Now, I'd like to call to order the special session regarding the...
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 ending.
by Byron Osborne, followed by Event Williams.
Mr. Smith?
Hello.
My five year IBEW member and a apprentice currently working at the castle solar farm.
I think it's been speaking of support of it, and I lift the panels up.
by torque down, I connect in jumpers.
And 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 Detroit,
but it's also good for supporting the entire sort
of electrician trade as a good foundation point.
I think 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, Rondo Williams.
Good afternoon, council.
Byron Osborne District five 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,
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.
I don't have the numbers of Detroiters that did respond, but
knowing that meetings that we've gone to in the interest is at an odd time high.
I'm 100% 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, skillset, 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 going to take them through Castle.
So we've got Motor City Electric, one of our largest employers in Detroit based business right over on Lynch Road.
They're involved heavily in this project, so of course, local 58 is speaking in support of moving this agreement over to DTE.
Thank you.
Our next speaker, Event Williams, followed by Ronda Williams, followed by Joanne Ward.
Thank you for having me here today.
And here in the comments throughout the room, it really does heartens 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 crimes of corporate America to stand their homes.
Why hasn't there been any increase in evaluation?
Our home owners race are through the roof, and we're going to really have a hard time getting trying to get the homes insured with a solar panel farm.
not valuable 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 going to drop the evaluation from anywhere from 10 to 40%. So therefore,
and the information is not going out to the public.
And then we have to sit up here and say,
then you change the deep restriction.
Deep restrictions are 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 whole.
The next speaker, Juan de Williams, followed by Joanne Rorick, and our final in-person speaker, Darren McCleskey, Ms. Williams.
So thank you for having us here.
My family and I has lived in the Greenfield Park area, District 3 since 1971.
one. 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 residents,
its long-term residents. Instead we are seeing fields being knocked down. Now there's been
vacant homes, there's been burned down homes, there's been creating that blight, and we
You know that the city could have cleaned those things up.
But now with this initiative, you are a land down land, but now you are taken away
the actual pre of a proper zoning for that area and turn it into a 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 is reaching certain areas.
And I feel like this has just been a very hostile situation. Our family is being sued. We have not gotten proper notification.
There was a hearing that was on June 15th that 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 has been very stressful and we want to see this done properly.
Thank you, Ms. Williams.
Thank you.
Next speaker, Joanne Woolworth, followed by Darren McCleskey, who will be our final speaker in person.
This is Woolworth.
Good afternoon, everyone.
I brought for you a copy of a basically a press release from the Department of Justice,
this, how in February of 2026, there was a court ordered civil penalty of $100 million
against DTE, Energy Company, and some city areas for violation of the Clean Air Act.
And you were just saying about the switch-up of the poor authority, whatever, Mr. Whitaker
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, et cetera, et cetera.
Also, there's no solar plans in the master plan, the current master plan, the delayed
master plan, but you're shoving it out in many ways, not everybody.
Diane van Buren in the Green Energy Task Force did a video with Ms. 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 what we don't know are the fire risks 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.
And the New York Times today said people are suffering toxic diesma.
So everybody, yes, Ms. Burns, 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 charter.
I'm going to speak to you, I'm a clesky in person.
What was your name?
Yeah, afternoon, again, council.
I'm going to summarize this project very quickly.
You guys were offered renewable energy tax credits.
They became transferable with the Biden administration.
Your predecessor, Doug, and 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. Eski, that power plant still stands.
It's never been answered.
Where is the $10 million?
Why is it not remediated?
You're reusing the money.
You're misplacing it.
How can we convince the neighbors?
Offer the 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 the fair russian 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 would be jobs there'd be all the benefits fighting global
warming you didn't have to take private property so much transition to our
online callers was our first callers, sir.
First caller is going to be the dot face signal.
All right. Caller, the floor is yours.
You have a minute, 30, general public comment.
I want to say I appreciate you calling me young
because I feel like you knew you were throwing me a bond earlier
when you said, when you spoke about the moral and Bible
islands, I just made a call and I got more information
about the 15 year old deal that the marines have a Bible island.
How do you have them pay taxes and they have 100 year deal
for land if 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
When it comes down to no energy, we definitely need that we definitely need to
Make sure we're getting our green footprint as big as we can get but we don't need to be at the expensive residence
We don't need to take private land. We could have put this on top of city on buildings
We could have put this in vast acres of city on land that would not disturb people that would have not used eminent domain
Also, we have, I'm going to call it the exhumation of faking lots that have contaminated dirt right across the street from the Van Dyke lunch solar project on Elgin Street and Van Dyke, which is right by kids.
So they not only do they have to continue with the solar farms looking outside when they go, I've seen them happen, I've seen some people over having a party, they had a party outside of solar farms.
also they have contaminated dirt. So they have two environmental hazards. Also these
use restrictions are going to be their favorite. The zoning is forever change. I think that's
really ridiculous. Why you change the zoning forever and ever and ever for this deal that can
be pulled out on the other end from the developers from DTE, but we have no recourse that they do.
This is a terrible deal and the way it is done and wasting a lot of city assets and city phones 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 wanted to be William M. Davis. William M. Davis. The floor is yours minute 30 general public comment.
Good afternoon, copy her. Yes, sir.
Okay, and generally I am a various general advocate for renewable energy. I think that the city should be doing more wind. I know there are thermal and all sorts of other energy that does not pollute.
I'm also think 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 relates to enemy domain about taking people's property and taking out given the restrictions on their property to date for future use.
I think we need to be fairly 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 being used, you know,
the improvements to people's homes should not just be in that general area, but improvements should be citywide.
The city funds are doing this.
You know, so far too often you might do a project and whatever district,
But they need to be doing stuff to help more city trade residents than what's going on now. Thank you. Thank you.
Next caller please.
Next caller Sandra Turner handy.
Sandra Turner handy the floor is yours.
I'm in the 30 general public comment.
Good afternoon everyone.
As the executive director of the Denver neighborhood alliance.
I am in support of transferring the contact over on the solar, on solar.
Due to the fact I'm here in the Houston-Widdy 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 toward solar is one of the best things we could do because it helps to reduce
health disparities from greenhouse gases.
It moves us into renewable energy that is so needed.
I worked in the environmental field for over 15 years and have advocated it for more
renewable energy in this 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 going to 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.
