.2 as well together?

4.2 contract number 600 6343-a1, 100% city funding to amend terms for phase one solar photopolitic energy development on city-owned property in the state fair in Grashett Finley.

Thank you.

Neighborhoods.

Thank you so much.

All right.

Um Member McCampbell line items 4.1 and 4.2, sir.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um discussion.

Um he can he can do the discussion first if he prefers.

Line in the 4.1 and 4.2 uh for discussion.

Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Just want to open up for discussion because I know this is our first time or in the special session to discuss this.

So I want to open up for discussion for um our colleagues.

Yeah, I want to bring forward the uh individuals who are joining us as well.

We have information.

I believe we have Ms.

Trisha Stein, Mr.

Fora Rushton, Ms.

Valerie Brader, I believe it is, and Sarah Patsen, as well as uh Corporate Council Corporation Council Mallet.

Comrade Mallet.

All right, I'm sorry, did I miss a hand?

Who was who's hand that wanted to discuss?

I have questions.

Oh, Member Miller.

Through the chair, thank you for joining us.

I would just start by saying, as a new member on council, I would like to get an explanation of how we got here, what the cost increase will be, and what community benefits are being preserved and what DTE is receiving in exchange for stepping in.

I don't view it as they are saving us, but they seem to be the only one willing at this time to move forward as we correct a wrong.

So if you would expound on that, I would really appreciate it.

Please station for the record.

Absolutely.

Uh through you, Mr.

President, uh, to member Miller, uh, Trisha Stein, I am Senior Director of Strategic Initiatives for uh Mayor Sheffield.

I'm also joined by my colleagues today who we will um in response to Member Miller's uh question uh respond.

We have a few slides, we won't go through the whole deck, but um, if Sarah uh Patton, Solar Project Manager could share just the the first slide really is to show you um how how we got here.

So it is uh the five solar neighborhoods.

Uh three years ago, Mayor Duggan put a call out uh to the city uh and and in response to uh the Biden administration offering up tax credits uh to develop a renewable energy at a way that made them financially viable.

Uh five neighborhoods uh are what is shown up there.

Uh this is in response.

A lot of them you heard from uh today.

They they applied to host solar in their neighborhood.

Uh and the dark shaded areas here uh represent 165 acres that will be developed uh into solar arrays.

Most of those areas were vacant.

Uh had one house on a block uh and um were subject to a lot of light and illegal dumping.

Then uh the neighbors when they applied, they also developed the impact area.

And that is the red um you just can go back, Sarah.

Sorry, yeah.

The red, as it's got a mind of its own.

Okay.

The red area around that is was surrounded by more stable housing and a lot of owner-occupied uh homes.

And when they applied, uh part of the development would be energy efficiency upgrades that the developers would deliver as part of uh hosting solar.

And so there's 200, over 200 homes uh in those impact areas across these five neighborhoods that would receive anywhere in the solar uh uh portion, 15 to 25,000 of energy efficiency upgrades.

Um that was also uh met with DTE's uh energy efficiency uh program that they administer, and every home was able to um receive $35,000 worth of benefits.

And so you've heard from a lot of them today, and and we're halfway through that uh project.

So 11 homes.

Yes, ma'am.

I had that part.

I mean the part about the Light Star failing.

Yes, that's the I mean if you just want to speak up.

But thank you in case anyone wants to hear that who did not know it, I do appreciate it.

I think everyone here pretty much knows that portion.

Yep, I'll go right to their so yes, we're halfway there.

Uh and so that leaves half of the homes, uh, most of them, if not all of them, by LightStar have not been completed.

And so um I'd love to turn it over to my colleague uh from a legal standpoint to um expound on how we got here in the LightStar contract.

Uh they have made notification to us over the last few months, the starting last fall, that they could not uh develop their three solar areas, that's what they got.

We after an open competitive bid process, we selected two vendors, uh DTE and LightStar as a contingency.

Three of those are Lightstar.

Uh they did put us on notice last fall that they could not um develop solar given the contract prices and they would need an increase.

Then they also let us know um at the beginning of the year that they were sold by uh an owner, but they were continuing to develop solar and they were trying to find an EPC that's the developer who develops um solar, and they were going to an open and competitive bid process.

They shared those bids with us at the end of March, beginning of April, um which were much higher.

And then literally 24 hours later, they told us because of their new ownership, they're owned by an equity firm now, they no longer develop solar, which was a complete shock to us after months of working with them and trying to um figure out what it was going to cost the city if we did a contract amendment with them.

And um I'd love to turn it over to the legal folks to talk about from a contractual standpoint, and then Valerie Brader is our external expert to talk about the tax credits.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh through the council president, uh Councilperson Miller, as as uh my colleague described.

Uh what LightStar did to us was unexpected.

Uh there have been questions about what our contractual remedies might be vis-a-vis LightStar.

It is true that we do have a contract signed with LightStar, where they were given the opportunity based on that contract to go in once we had secured controlled the land and do all the preparation work in terms of bringing in the solar fields.

They never did sign the virtual power purchasing agreement, which would have then given us the ability to pose on them significant costs, fines, and remediation requirements, uh, because we never actually uh got that far.

We were waiting, as Mrs.

Dye pointed out, for a price.

The price was going to be the crucial element of the uh virtual power or purchasing agreement that they hesitated, I don't want to say refused, but so far had not given us.

We sent them, and I think councilperson uh I've shared this with this honorable body before.

We sent a letter to LightStar in December saying that you were in breach of the contract, and that what we were going to do with the time that we then still had available was to rebid the contract and go our separate ways.

They uh ask us and you and and and and utilized all of the goodwill that they had available with us to say, look, we are being purchased.

If you uh don't withdraw the letter that you sent, the sale will not go through, and we will be unable to do the contract work which we required to perform.

Obviously, they lied to us.

When they came in and said we are no longer in the development business, everything as a precursor prior to then actually just simply went away.

Now the option that we have is the assignment by Lightstar to DTE.

In response to some of the council questions that were received, it was the Office of Sustainability and the OCP that insisted that no matter what, no matter how good the proposition was or the prices were, that there be two vendors associated with the process, just in case one of the vendors failed.

But when it did happen, there was an option.

The option was DTE.

Lightstar saw that as an option and ask us for permission to assign to DTE their contract.

Now that's a negotiation, Councilperson Miller, that takes place between Lightstar and DTE.

It's not a conversation, it's not a negotiation that the City of Detroit participates in.

The very good news is that they were able to come to an agreement, obviously, subject to this honorable body's uh approval.

Uh so with the that is the legal framework, and that's the factual context of how it is that we got to where we are right now.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any further member Kelleway.

Yeah, thank you, and good afternoon, um, everyone.

Um I can proudly say um I'm the only council person who has voted against this project from day one, a hundred percent.

I've never vacillated, I've never wavered, um, because I've done my I've done my research.

And I think it's kind of disingenuous of you, Miss Um Tricia Stein, for you to say that you all just found out when Life Star was sold when you all were standing before us, they were in the middle of being sold.

So I don't know why the right questions weren't answered, but they were sold January 31st, 2024.

And they were acquired by Eagle Creek Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, which was later acquired by an equity firm called Apollo Global Management.

So for us not to have known that they were being sold while you all were standing here, while you were standing here.

So somebody didn't do their due diligence to protect the interests of we the residents, and to me that's very um very unfortunate.

We find ourselves here today.

Um I don't know how um, I don't know why someone didn't do their due diligence to stay on top of um the purchase of LightStar because it was happening while you all were standing here.

