An item on the February 3, 2025 City Council agenda is an opportunity to re-evaluate some recent City expenditures and consider the relative benefit they may (or may not) provide to our community:
DC-1 (25-0200) Resolution to Direct the City Attorney to Provide a Public Legal Memorandum Regarding the City of Ann Arbor’s Intervention in DTE Electric Company and DTE Gas Company Proceedings before the Michigan Public Service Commission since 2022
The Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) regulates policy and rate schedules for our current utility, DTE. I.e. Resolving disputes with DTE means advocating in proceedings before the MPSC.
CITY INTERVENTION: THEN AND NOW
In recent years, the City has frequently participated in “intervention” at the MPSC, advocating for or against policy and rate schedules. Information about the City’s advocacy appears on Council agendas, but it is somewhat buried in the category of “report or communication.”
Previously, information about intervention at the MPSC was a bit more visible, because City Council voted to approve specific contracts for legal services. For example:
December 2016
$48,000 contract for legal services to challenge policy requests by DTE that would impact the City’s hydroelectric plants (case U-18091)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2902138&GUID=E3B8A9A0-7617-4DD8-B5BF-6E1D2DE31D4A&FullText=1
November 2018
$6,300 contract for legal service, same as above (case U-18091)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3710086&GUID=6126D51B-602D-4C66-8910-27F472A6BB4D&FullText=1
August 2019
$15,000 contract for legal services, same as above (case U-18091)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4069786&GUID=5694E064-956A-49B0-AD3D-27F927E89CE4&FullText=1
Recent City intervention/advocacy at the MPSC is funded under the umbrella of much larger contracts for legal services, which are now a regular part of annual budget allocations for the Office of Sustainability and Innovations (OSI).
Cases before the MPSC include hundreds of pages of submitted statements and legal filings from impacted parties and advocacy groups. Below, you can find links to some of the more interesting documents submitted by the City of Ann Arbor: direct testimony provided by City staff and community members:
Case U-21291 (July 2023)
re: rate schedules (DTE gas)
January 2024 testimony
https://mi-psc.my.site.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/0688y00000BRwoEAAT
May 2024 testimony
https://mi-psc.my.site.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/0688y00000DOzW0AAL
Case U-21384 (September 2023)
re: depreciation accrual rates (DTE gas)
March 2024 testimony
https://mi-psc.my.site.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/0688y00000CaDKAAA3
Case U-21297 (January 2023)
re: rate schedules and rules (DTE electric)
June 2023 testimony
https://mi-psc.my.site.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/0688y00000863fkAAA
Case U-20836 (June 2020)
re: rate schedules (DTE electric)
May 2022 testimony
https://mi-psc.my.site.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/0688y000002xqzmAAA
Case U-21172 (December 2021)
re: regulatory review (DTE electric)
April 2023 testimony
https://mi-psc.my.site.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/0688y000007ZVRaAAO
Case U-20713 (January 2020)
re: regulatory review (DTE electric)
December 2020 testimony
https://mi-psc.my.site.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/068t000000HxNqpAAF
WHAT IT COSTS
Since 2020, the OSI department has consulted with a legal firm called Rivenoak to intervene in DTE cases before the MPSC. City allocations to Rivenoak have grown rapidly in recent years:
12/10/20
Agreement between Rivenoak and City of Ann Arbor (reported without detail)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4730675&GUID=355B871B-7BDF-4B48-A2D1-F92282F4E97D&FullText=1
12/21/20
$20,000 added to Rivenoak contract (added to previous allocation of $25,000)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4731712&GUID=E8B253B2-9BD8-4566-8021-0FD4DE705DDF&FullText=1
3/2/21
Agreement between Rivenoak and City of Ann Arbor (reported without detail)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4812751&GUID=843F984B-BBA8-432D-BE69-CC7AC268841C&FullText=1
4/19/21
$20,000 added to Rivenoak contract (total not to exceed $65,000)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4904356&GUID=95D7E248-FE22-48B6-B8C7-B2044AD4DCB9&FullText=1
6/21/21
$50,000 annual contract with Rivenoak
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4981702&GUID=4FD07C3F-15F2-4ECB-93D3-178908F5750E&FullText=1
12/6/21
$85,000 annual contract with Rivenoak (amendment to 6/21/21)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5211725&GUID=AD02F1D6-193D-4D13-A163-2D73C8CE6519&FullText=1
6/6/22
$85,000 annual contract with Rivenoak
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5663395&GUID=BF83CD60-CDF2-4EC1-B247-3303FCA25593&FullText=1
7/10/23
$110,000 annual contract with Rivenoak (not reported but referenced 6/18/24)
6/18/24
$54,100 added to contract with Rivenoak (provided from grant funds)
https://a2gov.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6716336&GUID=D6395601-1B8F-48AB-9336-36966FC6F11F&FullText=1
In a little over four years, the City’s annual investment in these specialized legal services has more than tripled: from $45,000 (2020) to $164,100 (2024). Three times, contracts were amended and increased within six months of initial approval.
WHY THIS MATTERS
The resolution on this week’s agenda includes two particularly interesting clauses:
Whereas, In some MPSC proceedings the City was the only party advancing certain arguments and in other proceedings it worked collaboratively with other entities to advocate for the City and its residents;
…
Whereas, It is in the public’s interest for the City to be transparent about the arguments advanced by the City before the MPSC and the outcomes of the MPSC proceedings in which the City participated
Nothing in the resolution refers to the cost of these activities in terms of staff time or legal expenses. The operative part of the resolution asks for details about “arguments” and “outcome”:
RESOLVED, That as soon as possible the City Attorney provide a public legal memorandum summarizing the arguments advanced by the City in MPSC proceedings regarding DTE Electric and DTE Gas and the outcome of those proceedings since 2022.
This week, Council submitted no questions about this resolution or any other item on the agenda. When Council eventually gets the legal memo summarizing “arguments” and “outcome,” I hope they have at least one: was it worth the investment?