Caller, please. Our next callers want to be Mr. Foster. Mr. Foster, the floor is yours. You have a minute, 30, general, public comment. Good afternoon, through the council body. Just a few things. I want to bring to your attention. A, the number of scandals that were spending a ball with DT the last four or five years. We talking about a private jet. We talking about to have one billion dollars in profits and paid no federal income tax.
We talked about the Zug Island pollution five for a hundred million dollars. We talked about dark money through
Now profit to overturn the governor's 2020 emergency powers, right? These are not the type of people to have our community in the best
Entrance here will be as vulnerable as they are right now to be getting no advocate for somebody that's given a
$1,500 and home repairs. It's what one of the people have articulated no more than $1,500
out right and so we have to do a better job and educate in our community as far as education
goes and politics as far as these go every time this city got in the crunch they called
on Republicans when we talk about the bankruptcy you want a guy we public in Kevin or the comment
as emergency manager when we talked about crime you want to 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. We want our community to benefit from every
dime, every decision, every dollar that comes into the city moving forward.
Next caller please.
Next up is owner pop them.
All right, caller of the floor's yours. You have two, excuse me, a minute 30, general public comment.
Caller, are you there?
Yes, through the chair, maybe hurt.
Yes, ma'am.
Good afternoon.
You've heard Mr. Foster just then tell you that we should be involved in everything.
This concert, what you have before us is fraudulent.
First of all, light 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
common daring, seizing homes.
And this amended cost of energy, $285 per megawatt hours.
If you understood what that means,
you'll know that we could never produce that kind.
This is not a sunny state.
It is a state that is gloomy.
It is one of the gloomy estates in the nation.
And when you make people desperate,
desperate because you have been misappropriating C, D, B, G funds, R for 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
And the contract, as it stands in front of us, is illegal.
Lightstar has pulled out since last year.
They should, their name should not even be on this docket.
Thank you.
Let's call the police.
Our final callers want 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 Dara?
OK, I'm here.
I'm here.
All right, I tried to get on public comment and I guess you don't really want to hear us.
I had so many times over three where your screen disappeared or the sound disappeared
and then it would say the host will 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 where I could see the hand to raise? Well, 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 always respond to the emails. But it's really kind of, I guess I'm sending in another one.
I think we need to have public comment before he vote in the beginning of the meeting. And by the way,
a lot of people used to have it. I don't know why you have to cut off public comment. Other
than half people, if 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 not put a deadline on it and make a comment after you vote so we can tell you
how aren't don't like what you did but seriously that's the case and it's
disgusting it really.
All right it 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 on to public
the public record for review.
All right, Madam Clerk, from the Office of Contracting and Precurement.
Contract number 6-00943-A1, 100% city funding to amend terms for phase two solar,
photolyphic 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 can we also move 4.2 as well together?
4.2 contract number 6-0-0-6-3-4-3-A-1, 100% city funding to amend terms, 4-phase-1 solar
for the prolific energy development on city-owned property in the state fair and grassed
family.
Thank you.
Neighborhoods?
All
right.
Member McCamble, line items 4.1 and 4.2, sir.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Discussion?
A lot of them is 4.2.
No, he can do the discussion first, if he prefers.
Line item 4.1 and 4.2 for discussion.
Member McCamble.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just want to tell about four discussions, because I know this is our first time.
or in this special session to discuss this.
So I want to open up for discussion for our colleagues.
I want to bring forward the individuals who are joining us as well have information I believe we have.
Mr. Shastain, Mr. Forreston, this is Valerie Brader I believe it is.
And Sarah Patton, as well as Corporate Council,
Corporation Council Mallet, kind of ran Mallet.
I'm sorry. Did I miss a hand? Who was the hand? I wanted to discuss.
I have questions.
Member Miller.
Through the chair, thank you for joining us. I will 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 DT 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 do today for the record and floor yours.
Absolutely.
Through you, Mr. President, to Member Miller, Tricia Stein, I am Senior Director of Strategic
initiatives for Mayor Sheffield. I'm also joined by my colleagues today who we will in response
to Member Miller's question respond. We've got about a few slides. We won't go through the
whole deck, but if Sarah Patton Solar Project Manager could share just the first slide really
is to show you how we got here. So it is the five solar neighborhoods three years ago. Mayor Duggan
put a call out to the city and in response to the Biden administration offering up tax credits
to develop renewable energy at a way that made them financially viable. Five neighborhoods
are what is shown up there. This is in response. A lot of them you heard from today,
they applied to host solar in their neighborhood. In the dark shaded areas here,
represent 165 acres that will be developed into solar arrays.
Most of those areas were vacant, had one house on a block, and were subject to a lot of light and illegal dumping.
Then the neighbors, when they applied, they also developed the impact area.
And that is the red, just kick it back, 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 homes and when they applied, part
of the development would be energy efficiency upgrades that the developers would deliver
as part of hosting solar.
And so there's 200 over 200 homes in those impact areas across these five neighborhoods
that would receive anywhere in the solar portion $15,000 to $25,000 of energy efficiency upgrades.
That was also met with DTE's energy efficiency program that they administer.
And every home was able to receive $35,000 worth of benefits.
And so you've heard from a lot of them today and were halfway through that project.
project. So 111 homes. Yes, ma'am.
At that part. I mean, the part about the light star failing. Yes, that's what I mean.
I mean, if you just want to, 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 there. So yes, we're halfway there. And so that leaves half of the
homes. Most of them, if not all of them by light star, have not been completed. And so I'd
I love to turn it over to my colleague from a legal standpoint to expound on how we got here in the Lightstar contract.
They have made notification to us over the last few months, the starting last fall that they could not develop their three solar areas.
That's what they got, after an open competitive bid process we selected two vendors, DTE and Lightstar as a contingency.
Three of those are light star.
They did put us on notice last fall that they could not develop solar given the contract
prices and they would need an increase.
Then they also let us know at the beginning of the year that they were sold by an owner,
but they were continuing to develop solar and they were trying to find an EPC that's the
developer who develops 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, which were much higher.
And then literally 24 hours later, they told us because of their new ownership, their own
buying equity firm now, they no longer developed solar, which was a complete shock to us after
months of working with them and trying to figure out what it was going to cost the city if
we did a contract amendment with them.
And now 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.
Through the Council President, Councilperson Miller, as my colleague described, what
Lightstar did to us was unexpected.