This happened almost two years ago, and that's when you first started bringing this before us, and I continue to um take the position there was not um a way to address blight or crime in our city.

Um, I'm just reading articles, so um, for you all to say you didn't know, you should have known you should have known that they were being sold, and and the ramifications or the consequences um of the sale.

And um to still have their names in these documents, I don't know if they need to be amended to reflect the name of um Apollo Global Management.

I don't know how we can move forward with the company that's out of business.

I don't know how that works.

I I really don't, and um, so I'm just you know very disappointed that we didn't stay on top of this very, very it's a 35-year deal.

And everybody knows we can't trust a DTE.

They do not have us our best interest in mind, they never have.

Um, and um they've um turned off 120,000 people's electric um electricities in the last year and a half.

Um they're not a good partner, um, and I don't take any donations for um from them.

Um so I'm just disappointed that um somebody wasn't at the will of this, and somebody should have known it's just inexcusable in my opinion, a 35-year agreement.

Nobody knew that the company that we had negotiated with an internal contract with was sold to another company and then yet another company.

And um, so you know, um, we'll just see how it all um pans.

I don't know, people gas and refrigerators and stoves and roofs and windows.

That's great.

But at the end of the day, we destabilized neighborhoods.

Nobody's going to go into those neighborhoods and buy anything.

I want everybody to go to my childhood neighborhood, which is at Capitol and Greenfield and look at O'Shea Park and see what they've done over there.

It's still blight, it's still crying.

It did not address the problem, and it's so unfortunate that we find ourselves here today.

I'm glad some people are happy about it.

That's great.

Some people did benefit.

But what has happened, and you'll see I won't be here, but you'll see in 35 years we have destabilized entire communities.

We've not made them better.

And I always believe that when you go into an area, you make it better than you left it.

And that's not that's not going to be the narrative in 35 years.

We are not going to leave that area.

It will probably be deserted.

So thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Corporation Council.

Council, I do want to correct uh one thing for the record.

Uh Councilperson Callaway, we absolutely knew that LightStar Renewables was being purchased by Eagle Creek.

They were in the same business.

In fact, we knew that and counted that as a positive, thus making LightStar even stronger and providing a more firm basis for all of the work that we knew had to be done associated with this project.

We knew that Eagle Creek was in the process, or that LightStar had just been purchased by Eagle Creek.

That was not news.

That was in fact a positive factor that we used in terms of their evaluation.

What was a surprise was the first the eventual sale to Apollo, and just also to point out, just so this honorable body is is comfortable.

Lightstar still is a viable LLC under the umbrella of the equity fund called Apollo.

They own a series of separate companies.

In this instance, Lightstar is one of them.

So it's it it is perfectly legal legally inappropriate for the City of Detroit to continue to deal with Lightstar as an entity.

It continues to exist.

Mr.

Chair?

Member Callaway?

Thank you.

Um disrespect to you, Corporation Council, but that was never told to me.

I don't think I've ever missed a meeting when we discussed solar.

And every time we discussed and every time a contract has come before us, I've been a no vote.

Um that I had never heard of Eagle Creek Renewable, and then maybe we can check the minutes.

I don't think that name was ever mentioned during the time that you all appeared before us.

If it has been, I'd like to see it in writing.

The suggestion was that we didn't know about it.

I don't know if we're not going to be able to do that.

I thought you said you knew about it.

We did know about it.

We absolutely know.

Going through the chair.

So, Mr.

Chair, um thank you, Mr.

Chair.

So I had never heard of Green Um Eagle Creek Renewables until I started reading myself.

Um I did not know that they um purchased Light Star in January of 2024.

And I certainly would like to see any evidence of what you're saying, because I just don't remember ever hearing that Light Star was being purchased by Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, which was later acquired by an equity firm that's all in it for profit.

Everybody's in it for profit because DTE is everything they do is for profit.

So I have never, no disrespect to you, Corporation Council Mallet, heard you or Trisha Stein or the young lady sitting to the the right of uh Miss Stein, Eagle Creek renewable energy ever mentioned.

It could have been, but I'd like to see it that you did mention it.

And I stand corrected if you did.

But I have a pretty good memory, and I don't ever remember knowing that LightStar had been purchased, and then later Eagles Creek purchased by an equity firm.

I just don't remember.

So if you can show me that in writing, I'd appreciate it.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

So I guess that I mean that that does raise a question.

I mean, it's one thing to know it, and another thing for it to be communicated to the body.

I mean, as we move forward with uh the contracts.

I mean, if I don't recall it myself either, not to say that my vote would have been different because everyone knows how I voted on this as well, uh certainly when it came to uh district one and where they were going to be located.

But do we have any documentation to show that it was presented to us?

Because I don't recall that either.

Uh through uh to you, Mr.

President, I am confirming that right now.

Uh I do remember it uh in writing, so now I'm uh I'm checking to see what documents were submitted to uh this honorable body during phase one or phase two.

Gotcha.

Okay.

So those documents are being uh located, colleagues.

Any additional questions?

Uh, member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um first question, I think I have a lot of them.

Um what's our recourse with Light Cor Light Star?

Have has any litigation been filed?

Are we pursuing them considering what corporation counsel indicated that they blatantly lied about what was going on with them as an entity?

We believe that the assignment from LightStar to DTE will in fact deliver to the citizen of Detroit what was promised by the original contract.

The issue really does come down to price.

At the end of the day, the litigation would be quite expensive.

I do believe also that it would be used as a fulcrum to undermine all of the other legal work that we've done prior to on this particular project.

And so at this point, Councilperson Johnson, we don't anticipate a lawsuit against Lightstar, particularly if the assignment assumed by Detroit Edison goes as smoothly as the prior contract with DTE has gone.

Whatever our damages were, they would claim that because they had not given us a firm price prior to uh actually signing the virtual power purchase agreement, that our damages were minimal and that they they would have in fact imposed on us very similar costs.

So you're saying they did not give us a price.

What did we approve of?

Because they had given us a per kilowatt hour rate.

DTE had also given us a rate now, but now we're saying that they did not.

So go ahead.

Through you, Mr.

President.

Yes, Mr.

Uh to Member Johnson.

Uh in LightStar's contract, it was a minimum of base and a maximum price that was approved with a 2 percent annual inflator.

Uh there was also the ability for them to amend that uh and ask for a higher uh rate.

Uh and that was part of the negotiations that we were doing uh late last summer and the fall to get them to sign the lease and in the power purchase agreement.

Um they never committed to a price.

They did put it in writing to us in October that if they would need additional dollars, uh, that the current rates in the contract uh were not sufficient to develop based on higher costs for uh supplies and equipment and um contractors, and so then they went about the process to try to get uh EPC, the energy procurement and in and can and construction uh contractor to build it.

That's what they did uh for Q1 of 2026 and and got four bids.

They never committed to a price.

They did tell us on record in writing that they needed additional money because they could not make the um contracted rates uh work for the um to develop, and then they did share with us their EPC bids, which were higher than um anything we'd ever seen before.

Uh but before they gave us a firm price to put into a PPA price uh prepay agreement or a lease or a contract amendment, that's when they told us they no longer develop solar per their new uh equity firm ownership.

And so within that, the range, the kilowatt hour range that they provided is DTE's rate within that range?

It's under uh through you, Mr.

President, uh, to uh council member Johnson, it's less than their yes, so DT's price is a level levelized cost of energy, which is a flat fixed rate that is approved by MPSC, uh, and they don't have a min-base max, they don't have a range in their contract, they don't have a two percent inflator, it's a fixed flat rate in their other two contracts uh that will not change.