There have been questions about what our contractual remedies might be vis-à-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 been given us the ability to pose on them significant costs, fines and remediation requirements, because we never actually got that far.
We were waiting as Mrs. Dine pointed out for a price.
The price was going to be the crucial element of the virtual power or purchasing agreement
that they hesitated, I don't want to say refuse, but so far had not given us.
We sent them, and I think Councilperson, 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
re-bed the contract and go our separate ways.
They asked us and utilized all of the goodwill that they had available with us to say, look,
We are being purchased. If you 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 require 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 them actually just simply went away.
Now, the option that we have,
Is the assignment by light star 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 a council person miller that we knew this might happen because obviously
that's not the case, that's not what we wanted to occur, but when it did happen there was
an option, the option was DTE.
Lightstar saw that as an option and asked us for permission to assign to DTE their contract.
Now that's a negotiation council person 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.
And the very good news is that they were able to come to an agreement, obviously subject to this honorable bodies approval.
So with that, 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.
Alex, any further member or kelvin?
Thank you, and good afternoon, everyone.
I can probably say, I mean, the only council person who was voted against this project
from day one, 100%, I've never vacillated, I've never wavered because I've done my
research.
And I think it's kind of disingenuous of you, Miss Trisha Stein, for you to say that you all
just found out when Lifestar were 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 31, 2024.
And they were acquired by 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, why are you all standing here?
Why are you standing here?
So somebody didn't do their due diligence to protect the interests of we, the residents.
And to me, that's very, very unfortunate.
We find ourselves here today.
I don't know why someone didn't do their due diligence to stay on top of the purchase
of Lightstar.
Because who's happening, why are you all standing here?
This happened almost two years ago, and that's when you first started bringing this before us, and I continued to take the position that was not a way to address blight or crime in our city.
And, you know, I'm just reading articles, so for you all to say you didn't know, you should have known.
you should have known that they were being sold and the ramifications or the consequences of
the sale. And to still have their names in these documents, I don't know if they need to be
amended to reflect the name of Apollo global management. I don't know how we can move forward with
company that's out of business. I don't know how that works. I really don't. And 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
interests in mind. They never have. And they turned off 120,000 people's electricities in
the last year and a half. They're not a good partner. And I don't take any donations
from them. So I'm just disappointed that somebody wasn't at the will of this. And somebody
should have known, it's just, in my opinion, 35-year agreement. Nobody knew that the company
that we had negotiated with and entered a contract with was sold to another company
And then yet another company.
And so, you know, would you see how it all pans?
I don't know, people gas and refrigerators and stoves
and roofs and windows.
That's great.
But the end of the day, we've 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'Shae Park
and see what they've done over there.
It's still blight, it's still crime.
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 going to be the narrative in 35 years.
We are not gonna leave that area.
It will probably be, probably be deserted, so thank you, Mr. Chair.
Yeah, the corporation council.
Council, I'd rather do want to correct one thing for the record.
Council President Caliroy, we absolutely knew that light star renewables are being purchased by Eagle Creek.
They were in the same business.
In fact, we knew that and counted that as a positive thus making light star even stronger and
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, excuse me, 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 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 is perfectly legally inappropriate for the City of Detroit to continue to deal with
light star as an entity, it continues to exist, and we knew that Eagle Creek was purchasing
light star during the course of the initial process of our affiliation.
Mr. Chair.
Mayor Kelley?
Thank you.
No disrespect to you, Corporation Counsel, 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.
That I had never heard of Eagle Creek Renewable, and maybe we can check the minutes.
I don't think that name was ever mentioned during the time that you all appeared before.
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 what that was.
I thought you said you knew about it.
We didn't know about it.
No, I didn't.
We absolutely knew about it.
We go through the chair.
Right.
I'm sorry.
Go through the chair.
So, Mr. Chair, thank you, Mr. Chair, so I had never heard of Green Eagle Creek Renewable
until I started reading myself, I did not know that they 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.
This all in it for profit, everybody's in it for profit because DTE is everything they
do is for profit.
So I have never, you know, disrespect to your corporation council, mallet heard you
or Trisha Stein or the young lady sitting to the right of Ms. Stein, eagle, creek, renewable
energy ever mentioned, 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
I mean that lifestyle had been purchased and then later EGLE's 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 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 the contracts, I mean, I don't recall it myself either.
And I have to say that my vote would have been different because everyone knows how I voted on this as well.
Certainly when it came to District 1 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.
Through you, Mr. President, I am confirming that right now.
I do remember it in writing, so now I'm checking to see what documents were submitted to this honorable body during phase 1 or phase 2.
Gotcha. Okay. So those documents are being located, colleagues, any additional questions?
Member Johnson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. First question, I think I have a lot of what's our
recourse with light star? Has any litigation been filed? Are we pursuing them considering
what Corporation Council indicated that they blatantly lied about what was going on with
as an entity?
Through the Chair, Councilperson Johnson, we are not currently involved in litigation
with Lightstar.
We believe that the assignment from Lightstar to DTE will, in fact, deliver to the citizens
Detroit, what was promised by the original contract.
effect. The issue really does come down to price. The litigation would focus around the
issue of whether or not the city of Detroit because of their malfeasance was required to
pay more for the product that was promised. Lightstar is very likely to say a number of
things, including the fact that they never agreed to a price, to that prices have changed
significantly because of the costs associated with inflation and tariffs.
At the end of the day, the litigation will be quite expensive.
I do believe also that it would be used as a full come 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 again.
light star, 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
actually signing the virtual power purchase agreement that our damages were
minimal and that 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 good.
Through you, Mr. President.
Yes, ma'am.
To remember, Johnson, in Light Star's contract, it was a minimum of a base and a maximum
price that was approved with a 2% annual inflator.
There was also the ability for them to amend that and ask for a higher rate.
And that was part of the negotiations that we were doing late last summer and the fall to
get them to sign the lease and in the power purchase agreement.
They never committed to a price.
They did put it in writing to us in October that they would need additional dollars.
That the current rates in the contract were not sufficient to develop based on higher cost for supplies and equipment and contractors.
And so then they went about the process to try to get EPC, the energy procurement in construction contractor to build it.
That's what they did for Q1 of 2026 and got four bids.
They never committed to a price.
They did tell us on record in writing that they needed additional money.
They could not make the contracted rates work for the to develop.
And then they did share with us their EPC bids, which were higher than anything we'd ever seen before.