And so the LCOE that is in this contract amendment per the assignment is less than the rates that LightStar gave us that they got for the EPC bids.

Okay.

Um through the chair.

So can you provide more information about the expiring tax credits?

Um, considering Lightstar had already been committed on the federal side to receive the tax credit.

So why are we now at a point where we're not able to rebid it?

Yes, ma'am.

And instead of going out to rebid working with DTE.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh through Mr.

President, uh, to answer uh Member Johnson, we would like uh Valerie Brader, our external counsel and subject matter expert on clean energy to answer that.

Uh she is uh the one that provided our guidance uh throughout this for the tax credits and uh clean energy development.

Through the president, uh member Johnson under the IRS rules, which changed approximately a year ago with the federal act, the uh credits are only available for projects that start prior to July 4th of this year.

So, in order for someone to take credit and and be assured that they would get the credits, which are between 30 and 40 percent of the project cost, they have to have committed five percent of the project costs prior to July 4th of this year.

Because um this is happening after December 31st of last year, and and right now you also can't use equipment that was purchased prior to then that doesn't qualify under some additional foreign entity of concern rules that came into place.

What this means in the upshot is that you have to have an entity that can commit five percent of the project costs with equipment that Lightstar did not purchase that that entity purchases before July 4th in order for the for a project in order to be assured you would receive those credits, which are again between 30 a minimum of 30 and as much as 40 percent of program costs.

Thank you.

Naturally, um I am in a very difficult position.

I have two of these solar arrays in District 4.

Some residents in one of them have already begun receiving the home improvements, the upgrades to their property, and not all, not all in Gratchett Finley.

And then in Houston Whittier, um, I understand a few people have, but not everyone.

So I'm really interested in the totality of this.

What happened with the community partners that were involved?

Is DTE assuming the costs that had have already been spent on home improvement for those who've already received the upgrades?

Like what is actually happening?

There were a number of conversations that took place, and I attended many of the meetings with the community where we talked about what how everything would look.

Um there were some areas that selected having agriculture, agribaics um and and growing um things that could be eaten.

What help me to understand how that continues to move forward or does it?

Uh yes, through you member Mr.

President.

Uh yes, uh to member Johnson.

Uh in this assignment, DTE will take on all the rights and responsibilities in the contract, which include the neighborhood agreements uh regarding the design and the fence.

Uh uh Director Rushman will talk about the uh uh urban farms uh a second.

Uh they're also taking on the responsibility of the energy efficiency upgrades and completing them.

And uh they're also uh taking on all of the environmental work and the the engineering that Lightstar has done.

So they are taking on all the rights, all the responsibility, and they are assuming that, and that is included in their LCOE price.

And then I'll have um uh director Rushton talk about uh what happens with the uh food yes uh and through the chair.

Um member Johnson uh so the um neighbors neighborhoods that uh selected agribics as part of their project design.

They um we had started down the road with Lightstar with four different urban farmers who were ready and willing to um and really excited about taking on um acres of land uh underneath the solar panels.

Uh so we've gone through trainings and everything.

This is all in conjunction with our office.

Um, and then um in this in this change, uh DCE's uh arrays are very structured very differently than uh light stars were so light star light stars were eight to twelve feet tall, they inverted with the sun, and um they were just more conducive to have urban farming underneath.

In this change of process, we learned DTE's process, they look just like O'Shea's, nothing changed, so they're shorter to the ground.

They are not able to do the agribics in the same way that LightStar had proposed.

And so I've worked with those farmers to make sure that their time and planning has been compensated for the season.

In the city, they're gonna pay them $5,000 per acre that they had planned with LightStar.

And we're also developing farm stands or community spaces in the um in the in the solar areas where we can bring fresh produce to those neighbors and still live up to those neighborhood agreements.

Um thank you for that.

So is DTE not able to do the solar the way Lightstar did because it sounds like it would capture more um energy.

Yes.

Um I don't know if there's a rep from DTE that can talk about uh the actual design.

Julie, are you able to speak on behalf of Mr.

President?

Also uh are the solar developers uh here uh for uh so you have community representative, and you also have uh DTE leadership who are developing solar.

Whoever it is, come on down.

Oh sorry, yes.

I have sorry, Mr.

President.

So yes, the subject matter experts are here, uh, the solar development team and leadership team.

All right, you have been summoned.

Come forward, please.

Please introduce yourself for the record.

Hit that button in front of the thank you very much.

Uh Mr.

President and Council Daniel Mahoney, Director of Policy and Regional Affairs for DTE, here with my colleague who I'll let introduce himself.

Good afternoon.

Uh Sean Gooder, director of renewable energy at DTE.

Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, so the question is whether or not DTE is able to install solar panels that rotate with the sun to be able to capture more energy.

Through the chair, I'll let my colleague Sean be a response to the question.

Yeah, the way that we design this solar array are with uh fixed um racking systems, they do not rotate with the sun, and that was our standard uh for a number of reasons that uh engineering when we looked at this.

We did this in our previous installations at O'Shea, and we're doing it at Castle, and we're gonna be doing it at Greenfield.

So we hold that standard from a operation and maintenance profile, and uh that's what we were we engineered that was best for this uh site.

We weren't able to follow LightStar's design.

Through the chair, so would it be more expensive for a rotation?

I can't answer that.

I'd have to because they did their own design with their own cost estimates.

We did our own design with our own cost estimates when we had the opportunity to evaluate these properties and how we would put these assets in, and so that's that's what our engineering team had come up with.

That's best use for that site as we saw it.

So DTE has never done any that rotates with the sun.

I'd have to find that out.

I don't from my knowledge, I don't know if we have any in our asset uh profiles.

Okay, thank you.

Um my last question is in regards to elevate.

Elevate was were were they working directly with LightStar?

Are they still involved in this project at all?

Uh through you, Mr.

President, to Member Johnson.

Elevate is a subcontractor of Lightstar, and with the assignment, they would no longer be uh a subcontractor.

Thank you.

That's all I have for now.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Member Waters.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um my first question would be are the residents in the city of Detroit gonna see any decrease in their energy bills.

Uh through you, Mr.

President, uh, to member waters, uh, with the energy efficiency upgrades, uh, we do have actual usage that we are able to track out of the 111 homes that have been completed.

Um we are uh seeing again, those are actual data that we get.

Uh we are seeing a uh over 20% reduction in the usage of these homes that have got the energy efficiency already, both in electricity and gas.

Because of privacy, we are not able to see the financials.

Uh, but the residents have told us anecdotally that they are receiving a reduction in their energy bills uh anywhere from 25 to 35 dollars a month, they are seeing, um, but we are tracking the actual usage, and that is been going down, and it's more energy efficient.

I hope so because I need to see some in mind, okay.

So you, Mr.

President, we'll we'll talk about some energy efficiency upgrades for you.

Off the charts.

You know.

It is hard to love on uh DT, I'm telling you.

I mean, those high energy bills are killing us.

Um, the the purchase agreement.

They never signed one, right?

Yes, but they have they did not today.

They did not, right?

So what about DTE?

Have they signed one?

Yeah, through through you, Ms.

President, to member waters, yes, they have signed for Van Dyke Lynch, and uh we are in the process of doing the final T's and C's for Greenfield Park, which was phase two, which was you know a number of months behind.

But yeah, those are fully uh executed and have a uh set rate uh on time on and mating the milestones.

Um there was a gentleman here a little earlier, as you know when it's all said and done, for me, it is about the the people, the residents, and what it is that they feel they can get out of this.

So there was a gentleman who testified sitting right up there.

I don't know if he's still here or not, but he said that he went through all of the procedures and he hasn't heard anything uh after you got his financials, you never got back with him so that he can get what he believed that he was due.

Uh what is going to happen with him?

Yeah.

Through you, Mr.

President, to Member Waters, there's also a resident that's not here today, the member Johnson has also um flagged for us.

There are a few uh who um because of a delay and and and getting started and uh and a delay uh from from Lightstar and their their their implementers uh that the the upgrades are are are woefully behind.

And we uh we we need to um with the transfer we will be able to switch the implementers and you also heard from DTE, both of their implementers were here today, and and SEAL and Walker Miller, and their commitment to this project, and they are Detroit based and and their their um workers are Detroit based, they have a commitment to finishing those energy efficiency.

That is part of the assignment that they will take on, yes, ma'am.

So this gentleman might come back and tell me later that he's been taken care of.

I hope so.

That's what I that's what I need to use.

You know, so um let's go to imminent domain for for a moment.

You know, when this first this project first came to us, um we talked about the fact that if homeowners, especially owner occupied, did not want to sell, they don't want to participate, they didn't have to.

And I need to be reassured that we are not forcing them to do anything that they do not want to do.

Um so last time we spoke, you said that you had not taken any homes from owner-occupied.

Uh what about the other homes that you've used imminent domain on um other private properties that not owner occupied but other properties.

How many?

Uh so the corporation council looks it up uh through you, uh, Mr.

President to Member Waters.

Uh, there were 32 uh owner-occupied homes that all voluntarily sold.

Uh and I know the next question that you asked me, so I'll answer that first.

Uh, is there was a hundred and twenty-five uh thousand dollars on average that they received.

Uh and then uh as Corporation Council repairs to answer, uh, landlords on average receive sixty thousand dollars for their property.

Why do we keep hearing people uh from the community say, well, you you're taking private property.

I mean, I I need to understand that uh because they say it was so much conviction as though it's really happening to people.

So I I mean I I really need to understand that.

Mr.

President, if I may, uh council president uh excuse me, uh Councilperson Waters.

There is no doubt that we used imminent domain on vacant lots.

Okay.

There were some people who owned vacant lots who did not believe that the $2,500 per vacant lot that we were offering was appropriate.

Okay.

They then, and there are a number of them, uh, went to court, and currently uh we have one just compensation case in Wayne County for phase one.

We have four just compensation cases for phase two.

But all of them, member waters, all of them regarding vacant lots.

Now there's no question that a vacant lot is still a valuable piece of property in the city of Detroit, and it is yours.

And there is no question that people have a right under this constitution to own their pro their property privately.

Uh and but in those instances when we could not agree upon a price, we use imminent domain to in fact either force the negotiation or force the sale under the supervision of a court.

But it was only the vacant lot.

How many did you say there were?

There were 270 private vacant lots, and I just want to re uh say to the entire uh honorable body, 1,700 excuse me, 1,072 were in fact publicly owned.

And okay.

I'm still not sure that the number that you've used imminent domain on just yet.

So we don't we we used imminent domain on 270 private vacant lots.

Well that even that's an exaggeration.

Yeah.

There were 270 vacant lots.

We had over someone.

Yeah, no, absolutely.

Um we had uh of the 272 uh we only used imminent domain.

Um there are 11 cases still pending.

One junk one just compensation case, three did deed restriction cases, and one remaining case to clear up title in phase one.

Phase two, four just compensation cases, and two did deed restriction cases.

The vast majority, because I don't have the precise number, the vast majority, all of the all of the uh owners took what was offered, or we were able to negotiate uh a price.

Okay there were minimum number of imminent domains, but whatever imminent domains uh uh councilperson that were used were used on vacant lots.

Okay.

All right.

Because you know, I I certainly didn't want to see it used on owner occupied, that's for sure.

So they were not not on not on PREs.

Now there were uh uh uh uh when there were landlords.

A rental property.

Right, rental property, uh, and we could not uh uh enter into an agreement.

We did use imminent domain.

I don't have the number of landlord uh landlord satisfied with with what you offered?

One forty-one.

There were 41.

Uh but does that mean that uh this is the number of imminent domain cases?

No, and we did volunteer some months.

The vast majority of the the rental properties, again, we were able to negotiate a price.

There were 41 of those, councilperson waters.

Uh I don't have in front of me the number of rental properties where we use uh uh imminent domain.

Uh I don't want to say none, but I I I absolutely can guarantee you is less than 10.

Okay.

And and so, but the rest of them did agree.

The rest of them did agree, yes, ma'am.

And and that's that's always been my concern that we work something out with people that they can actually live with, and of course, never to take owner-occupied properties.

Um because I know how difficult it is for people to be, you know, get to homeownership.

And so uh we have to always be very careful with that.

Um does anybody know how many jobs we're gonna get and how long would they last?

I am curious about that because I want to make sure that people in the community know about these jobs, and we can get Detroit some of these jobs for sure.

Yeah, through through you, Mr.

President, to uh member waters.

You heard from uh at least one uh today uh and uh there was a jobs report uh per yequest that was submitted yesterday.

Uh currently there's just under 230 jobs uh that are created uh from the DTE uh portion of the two uh out of the five uh that are up and running in Van Dyke Lynch and and Greenfield Park that is spread across the implementers to do the energy efficient upgrades and the construction bills.

Uh then uh there is an additional uh at least 50 jobs that will be created uh by uh the assignment for the uh the other three areas because some of the jobs will be transferred over because uh Van Dyke Lynch will be all the energy efficiency upgrades are completed in Van Dyke Lynch, so then those jobs will go to different um uh uh different neighborhoods.

So we're looking at just under 300 jobs.

And just one other final question.

Um are there residents living over there now?

Uh through you, uh Mr.

President Chairman Waters, yes.

And we um have taken a look at their uh property values uh because that was one of the data points that we were asked two years ago when these contracts were here in front of the Sound Rabody, and so we continue to take a look at the um property values, and they have continuously increased greater than the solar neighborhoods uh just as an evaluation uh point that we were asked about two years ago.

We've continuous to monitor that.

And the O'Shea property values are uh 41 percent greater than uh the other five solar neighborhoods okay.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um one second, let's make sure everyone who did not have a question yet had a chance to do so first.

Okay.

Thank you.

Did you start off?

I didn't say any questions.

Okay.

Uh member McCampbell, followed by Member Callaway.

Followed by Member Santiago Romero.

A question on the OSHA community, you say it increased the property value has increased 41 percent.

What was the comparable rate around the neighborhoods around O'Shea?

Do you have those numbers?

Um through Mr.

President to Member Campbell, Mr.

Campbell, um it was a 41% increase over the other five areas.

So um it was a data point two years ago that we were asked to um provide.

So then uh we've continuously just looked to see from a property value um standpoint, OSHA versus the five neighborhoods, and so OSHA is um 51 percent higher than the five solar neighborhoods.

Gotcha.

But I don't have the property values.

Okay, because that would that would be something I would wander around, understanding over the other solar neighborhoods, but sitting around the area that it is, because we also know that home values have gone up across the city, so want to see how that compares to a neighborhood right next to it.

Um I I have a question on the use of the land.

You know, we've had a quite a bit of conversation in committee, so I don't have a lot of questions because I've already asked them.