But before they gave us a firm price to put into a prepaid agreement or a lease, or a contract amendment,
that's when they told us they no longer developed solar per their new equity firm ownership.
And so within that, the range, the kilowatt hour range that they provide it is DTE's rate within that range, it's underman.
Through you, Mr. President, to Councilmember Johnson, it's less than.
So DT's price is a levelized cost of energy, which is a flat fixed rate that is approved by MPSC.
And they don't have a min-based max, they don't have a range in their contract.
I have a 2% inflator, it's a fixed flat rate in their other two contracts 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, through the chair.
So can you provide more information about the expiring tax credits?
Considering Lightstar had already been committed on the federal side to receive the tax credits.
So, why are we now at a point where...
We're not able to re-bid it. Yes, ma'am. And instead of going out to re-bid, working with DTE. Yes, ma'am. Through Mr. President, to answer Member Johnson, we would like a Valerie Brader, our external counsel and subject matter expert on clean energy to answer that. She is the one that provided our guidance throughout this for the tax credits and clean energy development.
Through the president to Member Johnson, under the IRS rules which changed approximately a year ago with the Federal Act, the credits are only available for projects that start prior to July 4th of this year.
So in which are between 30 and 40% of the project cost, they have to have committed 5% of the project costs prior to July 4th of this year.
because this is happening after December 31st of last year, and right now, you also can't use equipment that was purchased prior to then that doesn't qualify under some additional for an 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 5% of the project costs with equipment that Lightstar did not purchase, that that entity purchases.
Before July 4th, in order for a project in order to be assured you would receive those credits, which are again between a minimum of 30 and as much as 40% of program costs.
Thank you.
Naturally, 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 Graschett Finley.
And then in Houston, Whittier, I understand a few people have, but not everyone.
one. So I'm really interested in the totality of this. What happened with the community
partners that were involved is DTE assuming the cause that have already been spent on
home improvement for those who have 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 how everything would look.
There were some areas that selected having agriculture, agri-voteics, and growing things
that could be eaten.
What helped me to understand how that continues to move forward or does it?
Yes, through you, Mr. President, yes, I remember Johnson, in this assignment, DTE will take
on all the rights and responsibilities in the contract, which include the neighborhood
agreements regarding the design and the fence, Director Reston will talk about the urban
farms second.
They are also taking on the responsibility of the energy efficiency upgrades and completing
them.
And they're also taking on all of the environmental work and 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 Director Reston talk about what happens with the food.
Yes, and through the chair, member Jocelyn.
And so the neighbors that selected Agable Takes as part of their project design, we had
started down the road with like star with four different urban farmers who were ready
and willing to and really excited about taking on acres of land underneath the solar panels.
So we've gone through trainings and everything.
This is all in conjunction with our office, and then in this change, DCEs, arrays are very
structured very differently than light stars, so light stars were 8 to 12-feet tall, they
inverted with the sun, and 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'Shae's, nothing changed.
So they're shorter to the ground, they are not able to do the agribotics in the same way
that light star half propose.
And so I've worked with those farmers to make sure that their time and planning has been
compensated for the season.
DTE has agreed to pay each of those farmers $5,000 to expand in different areas of the city,
whether that's their sites or to purchase land in the city, they're going to pay them $5,000 per acre that they had planned with light star, and we're also developing farm stands or community spaces in the in the in the solar areas where we can bring fresh produce to those neighbors and and and still live up to those neighborhood agreements.
Thank you for that.
So is DTE not able to do the solar the way light star idea?
Because it sounds like it would capture more energy.
Yes.
I don't know if there's a rep from DTE that can talk about the excellent design.
Julie, are you able to speak on behalf of?
Mr. President, also are the solar developers here for the community representative.
and you also have a D.T. leadership who are developing something like that.
Whoever it is, come on down.
Oh, sorry.
Yes, I'm sorry, Mr. President.
So yes, the subject matter experts are here.
This all a 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, Mr. President and Council of Daniel Mahoney, Director of Policy and Regional Affairs for D.T.E.
Here with my colleague, who I'll let introduce himself.
Good afternoon.
Sean Goode, Director of Renewable Energy at DTE.
Mr. Johnson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
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 fixed racking systems.
They do not rotate with the Sun.
And that was our standard for a number of reasons that engineering when we looked at this and we did this in our previous installations at O'Shea, and we're doing it at Castle, and we're going to be doing it at Greenfield, so we hold that standard from a Operation Maintenance Profile, and that's what we were we engineered that was best for this site, we're able to follow light stars design.
Through the chair, so would it be more expensive for a rotation?
I can't answer that, 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 what our engineering team had come up with, that's the best use for that site
as we saw.
So DTE has never done any of that rotates with the Sun.
I'd have to find that out.
I don't, for my knowledge, I don't know if we have any in our asset profiles.
Okay, thank you.
My last question is in regards to elevate.
Elevate was, were they working directly with Lightstar?
Are they still involved in this project at all?
Through you, Ms. President, to member Johnson, elevate is a subcontractor of light.
star and with the assignment they would no longer be a subcontractor.
Thank you, that's all I have for now.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Remember waters.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. President.
My first question would be the residents in the city of Detroit going to see any decrease
in their energy bills.
Through you, Mr. President, to member waters, with the energy efficiency upgrades, we do have
of actual usage that we are able to track out of 111 homes that have been completed.
We are seeing, again, those are actual data that we get.
We are seeing a 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, but the residents have told us
anecdotally that they are receiving a reduction in their energy bills anywhere from 25 to 35 dollars a month
They are seeing 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 mine, okay
Through you, Mr. President, we'll talk about some energy efficiency upgrades for you off the charts
You know, it is hard to love on DT. I'm telling you I
I mean, those high-energy bills are killing us.
So the purchase agreement,
they never signed one, right?
Yes, they did not.
They did not.
They did not, right.
So what about DTE?
Have they signed one?
Through you, Mr. President, to member waters.
Yes, they have signed for Van Dyke Lynch.
And 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, there was our fully executed and have a sat-rate on time and making the milestones.
There was a gentleman here a little earlier, because you know what is all said and done.
For me, it is about 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 after
you got his financials, you never got back with him so that he can get what he believed
that he was due.
What is going to happen with him?
Yeah.
Through you, Mr. President, to remember what is there's also a resident that's not here today
the member.
Johnson has also flagged for us.