But the use of the land after the 35 years, because my whole thing was that this is a 35-year deal.

I understand there would be decommission, that's the life of the panels, but for that land, because it has come up what are our plans with that land after the 35 years.

Uh, through the chair, uh to member Campbell.

Um, you know, we don't have plans after 35 years.

That will be entirely up to folks who are here in 35 years to decide what that what that would be in those neighborhoods.

So that'd be entirely up to those neighbors and the residents of the city of Detroit in 35 years.

Appreciate that director.

And I think that's one of the concerns that is coming up, right?

That understanding that we have a need for clean energy in the city, understanding there is a need to get rid of light of property and such.

But as I've heard from the residents on the aspect that sure we'll have a solar farm there there at that time.

Um, but when we're thinking about planning the neighborhoods and such, I think residents also want to know what is the long-term plan for their neighborhoods.

And I know 35 years, I won't be around here either.

Um, but the aspect of when we're thinking about planning and master planning, um, I think residents want to know, especially as we're talking about right across from their homes and such.

So uh that's that's something that I think we really have to have a deeper conversation about because we know in 35 years these solar planels will not be there.

That's one thing that we know.

So I think doing a little bit that we know there will be other decision makers here uh thinking about what can be there and what will be there to increase the quality of life for neighborhoods further.

So I just wanted to make that point there.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

All right, thank you.

Um Member Callaway.

Thank you.

Um, as I indicated earlier, the Ocean Park areas where I grew up, the property value has not gone up.

That's not true.

The property values over there have gone down.

They're mostly renters now.

They used to be homeowners.

Just do a walkthrough.

Do a walk through.

I did um one of my um colleagues was my guest over there about a year or so ago.

Um and um she sat we sat on the bench together.

Some of the promises that DTE made, they never they never kept them.

They said they're gonna have a concert stage there.

That's not there.

They said they're gonna build out the green space, they didn't do that.

There are no flowers over there, there are no trees over there.

Um, and so all of that is just not true.

It's just not true.

Um, and after the solar farm um, after 35 years, the land will be contaminated, and we all know that.

Who's gonna do the cleanup once the solar um panels are removed?

The soil will be contaminated, and we all know that.

So um some of the things you're saying, Ms.

Stein are just absolutely not true.

Um I lived over there uh most of my childhood life, and those homes don't look the same.

They're mostly renters, love renters, love landlords as well and homeowners.

But over there today, we've we have made it worse for the residents, and we know that we have.

So I would invite my colleagues I have as I have been doing for the last 18 months, if you haven't done so, to go over there and look at what DTE has not done.

Um and my colleague, um Gabriela Santiago Romero was the one sitting on the bench with me, and we looked out and we had some really good conversations, and um I was a no then, I'm a no now because it has not increased the property value of any house over there.

There's a lot of um blight, there's a lot of um homes that are vacant, falling apart.

There's um still a lot of crime in the area.

That's 4827, and um you tore down, they tore down the rec center, didn't replace it.

You left them one tire swing, two regular swings, and two benches, and that's all that DTE did.

They did not keep their end of the bargain.

And that this happened before I got on the council.

But we need to go back and look at what DTE actually promised and see if they kept those promises, and that will um guide us in terms of the promises that they're now making um today.

But they don't keep their promises, and a lot of people think that their utility bills are gonna go down only if you got some upgrades to your home.

Um the solar energy is bypassing the neighborhoods and only coming down to down here to um buildings.

That's where the solar energy is being directed.

It's not going into the neighborhoods, and people still believe it's going into the neighborhoods.

The solar power is bypassing your neighborhood and coming downtown to um uh provide power to about 21 between 21 and 27.

It's been a minute since I've looked at the numbers between 21 and 27 buildings, and I would love to know where those buildings are, but it's bypassing the neighborhoods where the solar farms are actually located.

That's that's that's that's my memory, not unless it's changed.

Um so to say that the property values have gone up, they have not.

I don't know the last time you were over there.

Um, but I'm over there quite frequently.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Uh member Santiago Romero.

Oh, thank you, Mr.

President.

I just want to, for the record, say that I do support solar.

Um I support good union jobs, and I have already supported this project.

Um that is before these amendments, including DTE as the main entity to build this out.

Um, quite frankly, I I believe that DTE should be building solar, that they should be providing good jobs, and that they should pay for it themselves.

Um, quite frankly, it is a hard uh thing to ask us to pay for this um for a company that has stockholders that collect our money that could very much invest it back into these into this infrastructure.

Um so this time around I will be a no for these projects, unfortunately.

Again, as someone that supports solar, um I can't also support a company that also charges me an incredible amounts of uh money each month as it does for the rest of our residents.

Um I think we should address that issue, DTE being a monopoly, um, quite frankly, having control of the grid and of this infrastructure and of this capacity, um, and I will not be able to support it.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

Now, this is the moment that you all talked to us about the potential of contaminated soil.

Um I know that was one of the prospects that was raised when these contracts came to us in the first time around, and many of the um the conversations that were had in the community, they were raised as well, and I heard something that was different.

Now I haven't heard you refute that at all with any information or evidence.

So uh this is the time to do so if that is the case.

Thank you, Mr.

President, for that.

Um I again I would like our subject matter expert on clean energy and our external counsel, Valerie Brader, to talk about um the health uh benefits uh from solar and then also to um uh uh exactly address that claim.

And again, uh you can state where you're from so that folks know you are you from DTE or are you from any other entity like this?

So please please state where you're from and sorry, I'm Dallary Brader.

Sorry, I'm Valerie Brader.

I'm external legal counsel to the city, and I never represent DTE, I always represent entities that are in negotiations if there is going to be a DTE part.

So I don't represent DTE ever.

In terms of the question regarding soil contamination, the Department of Energy has done tests where they take solar panels, kind of crush them until it's just run water through and then test for heavy metal contamination or things like that without finding any increases.

So the concerns regarding soil contamination, I think are unlikely to occur.

I I think if anything, you're you would have less contamination from a solar panel than from whatever else is gonna would sit out there on a roof or that kind of thing.

So I don't think you're gonna have a problem of being unable to use the property due to having solar there, the tests that have been done by governments trying to see if they would find contamination, have not.

Um I'm sorry, was there another item that you wanted to?

That was that was that was my my question.

Oh, the electricity, I'm sorry.

Talk about it.

No, no, no, it's the contamination.

Sorry, Mr.

President.

Yeah, just sticking on contamination.

That's the the main thing we're talking about.

I mean, especially now with us having contracts for contaminated soil.

I mean, that's on a lot of people's minds at this moment to make sure that we don't you know double down on that concern, if you will.

Um yeah, again, uh there the evidence that has been done to see if solar panels would end up creating a contamination, have not found that.

And when they have done very extensive testing, that if you were going to see something, it would be coming out of that.

Um again, just you know, my personal, I would not there are things that you might want to be concerned about, you know, creating contamination.

This is not one of them.

Okay.

And then my other question, and I'm gonna get to you, uh Corporation Council.

I know we've been talking about the O'Shea uh installation, and I believe that was installed.

Was that during the Kilpatrick administration?

2017.

2017.

Okay.

So in terms of the um agreements that was made that were made, uh, how dissimilar or similar to that particular uh installation are we talking about in comparison to what we have before us today?

To you, Mr.

President.

Um two separate different uh arrangements.

Uh OSHA came uh as with the city was coming out of bankruptcy, it was a lease uh to DTE for this uh property.

Um they uh develop it, it's their project, it's it's it's their uh uh agreement to do so.

Uh and um as we've been very open and transparent about here two years ago when the contracts were up, a lot of lessons learned.

Uh they were the first neighborhood uh that Mayor Duggan went to uh to hear about how uh it went during the development and how it was going.

Uh and um we uh learned a lot about the energy efficiency upgrades uh that uh happened just on a very small scale, but should have been in a larger scale.

And then also the um development uh around for the designs, the the fencing, the the plantings, uh, and that really informed what this contract, what these contracts for the solar neighborhood initiative is.

The neighbors designed the uh the areas uh both for solar and then the energy efficiency upgrades, and then the neighbors chose what the fence would look like, what the uh designs will be uh both around the fence and inside uh in in a lot of those lessons learned and mistakes that were made in O'Shea, then informed uh the current contracts.

Thank you.

Uh the recenter was closed down during that administration.

That's the difference.

Uh Corporation Council, I know you had any uh something you wanted to add?

I did, sir.

Uh if you look at section 1.5 of the contract, uh it says directly DTE, Councilmember McCampbell shall decommission the solar project in accordance with this contract, the obligations contained in this section 1.5 shall survive the expiration or early termination of the lease.

It then Mr.

President goes on to say, DTE shall indemnify, defend with counsel acceptable to the city and a DTE sole cost, and hold City Detroit harmless from and against all losses, liabilities, obligations, penalties, claims, so on and so forth, in connection with or arising out of in whole or in part, whether directly or indirectly, the transportation treatment, storage disposal, production and manufacture or use or the actual or threatened escape, dispersal, seepage, migration, emission of any hazardous subjects substances by DTE, its agents or employees, or contractors from or at the solar project.

So I think the two things uh through uh the council president to councilperson McCampbell, uh DTE at the end of the 35 years will be responsible for the decommissioning, DTE per the contract.

If there is any hazardous waste, which as Valer Brader indicated, we expect not.

But if there is any, DTE has committed through the contract to indemnify for the city and to cover all of those costs.

Okay.

Have we been able to locate any of those documents yet that talked about the um Eagle Creek?

Uh to you, Mr.

President.

Uh yes.

OCP has been listening.

Uh they have not joined as a panelist because we weren't sure how this discussion was going.

Uh they have confirmed and they they sent it um through to the law department uh that uh it was clear in the bid documents that Eagle Creek was uh the owner of uh Lightstar when they uh put in their bids and were selected as a vendor.

And so in OCP's write-up, it is included in that.

Uh and they were uh clear and transparent about that that that Eagle Creek was their owner.

So so the to City Council, though, that's what I'm saying.

Any of the documents that were sent to us.

You know, we we vote on.

Uh it's my understanding, but again, OCP could uh speak to that directly.

It's my understanding as part of the write-up that they uh submit, uh that was included with the bid documents that they uh had.

And if I I'm not sure if it was in the TED report or it gets attached to the TEDA report, but OCP is the one that uh put together those bid evaluations and the um recommendations of the two vendors.

Okay.

So I do have to ask, though, with you know all the conversation around why was that the only place and only time that we may be able to find that?

Because I know I don't recall, again, we've had numerous conversations in the past about it as well, uh, Ms.

Stein, uh, and others.

And you know, again, I'm not saying that my vote would have changed, but uh uh I always like to vote based upon having as much information as possible.

And you know, to hear that now is just done feel good, uh, especially when we've had other conversations in the past about A through Z, whether it's questions I bring up or it's uh items that you all are presenting.

That one never came up in the conversation.

Just to at least have it as part of the full understanding of what we're working with in front of us.

Again, I'm gonna change my vote, but it's always good to have as much information as possible.

Uh through the chair, uh Mr.

President, I appreciate that very much.

I I expect uh and I take responsibility.

Uh we were aware of the like I said, of the affiliation between Lightstar and Eagle Creek.

Uh I suppose that it was our collective calculation.

You're absolutely 100 percent correct that we should have said that Lightstar is a subsidiary organization of Eagle Creek who is in the business of renewable energy.

They were a separate company, they had their own separate track record.

That's what we were focused on.

Uh but at the end of the day, Mr.

President, the um uh LightStar was the entity that was the one presenting us uh the proposal.

Uh so again, you're 100 percent correct.

Uh we should have been uh more vigorous with our presentation as the affiliation between Eagle Creek and LightStar.

But again, Lifestar was then uh a it was a subsidiary, I don't want to say it was a separate company, but a subsidiary capable of signing its own contract.

Eagle Creek was never on any of the contracts that we signed.

Uh and so uh uh that's the only explanation I can give you.

Okay.

Colleagues, any additional uh member McCampbell?

Through the chair through the chair.

I hear a voice.

Yes.

Uh Graham Anderson Law Department.

One thing that has just been distributed to this body is Lightstar's initial bid, which, as you will note from the date, is February 23rd, 2024.

And then if you turn to the second page, it makes very clear that Eagle Crust is uh controlling LLC.

So I go back to make that clear.

I appreciate that, but we we we already this was already notified.

What I'm saying is just in the conversation, the presentations, the numerous discussions, it was not mentioned.

Absolutely, yes, is in a document that we have here in front of us.

Thank you for further recognizing that.

So, yes, sir.

Thank you, Council President.

All right, member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um I have a one more question.

Thinking about you know how the city is protected under the proposed contract.

Is there a termination for convenience on the city side or DTE side?

It's a termination convenience, uh, council person McCameron, sorry, through the president.

Uh we can terminate any time that we want for convenience.

That's absolutely correct.

Okay, what about DTE?

DTE has a contractual obligation to uh uh continue the project.

Okay.

All right.

Um, and then I'll just say I understand the aspect around lessons learned around O'Shea to be the person that represents that area right now.

Um as my colleague share, um, member Calloway, it has been woefully inadequate for that project.

Um, and understanding that with the lessons learned and what we're putting in this contract right now, I would still have expected for DTE to be better folks in keeping up that area and doing what's right by residents in that area.

Um, so that I'm carrying that with me as a member that represents that area right now.

Uh and just around on the overall aspect as I've shared in committee with this project, the cost of this project is alarming to me.

Um, and also the aspect around the jobs.

I understand, as mentioned, I'm all about I push union jobs and and skill trades all the time.

But to see the numbers, especially even right now where we are, well, the Detroiters on this project is very low.

Um, even with the the project that has been for year a couple years now.

So that's alarming to me.

Um, even with as we know with this council, we always push at least 51% of the jobs to be Detroiters.

Um, and I understand the need around clean energy.

I'm a huge proponent around clean energy.

I I think we have to get to 100% renewable, but I'm not sure that this is the way to do so.

And I'm not sure in the way that we are asking our tax dollars to go to this on top of the multiple increases that our residents have faced on top of, as I mentioned, even the opt-in program around my green for an investor-owned utility.

Um, I'm just not uh comfortable with that as well.

And and as we think about and I understand the need to make our residents owe that we made that promise to them, I just think we can do it or should have done in a different way.

Even on the timeline of things have been, we knew as it seems that we knew that lifestyle was on shaky ground.

Um we should have had contingency plans from that point instead of us getting to a point now where we are a couple weeks out from a deadline of tax credits that we can't even open this up to other folks.

So those are the reasons why um it's unfortunate because I do think we we absolutely need much renewable energy in the city.

Um, but it's unfortunate that I cannot support these.

So thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Okay, colleagues, let's start to bring this to a close because we did have a number of rounds of questions being asked.