There are a few who, because of a delay in getting started and a delay from Lightstar and their implementers that the upgrades are woefully behind, and we need to, 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 Seal and Walker Miller.
and their commitment to this project and they are Detroit-based and their 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 general might come back and tell me later that he's been taken care of.
I hope so.
That's what I need to hear.
I hope so.
Me too.
to imminent domain for a moment.
You know, this project first came to us.
We talked about the fact that if homeowners, especially on occupied and 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.
So last time we spoke, you said that you had not taken any homes from owner occupied.
What about the other homes that you've used in the domain on private properties that
not owner occupied but other properties? How many?
So the Corporation
Council looks at up through you, Mr. President, to remember waters.
There were 32 owner-occupied homes that all voluntarily sold.
And I know the next question that you asked me, so I'll answer that first.
Is there was $125,000 on average that they received?
And then as the Corporation Council repairs to answer landlords on average received $60,000.
dollars for their property.
Why do we keep hearing people from the community to say, well, you're taking private property?
I mean, I need to understand that because they say it was so much conviction as it was
really happening to people.
So I mean, I really need to understand that.
Mr. President, if I may, excuse me, Councilperson Waters, there is no doubt that
that we used imminent domain on vacant lots.
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.
They then, and there are a number of them, went to court and currently we have one just compensation
case in Wayne County.
We have four just compensation cases for phase two, but all of them, member waters, all of them regarding vacant lots. 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, they're their property privately. But in those instances, what we're going to do
when we could not agree upon a price, we used 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 say to the entire honorable body,
1772 were, in fact, publicly owned.
And okay, I'm still not sure the number that you've used
imminent domain owned just yet.
So we use imminent domain on 270 private vacant lots.
Well, even that's an exaggeration.
There were 270 vacant lots.
We had of the 272, we only used imminent domain, there are 11 cases still pending, one
just compensation case, three deed restriction cases, and one remaining case to clear up title
in phase one, phase two, four just compensation cases and two deed restriction cases.
The vast majority, because I don't have to precise number, the vast majority, all of
the owners, took what was offered or we were able to negotiate a price.
There were minimum number of imminent domains, but whatever imminent domains, a counsel person
and that were used, were used on vacant lots.
Okay, all right, because, you know, I certainly didn't want to see it used on owner occupied
and that's for sure.
No, they were not on PREs, now there were, when there were landlords, rental property.
Right, rental property, and we could not enter into an agreement.
We did use eminent domain.
I don't have the number of landlord, rental property.
The landlord satisfied with what you offer?
One.
Forty-one.
There were forty-one, but does that mean that this is the number of eminent domain cases?
No.
The vast majority of the rental properties, again, we were able to negotiate a prize.
there were 41 of those council person waters I don't have in front of me the
number of rental properties where we use imminent domain I don't want to say
none but 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 man 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 on our occupied properties because I know how difficult
it is for people to be you know get to home ownership and so we have to always be very
careful with that.
Does anybody know how many jobs are we going to 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 Detroiters some of these jobs for sure.
Through you, Mr. President, to member Waters, you heard from at least one today, and there was a jobs report per your request that was submitted yesterday.
Currently, there's just under 230 jobs that are created from the DTE portion of the two of the five.
that are up and running in Van Dyke Lynch and Greenfield Park that is spread across the implementers to do the energy efficient upgrades and the construction bills.
Then there is an additional, at least 50 jobs that will be created by the assignment for the other three areas.
Because some of the jobs will be transferred over because Van Dyke Lynch will be all the energy efficiency upgrades are completed in Van Dyke Lynch.
So then those jobs will go to different neighborhoods.
So we're looking at just under 300 jobs.
And just one other final question, oh, Shay, are there residents living over there now?
Through you, Mr. President, to member orders, yes.
And we have taken a look at their property values.
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 of a body.
And so we continue to take a look at the on property values, and they have continuously increased greater than the solar neighborhoods.
Just as an evaluation point that we were asked about two years ago, we've continuous to monitor that.
And the O'Shea property values are 41% greater than the other five solar neighborhoods.
Okay, thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I want to want to make sure everyone who did not have a question yet had a chance to do so.
So first, okay, thank you, did you start off?
I didn't say any questions.
Member McCamble followed by, member Cali.
Follows on to your member.
Santiago McNarrow.
A question on the OSHA community.
You say it increased, the property value has increased 41%.
What was the comparable rate around the, the neighborhoods around OSHA?
Do you have those numbers?
Through Mr. President, to member Campbell, it was a 41% increase over the other five areas.
So it was a data point two years ago that we were asked to provide.
So then we've continuously just looked to see from a property value standpoint,
O'Shae versus the five neighborhoods.
And so O'Shae is 51% higher than the solar neighborhoods.
But I don't have the property values.
Okay, because that would that would be something I would wonder 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 I want to see how that compares to a neighborhood right next to it. I have a question on
the use of the land, you know
We've had quite a bit of conversation in committee, so I don't have a lot of questions because I've already asked them
But do you still land after the 35 years?
Because my whole thing was that this is a 35 year deal.
I understand there would be decommission just the life of the panels before that land,
because it has come up with, what are our plans with that land after the 35 years?
Through the chair to member Campbell, 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 would be in those neighborhoods.
So that will be entirely up to those neighbors and the residents of the city of Detroit in 35 years.
Appreciate the director.
I think that's one of the concerns that is coming up right that understand that we have a need for clean energy in the city.
I understand that there is a need to get rid of blighted property and such.
But as I've heard from the residents on the aspect that sure we'll have a solid farm there at that time.
But when we're thinking about planning and
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.
But the aspect of when we're thinking about planning a master planning,
I think residents want to know, especially as we're talking about right across from their homes and such.
So that's something that I think we really have to have a deeper conversation about.
Because we know in 35 years these solar panels 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 thinking about what can be there and what would 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.
Member Tellaway.
Thank you.
As I indicated earlier, the O-Shake 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 walkthrough.
I did one of my colleagues was my guest over there about a year or so ago.
And she said, we sat on the bench together.
Some of the promises that DTE made, they never kept them.
They said they're going to have a concert stage there.
That's not there.
They said they're going to build out the green space.
They didn't do that.
There are no flowers over there.
There are no trees over there.
And so all of that is just not true.
It's just not true.
And after 35 years, the land will be contaminated.
And we all know that.
Who's going to do the cleanup?