Uh right now we have member Miller, who else is in the queue, pro Tim Young, Member Callaway, said it?

Thank you.

All right, those are the last three speakers.

Through the chair, I have heard uh large discussion on why we're here today, and I must start off by saying in district five, we have no solar panel issues, but I am conscious that other districts that's represented here have these initiatives in their area, and I sympathize with you, but I must say that in District 5, I am constantly for the last few months been asked to find solutions for bad deals.

I have so many bad deals going on in district five that it just troubles me every single day, like Herman Kiefer, another bad deal.

The Lee Plaza, another bad deal.

And now I'm dealing with a deal that's does not that I did not represent, but I have a say in.

In District 5, I have a lot of solar advocates for renewable energy, the green initiatives, the task force, but I have many more residents that despise DTE.

It's a grave hatred for DTE.

And as I stand before my residents tonight at our at my meeting, I have to answer to them.

I would have to come up with the a reason why I voted the way that I did today.

I saw the trades come in today.

I am an advocate for trades, and we talked about jobs.

But are we talking about jobs for six months?

Or transitioned?

Well, they go two years, three years, four years while the effects of our community suffer for decades to come.

It's like data centers.

Everybody wants you to vote for jobs, but the effects on the environment and the water will last decades, if not centuries.

So how do you make a decision?

Why I'm not, I am not against rescuing a project if residents will benefit.

But I am against asking Detroiters to accept a quick fix.

I must say I cannot simply ignore the history because this project is troubled.

The history is that DTE do not lower bills.

And no matter how many incentives these projects bring, residents want to see lower bills.

Everybody don't care about a green initiative.

Everybody did not care about renewable energy.

They care about their bill, especially in the winter time.

And mine's usually run about $1,200.

DTE came from my neighborhood and took out every single one of our historical lamps, which left our neighborhood dark without a care in the world.

But when we look at the tax incentives that they receive, we look at what they do not give back to the neighborhoods, except on the philanthropic level, which I admire, then what they do.

But overall, residents do not see the wealth transferred to our neighborhoods.

And because of our past administration, who did not have a love for our neighborhoods, because that's why they look the way they do, except for downtown.

Otherwise, we fail.

We risk being sued and we've been and we risk being made a fool of again and again for our residents that call in every single day that talk about the dishonesty and the trust.

Do we leave them hanging?

Or do we say what we're going to do in spite of it being DTE?

So this is not the first time this body has been rushed with an instant notification of a vote.

It seemed to be actually what goes on here previously before I even got here.

But today we have to make a decision.

So because I refuse to keep my hair held up, and I walk out the door and I look at residents who do need those amenities, who's been promised those amenities, who's actually relocated and moved and sold property for these amenities.

We cannot turn our back on them.

We cannot say screw you because we made a mistake, but we have to again cover for the poor decisions that we made.

So in closing, I will say to my residents in District 5, this does not are admittedly affect us.

I will have to vote to support those residents because they were promised by the city of Detroit, whom I serve.

And I would like to make good on those promises.

And we hope in the near future that we will be honest, forthcoming, and not always take advice of the experts.

Because the experts seem to lead us down the wrong way.

We have to be stewards over our own decisions to make our own investigations so we can make thorough decisions.

And I commend my colleague, Member Callaway.

It's hard to stand alone.

It's hard to make the hard choices.

And every time I make a vote, it will be that way and that way only.

And I do have no problem with holding up a vote.

You know, I will stop a vote in a minute and come back and say, listen, this, but we can't do this today because my colleagues are tired of me already doing that so many times.

So I'm gonna vote today, and I support uh chair moving forward with the project, and I just hope everyone truly understands my statement today.

And I'm gonna ask one thing, one thing that Joan Ward do not attack me the day of my meeting, because she's already here today, and that she please understands and I and I truly respect you and all that you have to say when you represent District 5.

Thank you for your knowledge.

You are the most transparent person that I know, and I and I and I whether you know it or not, I can respect your opinion.

So I look forward to seeing you this evening.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Member Callaway.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, and um I did look up some information about what happens to the soil when solar panels are removed.

They leave behind heavy heavy, heavy metals and plastics, which contaminate the soil.

Um, I can send you the article, ma'am, um, to the person who made the statement.

It does contaminate the soil, ma'am with heavy metals and plastics, and anything else that was used to install those panels is left in our soil.

And so I don't know who's responsible for cleaning up the sites after the after 35 years.

I don't know whose responsibility that will be.

DTE asked for 474 million dollar rate hike while not paying federal income taxes for the last decade.

DTE paid no federal income taxes for the 12th consecutive year.

And that amounts to almost $1.5 billion in DTE, who's always before the Commission and Lansing for a rate hike, which they get typically that I oppose every time by making my statement known by attending those meetings.

But they are notorious for cutting off folks' energy in this city.

And that's shameful.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

A final member of council before we go move forward with the vote.

Thank you, uh, Mr.

President.

I appreciate that.

And thank you, everybody, for being here on this long day.

I wish I didn't eat that Chipotle because I have the itis right now.

Um, but I just wanted to just ask a couple questions really quickly.

One, I wanted to ask the question involving um agro voltaics.

I just wanted to know one, do you have an overall strategy of how much this is going to reduce food insecurity in the city of Detroit?

I know this is a significant issue that we have, and I believe that this is an opportunity not just for people to be able to buy fresh food, fresh food and fruits in areas that don't have that, but is also an opportunity for you to be able to deliver this in terms of certain neighborhoods that otherwise would not receive this.

Use technology to be able to be able to drop this off in certain places like drones and other things that otherwise will not have this.

And so can you just kind of kind of walk with me through that plan of farms and through that plan of what you plan on doing, how you plan on combating food insecurity with this program absolutely through cheer.

Um my pleasure because that is my love and passion is increasing uh security for our residents.

Um I uh uh believe that um the um the deal that we created between the farmers uh that were working with Light Star and DTE is gonna significantly increase uh production for those farmers.

So um 5,000 per acre that they were working, each farm is gonna get you know a little bit over 10K, 15K to expand their operations, um, the establishment of those um farm stands within those neighborhoods paired with uh the mayor's new initiative, the senior food program.

Uh this is something that I think um is gonna do you know our city a great uh great service.

And so um I'm confident that that this is a good negotiation that has been strict between the urban farmers.

So I appreciate the question.

No, I appreciate that too.

Um another question I had was about okay, so let's have a little bit of context here.

This started because we tore down Gitra, right?

And when we tore down Ghidra, we need to be able to replace the energy that it had.

And so they decided to be able to build solar farms.

And one of the reasons, as explained to me, is that they decided to build solar farms because not in terms of the initial implementation, but in the long term, the costs were going to be cheaper.

Now, is it true that we have saved because we've the only option other than solar farms was to pipe it in.

So you were gonna go into from the suburbs, you're gonna do the energy, you were gonna pipe it in.

And you could do that and it'd be cheaper because the infrastructure is already set up, but the long-term costs are gonna be there.

So that was the difference.

It was kind of the um the CapEx or your capital expenditures were going to be more expensive for this, but your operating um expenditures are gonna be cheaper over long term.

And it was vice versa, if you piped it in.

And it said about six point six million dollars gross.

Is that correct?

Uh uh through you, Mr.

President, to uh President Pro Tem uh Young.

We we talked about this two years ago.

It is that we uh the city did take uh Miskersky offline, they have not torn it down, uh but there uh it is Which would cost six hundred and thirty million dollars to put back on, by the way, Mystersky, correct?

Uh yeah, that's the same.