Once the solar panels are removed, the soil would be contaminated and we all know that.
So some of the things you're saying, Ms. Steiner, just absolutely not true.
I lived over there 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 have made it worse for the residents and we know that we have.
So I would invite my colleagues 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, and my colleague Gabriella Santiago Ramera was the one sitting on the bench with me and we looked out and we had some really good conversations and I was a no then I'm no now because it has not increased the property value of any house over there.
There's a lot of light, there's a lot of homes that are vacant, fallen apart.
There's still a lot of crime in the area, that's 4-8227.
And 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 the DTE did, they did not keep their end of the bargain.
And this happened before I got on the council.
But we need to go back and look at what DTE actually promise and see if they kept those promises and that will
guide us in terms of the promises that they're now making today, but they don't keep their promises and a lot of people think that their utility bills are going to go down.
Only if you got some upgrades to your home,
the solar energy is bypassing the neighborhoods and only coming down here to
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 provide power to about 21 to 21 to 21 to 27.
It's been a minute since I looked at the numbers between 21 to 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 my memory, not unless it's changed.
So to say that the property values have gone up, they have not.
I don't know the last time you were over there, but I'm over there quite frequently.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
I remember Santiago Romero.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I just want to, for the record, say that I do support solar.
I support good union jobs, and I have already supported this project.
That is before these amendments, including DTE, as the main entity to build this out.
Quite frankly, I believe that DTE should be building solar, that they should be providing
good jobs, and that they should pay for it themselves.
Quite frankly, it is a hard thing to ask us to pay for this, for a company that has stock
holders that collect our money that could very much invest it back into this infrastructure.
So this time around, I will be a no for these projects, unfortunately, again, as someone
that supports solar, I can't also support a company that also charges me in a incredible
amount of money each month as it does for the rest of our residents.
I think we should address that issue, DTE being a monopoly, quite frankly, having control
the role of the grid and of the infatuation of this capacity 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.
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 conversations that were had in the community they were raised as well and I heard something that was different.
I haven't heard you refute that at all with any information or evidence, so this is the time to do so if that is the case.
Thank you, Mr. President, for that.
Again, I would like our subject matter expert on clean energy and our external counsel,
Valor Rader to talk about the health benefits from solar and then also to exactly address that claim.
And again, you can state where you're from so that folks know you are you from DTE or you from any other entity like this so please please state where you from
I'm Valerie Brader. I'm external legal council 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 does run water through and then test for
heavy metal contamination, things like that, without finding any increases.
So the concerns regarding soil contamination, I think, are unlikely to occur.
I think if anything, you would have less contamination thing.
So I don't think you're going to 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.
I'm sorry, was there another item that you wanted to talk about?
That was my question.
Oh, the electricity.
I'm sorry.
No, no, no.
It's the contamination.
Sorry, Mr. President.
Just sticking on contamination.
That's the main thing we're talking about.
I mean, especially now with us having contracts for contaminated soil.
I mean, that's all in a lot of people's mind at this moment to make sure that we don't,
you know, double down on that concern, if you will.
Yeah.
Again, there are the evidence that has been done to see if solar panels would end up creating a contamination
have not found that when they have done very extensive testing that if you were going to see something, it would be coming out of that.
So again, just, you know, my personally, I would not, there are things that you might want to be concerned about, you know, creating
in contamination. This is not one of them.
Okay. And then my other question, and I'm going to get to you, a corporation council.
I know we've been talking about the O'Shea installation, and I believe that was installed.
Was that doing a kill Patrick administration?
2017.
2017? Okay. So in terms of the agreements that was made,
that were made, how dissimilar or similar to that particular installation, are we talking
about in comparison to what we have before us today.
To you, Mr. President, two separate different arrangements.
O'Shea came, as we've said, he was coming out of bankruptcy.
It was a lease to DTE for this property.
They developed it, it's their project, it's their agreement to do so.
And as we've been very open and transparent about here two years ago, when the contracts
a lot of lessons learned.
They were the first neighborhood that Mayor Duggan went to,
to hear about how it went during the development
and how it was going.
And we learned a lot about the energy efficiency upgrades
that happened just on a very small scale,
but should have been in a larger scale.
And then also the development around for the designs,
the fencing, the plantings.
And that really informed what this contract, what these contracts for the Solar
Neighborhood Initiative is, the neighbors designed the areas, both for solar
and then the energy efficiency upgrades. And then the neighbors chose what
the fence would look like, what the designs will be both around the fence and
inside. And a lot of those lessons learned and mistakes that were made in
then informed on the current contracts.
All right, thinking I would say in the air, I believe the O.S.A. direction was closed
down during that administration. That's the difference.
Corporations Council, I know you had something you wanted to add.
I did, sir. If you look at section 1.5 of the contract, it says directly DTE,
Council Member McCamble, shall decommission the solar project in accordance with
With this contract, the obligations contained in this section 1.5 shall survive the expiration
or early termination of the least.
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, manufacture, or use of the actual
or threatened escape, dispersal, seepage, migration, emission of
any hazardous substances by TTE, its agents or employees,
or contractors from or at the solar project.
So I think there's two things through the council president,
two council person, McCamble, DTE at the end of the 35 years
were responsible for the decommissioning, DTE, per the contract.
If there is any hazardous waste, which has Valerie Brader indicated,
we expect not.
But if there is any, DTE has committed through the contract to identify for the city and to cover all of those costs.
Okay. Have we been able to locate any of those documents that talked about the Eagle Creek?
To you, Mr. President, yes, OCP has been listening.
Would they have not joined as a panelist because we weren't sure how this discussion was going?
They have confirmed and they sent it through to the law department
that it was clear in the bid documents that Eagle Creek was the owner of Lightstar when they put in their bids and were selected as a vendor.
And so in OCP's right up, it is included in that and they were clear and transparent about that that Eagle Creek was their owner.
It's also to the City Council, though, that's what I'm saying.
Any of the documents that were sent to us, because that's the big issue, we're the ones
who make the, you know, we vote on them.
It's my understanding, but again, OCP could speak to that directly.
It's my understanding as part of the write-up that they submit that was included with the
bid documents that they had, and if, I'm not sure if it was in the T2 reporter, it gets
It's attached to the TTA report, but OCP is the one that put together those bid evaluations
and the recommendations of the two vendors.
Okay.
So I do have to ask though, with all the conversation around a while, 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, Miss Stein and others, and again, I'm not saying my vote would have changed,
But I always like to vote based upon having as much information as possible.
And to hear that now, it's just done feel good, especially when we've had other conversations
in the past about A through Z, whether it's questions I bring up or it's items that you all
are presenting, that one never came up in the conversation.
Just at least have it as part of the full understanding of what we're working with in front of us again.
I'm going to change my vote, but it's always good to have as much information as possible.
Through the chair, Mr. President, I appreciate that very much.
I expect, and I take responsibility, we were aware of the, like I said, of the affiliation
between Lightstar and Eagle Creek.
I suppose that it was our collective calculation.
You're absolutely 100% 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.
But at the end of the day, Mr. President, the light star was the entity that was
the one presenting us the proposal.
So, again, you're 100% correct.
We should have been more vigorous with our presentation as the affiliation between
Eagle Creek and Lightstar.
But again, Lightstar was then, 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.
And so that's the only explanation I can give you.
Okay.
Colleagues any additional?
Member McCemble.
Through the chair.
I hear a voice.
Yes.
Graham Anderson, a lot of heart.
One thing that has just been distributed to this body is like stars 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 controlling LLC.
So I just want to make that clear.
I appreciate that, but we already, this was already notified when I'm saying it's just in the conversation,
the presentations, the numerous discussions, it was not mentioned.
So yes, it's an 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 McCample.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I have 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, a constant person with camera, sorry, through the president.
We can terminate any time that we want for convenience, that's absolutely correct.
Okay, what about DTE?
A DTE has a contract obligation to continue the project.
Okay, all right, and then I'll just say, I understand the aspect around lessons learned around OSHA to be the person that represents the area right now.
As my colleague shared, member Calaway, it has been woefully inadequate for that project.
and understanding that with the lessons learned and what we're putting in this contract right now,
I would still have expected for DT to be better folks in keeping up that area.
And the one was right by residents in that area.
So I'm carrying out with me as a member that represents that area right now.
And just around on the overall aspect that I've shared in the committee with this project,
The cost of this project is alarming to me and also the aspect around the jobs.
I understand, as mentioned, I'm all about, I push union jobs and
skill trades all the time.
But to see the numbers, especially even right now where we are,
what the Detroiters and on this project is very low.
Even with the project that has been for a couple of years now.
So that's alarming to me, even with, as we know, with this council, we always push at
least 51% of the jobs to be Detroiters.
And I understand the need around clean energy, I'm a huge reporter around clean energy.
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 a 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 investor on utility, I'm just not comfortable with that as well.
And as we think about, and I understand the need to make a resume that we made that
promise to them, I just think we can do it or should have done it in a different way.
Even on the timeline of things I've been, we knew as it seems that we knew that lifestyle
was on shaky ground, we should have had contingency plans from that point.
Instead of us getting to a point now where we are a couple of weeks out,
from a deadline, a tax credit that we can't even open this up to other folks.
So those are the reasons why it's unfortunate, because I do think we absolutely need much renewable energy in the city.
But it's unfortunate I cannot support this, so thank you, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
All right, colleagues, let's start to bring this to a close.
Did you did have a number of rounds of questions being asked?
Right now we have Member Miller, who else is in the queue?
Pro Tim Young, Member Calloway, is that it?
Thank you.
All right, those are our last three speakers.
Through the chair, I have heard a 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 five 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 does not, that
I do not represent, but I have a saying in district five, I have a lot of solar advocates
for renewable energy, the green initiatives, the task force, but I have many more residents
is that despised DTE is a grave hatred for DTE.
And as I stand before my residence tonight at my meeting,
I have to answer to them.
I will have to come up with 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,
might these have built out or refurbished or transitioned?
Would they go two years, three years, four years while the effects of our community suffer for decades to come?
Just 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
ask the detour to accept the quick fix, despite it being DTE. I must say I cannot simply ignore the
history because this project is troubled. The history is that DTE, the residents want to see lower
or bills. Everybody don't care about a green initiative. Everybody not care about renewable
energy. They care about that bill, especially in the wintertime. And on my issues, you
run about $1,200. DCE came through my neighborhood and took out every single one of our historical
lamps, which left our neighborhood dark without a care in the world. But we look at the
taxes and those that they receive. We look at what they do not give back to the neighborhoods
because it's simply philanthropic level which I admire than what they do.
But overall, residents do not see the wealth transferred to our neighborhoods.
And because of our past administration, who today have a lot of our neighborhoods,
because that's why they look through what they do, except for downtown.
We must be honest with ourselves and say, listen, we're going to be true to our residents
who was promised what they agreed to get otherwise we fail we risk being sued
and we risk being made a fool of again and again for our residents calling
every single day they 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
This is not the first time this body has been rushed with a instant notification of a
vote.
It seems 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've 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 admittedly affect us, I will have to vote to support those residents because they were promised by the City 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 of our own decisions to make our own investigations so we can make thorough decisions and I commend my colleague, remember Calloway,
it's hard to stand alone, it's hard to make the hard choices.
And if for 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 going to vote today and I support chair moving forward with the project.
And I just hope everyone should understand my statement today.
And I'm going to ask one thing, one thing that joined work without attacking the day of my meeting.
because she's already here today, and then she please understand.
And I truly respect you in 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 really know tonight you respect your opinion.
So I look forward to seeing you this evening.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I did look up some information about what happens to the soil when solar panels are removed.
They lead behind heavy, heavy, heavy metals and plastics which contaminate the soil.
I can send you the article, man, to the person who made the statement.
It does contaminate the soil man 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 asks for $474 million 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 in Lansing for a rate hike, which they get typically that I oppose every time by making my statement known by attending those meetings, $1.5 billion, but they are notorious for cutting off folks energy in this city.
And that's shameful. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Our final member of council before we go, who fought with the vote, is a pro-tumia.
Thank you, 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 theitis right now.
But I just wanted to just ask a couple questions really quickly.
One, I wanted to ask the question involving agrovoltaics.
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 trade?
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 and areas that don't
have that, but it's also an opportunity for you to be able to deliver this in terms of
certain neighborhoods that otherwise will 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 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, my pleasure because that is my love and passion is for you to use security for our residents.
I believe that the deal that we've created between the farmers that we're working with
LightStar and DTE is going to significantly increase production for those farmers.