Yes, if we if we chose that for for but that would be coal uh a plant, and so from a health benefit standpoint, uh the city is going in a different direction by uh taking that offline, taking the incinerator offline as well in recent years, and developing clean energy here locally uh to the source and making the in the infrastructure improvements to develop that solar in the neighborhood, so that would also um strengthen the grid resilience.

Okay, so this is why this is important.

Because the $6.6 billion with that amount, if we had home repair grants up to $25,000 per home, you could buy $24, $264 homes estimate in terms of home repairs.

You can invest if for 2500 per youth through GDYT employer sponsorship, 2,640 youth jobs.

Trees at Tree Equity Investment, about 400 per tree from 30 million to 75,000 trees, about 16,500 trees.

Your mid-block street lights for 3,333 per light, you can repair about 1,980.

For your DPD average budgeted position equivalent, about 130,000, you can put you can hire about 51 people or 51 positions.

For your DFD average budgeted position equivalent, about 133,000 using fiscal year 2027 DFD budget employees, you get higher about 50 positions.

All right.

Your D dot average budgeted position equivalent.

174,000 using fiscal year 26 D dot budget employees.

That's 38 positions.

That fun that type of service fundamentally can make the city better.

And my the problem that I have with these discussions is that, and I'm not saying that they're not legitimate in terms of the issues and the complaints.

We have to be able to deal with that.

This is a real issue.

Environmental concerns are a real issue.

And I and I also think that we need to use, you know, more um, you know, better metrics in terms of power use effectiveness, water use effectiveness, carbon use effectiveness, um, carbon capture, you know what I'm saying?

These are things that we need to use in general anyway.

You know what I'm saying?

That we should be doing with whether we support projects or not, regardless, we gotta do a better job of that in the 21st century.

But we need to start emphasizing more what this money can be used and actually help the residents.

Um, I also just wanted to ask um a last question.

Uh, I just want to know in these neighborhoods, particularly.

Well, I got two questions, one more.

The one more uh is particularly in these neighborhoods.

Yeah, yeah, no, no, briefly.

No, I probably president brief.

Thank you for your patience.

You're the greatest.

Uh I I I I just wanted to say, just also really briefly.

Do we have an estimate of how much property values have increased with these investments?

And what has this contributed to the overall $4 billion in property value that this city's had in increases?

Uh yeah, through uh council.

I did answer this.

Scribble that one down.

What was that second question?

Because we want to get them both in.

No, that was that was all one question.

So I mean, you want me to hear what the oh oh uh we try to do that.

Oh, you heard me a lot.

We're trying to land the plane.

We try to do that.

Okay, this is this is um this is you don't you know what I forgot my other question, so go ahead.

This is this is hurry up often so I wasn't used to that.

Sorry, go ahead.

Uh yeah, through council president pro temp uh young.

Uh so we did talk about this uh before, so we are tracking the property values.

Did you remember?

You want to tell you when I spit it out?

No, no, no, no, no.

Go ahead.

No, no, I'm not talking to you.

You won't forget, okay.

Don't think about something else.

Go ahead.

All right, excellent.

So we are tracking the property values, and yes, the whole city has had increased property values.

Uh and the mayor did make that announcement uh a few weeks ago.

So we are tracking those.

We're tracking the neighborhoods that do surround the solar developments, and we will continue um to monitor that.

Uh and and it's too early on the solar uh areas because we we just started uh uh particularly Van Dyklynch, so we we will continue to uh monitor that and look and and communicate that to the city council.

Yeah, I appreciate that.

Um I do remember my final question.

Um if I can't do this, I understand, but I understand that somebody from DTE is actually here.

Yes.

Did you want to like speak at all?

You you've been mentioned quite a bit.

And so I want to know did you want to have anything you wanted to say at all to the issues of the question?

Oh, okay.

I must have missed it on my runs.

Go ahead.

I'm sorry.

Um through the chair.

Briefly president.

Yeah, yeah.

Um council member, thank you very much.

Um, it's an honor to be here.

Uh it's an honor to have the opportunity to develop the two projects that DT has.

Uh it'd be an honor to develop uh the balance of the portfolio projects.

Um simply put, we're here to fulfill a commitment that was made to our customers, and we stand ready to serve.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

I know I did close out.

I'm done.

Thank you, President.

Uh did raise his hand.

He did not have an opportunity to ask a question, he had to step out for a minute.

Um would be our last individual asking questions before we move forward.

Mr.

Chair, thank you very much.

And I just want to make a statement.

I want to say number one, thank you to the Green Task Force members who have made it our business to support what we stand for.

I've taken over the Green Task Force 12 years ago when we have stood solidly in line with sustainability and move the city of Detroit forward when it comes to sustainable energy.

And my members who are advocates, business owners, and practitioners have clearly said this is the proper project.

It is a sport to make fun of and berate DTE, of which I participated in.

They have a terrible reputation and it's earned.

But in this situation, they are doing something that is new to them.

The language and the culture of their renewable energy department helped change my thought process around DTE energy.

Having conversations with them about what this project means and how it will impact the residents of Detroit is huge.

And I just want to acknowledge those who have stood up when it's been unpopular to say yes, we are going to become the best, greatest green city on the planet.

We continue to strive for that.

Green Task Force has had five ordinances passed by this body to support sustainability.

We've helped establish the Office of Sustainability.

Huge advocates.

We've helped to grow that office as well.

Do not allow perfect to become the enemy of the good.

This is really not about DTE.

This is about supporting the residents of the city of Detroit and making their lives better.

When you think about someone's home that was worth $10,000, that has received $40,000 in improvements, they are going to see their quality of life improved.

When you know people who have their homes purchased within this footprint and will now be living in other areas of the city of Detroit, they've had a life-changing investment in their lives.

When young ladies can now go to school without having to worry about the nefarious nature of men on drugs looking for prostitution, when you don't have a homeowner, single mother of two children, with a man reaching through looking for the brothel right down the street, when you don't have to worry about finding a dead body on your lawn that you found three years ago because you were now moved to a more stable neighborhood when that brothel down the street is no longer there because we are removing blight and making a hundred and thirty-five million dollar investment in our neighborhoods.

That's what this results in.

That's what we're doing today.

And I stood with it in the beginning, I stand with it now, and I'm prepared to vote yes on this proposal before us.

And with that, Mr.

Chair, I call the question and move to end debate.

That's a motion to end debate.

Any objections?

Hearing none, then action shall be taken.

Uh member McCamball.

Just uh Mr.

Chair, there wasn't a motion to approve it's just discussion.

Uh yeah, we're just ending this debate discussion period.

Member McCampbell, is there a motion for line items 4.1 and 4.2?

Motion to approve.

So motion to approve line items 4.1 and 4.2, colleagues.

Are there any objections?

Objection.

Councilmember Callaway on line item 4.1 and 4.2.

Objection McCampal on both idles, please.

Objection member Santiago for Maryland 4.1 and 5 and 4.2.

All right.

Madam Clerk.

Through the chair, that is three nays from per Callaway.

Councilmember Callaway, excuse me.

Councilmember McCampbell and Councilmember Santiago Romero.

So that motion passes.

Thank you.

Items 4.1 and 4.2 shall be approved.

Is there a motion to uh receive and file line item 4.3?

Motion.

There's a motion to receive and file line item 4.3.

Any objections?

Hearing none, then action shall be taken.

All right.

Thank you so much.

Colleagues, seeing that there's no further business to come before this body, this meeting shall stand adjourned.