So 5,000 per acre that they were working each farmer is going to get a little bit over 10K,
A15K to expand their operations, the establishment of those farm stands within those neighborhoods paired with the mayor's new initiative, the senior food program.
This is something that I think is going to do our city a great service.
And so I'm confident that this is a good negotiation that has been strict between the urban farmers, so I appreciate the question.
No, I appreciate that too.
Another question I had was about, okay, so let's have a little bit of context here.
This started because we tore down Gidra, right?
And when we tore down Gidra, 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 it's plain to me, is that they wanted to build solar farms because
because not in terms of the initial implementation,
but in the long term, the costs are going to be cheaper.
Now, is it true that we have saved?
Because the only option other than solar farms
was to pipe it in.
So you were going to go into from the suburbs,
you were going to do the energy, you were going to 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 going to be there.
So that was the difference.
It was kind of the KPEX or your capital expenditures
We're going to be more expensive for this, but your operating expenditures are going to be cheaper over the long term.
And it was vice versa if you piped it in.
And it saved about $6.6 million gross.
Is that correct?
Through you, Mr. President, to President Pro Tem, young.
We talked about this two years ago.
It is that the city did take a Ms. Kersky offline.
They have not torn it down.
But there, it-
Which would cost $630 million to put back on, by the way.
Mr. Erski, correct?
Yeah, that's the extra-
Yeah, if we chose that, but that would be full of plant.
And so from a health benefits standpoint, the city is going in a different direction by taking that offline,
taking the incinerator offline as well in recent years, and developing clean energy here locally to the source,
and making the infrastructure improvements to develop that solar in the neighborhoods,
so that would also strengthen the good resilience.
Okay, so this is why this is important, because the $6.6 billion with that amount,
if we had home repair grants of $25,000 per home, you could buy 264 homes estimate in terms of home repairs.
You can invest for $2,500 per youth through GDYT, employer sponsorship, 2,640 youth jobs.
Trees, the tree equity investment about $400 per tree from $30,000,000 to $75,000 trees, about $16,500 trees.
Your mid-block street lights for 3333 per light, you can even repair about 1,980 for your
DPD average budgeted position equivalent, about 130,000 you can hire about 51 people or 51
positions.
For your DPD average budgeted position equivalent, about 133,000 using fiscal year 2027 DPD budget
Employees usually get high about 50 positions, all right?
You're D.O.T. average budgeted position equivalent, 174,000 using fiscal year 26 D.O.T. budget
employees, that's 38 positions.
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 terms of the issues and the complaints, we have to be able to deal with that.
But this is a real issue, environmental concerns are a real issue, and I also think that
we need to use, you know, more, you know, better metrics in terms of power use, effectiveness,
water use, effectiveness, carbon use, effectiveness, carbon capture, you know, these are things
that we need to use in general anyway, you know, saying that we should be doing whether
we support projects or not regardless, we got to do a very job of that in the 21st century.
But we need to start emphasizing more what this money keeping be used and actually help the residents.
I also just wanted to ask a last question.
I just want to know, in these neighborhoods, particularly, I got two questions, one more,
the one more is particularly in these neighborhoods.
No, no, I promise, I promise, I promise, I promise, I promise, I promise, I promise.
Thank you for your patience.
You're the greatest.
I just wanted to say, just just 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 has had?
It increases.
Can we come to a, I did answer this.
Yeah, scribble that one down, what was that second question because we want to get them both in.
No, that was all one question.
So I mean, you want me to, you know, you'll be, oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, you were trying to, you heard me, oh, you heard me a lot.
I'm trying to plan which is okay.
Okay, this is, you know, I forgot my other questions.
So go ahead.
This is, this is Herrie of Office.
I was used to this.
All right, go ahead.
Yeah, through Council President Frosive Pro Temps.
Young, so we did talk about this before.
So we are tracking the property values.
Did you remember you went to, you want to spit out?
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Go ahead, no, I don't have to talk to you.
You won't forget, okay.
What's up?
All right, excellent.
So, we are tracking the property values, and yes,
the whole city has had increased property values,
and the mayor did make that announcement a few weeks ago.
So, we are tracking those, we're tracking the neighborhoods that do
surround the solar developments, and we will continue to monitor that.
And it's too early on the solar areas, because we just started a particular
So we will continue to monitor that and communicate that to the City Council.
I appreciate that.
I do remember my final question, and if I can't do this, I understand.
By understanding somebody from DTEs actually here, did you want to speak, and you've been
mentioned quite a bit, and so I want to know, did you want to have anything you want
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.
Through the Chiefs.
The President.
Yeah.
Councilmember, thank you very much.
It's an honor to be here.
It's an honor to have the opportunity to develop two projects that DT has.
It'll be an honor to develop the balance of the portfolio projects.
Simply put, we're here to fulfill a command 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'll be honest.
Thank you very much.
Did raise his hand, he did not have an opportunity to ask a question, had to step out for a minute.
Member Benson will be our last individual asking questions before we move forward.
Mr. Chair, thank you very much.
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 have taken over the Green Task Force 12 years ago and we have stood solidly in line with sustainability and move the city of Detroit for when it comes to sustainable energy.
And my members, who are advocates, business owners, and practitioners have clearly said this is the proper project.
Carl Walker Miller, SEAL ENERGY, our Renewable...
Local energies task force have all come to help support. 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 help change my thought process around.
on 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're 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.
because we've helped to grow that office as well.
I want to make sure that we continue to do that.
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're going to see their quality of life improve.
When you know people who had 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, a single mother or 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 are 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 you 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 the motion to end debate, any objections?
Hearing none, that action shall be taken.
Point of motion.
Member McCamble?
Just Mr. Chair, that was an emotion to approve, was just a discussion.
All right, it was just an end of this debate discussion period.
Member McCamble, 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?
Subjection, Councilmember Callaway on line item 4.1 and 4.2.
Objection of the Campbell on both items, please.
Objection of members Santiago Vermeiro and 4.1 and 4.2.
All right, I'm clerk.
Through the chair, that is three nays from per Callaway Councilmember
Callaway, excuse me, Councilmember McCamble and Councilmember Santiago Romero, so that motion passes.
Thank you.
The item is 4.1 or 4.2, shall it be approved?
Is there a motion to receive and file line item 4.3?
Motion.
There's a motion to receive and file line item 4.3, any objections?
Hearing none, that 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.
just stand and try.