Committee questions Dykema Gossett contract for broadband challenge work; item returned for OCP clarification

The Detroit City Council Committee of the Whole paused final approval of a $25,000 contract with the law firm Dykema Gossett PLLC to advise the city's Office of Digital Equity and Inclusion on federal and state broadband availability challenges, and voted to bring the item back in one week for clarification from the Office of Contracting and Procurement (OCP).

The committee heard from attorney Jason Hanselman of Dykema Gossett, who said the firm provided a legal analysis in late 2023 to evaluate challenge options under the Federal Communications Commission and Michigan processes for the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. “This was purely a legal analysis and advising the city how we could challenge the FCC and the state of Michigan’s determinations,” Hanselman said.

Why it matters: the BEAD program is the primary federal mechanism distributing high‑speed broadband funding to states. City staff told the committee the work aimed to establish whether federal/state availability counts undercounted Detroit and whether the city could obtain additional BEAD dollars for low‑income residents.

Council members pressed several points: Member Mary Waters asked why a contract that covers work described as completed in November–December 2023 remains effective through Jan. 3, 2026, and whether the city is being asked to pay for previously completed work. Hanselman said Dykema submitted a final bill “about 15 months ago” and that he did not anticipate further billing, but he confirmed the firm already had been paid under an earlier contract and that the present contract appears to address outstanding fees from that previous engagement.

Member Angela Whitfray Callaway objected to paying retroactively for services that, in her view, had already been performed without timely notification to the committee. “If you provided any services and you didn’t get paid and you didn’t come before this council, I call that pro bono work,” Callaway said. She urged OCP to explain why the matter is before the committee now and said she expected OCP to appear at the next meeting with an explanation.

Chadrick Flenno of the mayor’s office told the committee he was working to engage OCP staff for next week’s meeting so they could explain procurement timing and any unsettled invoices.

The committee’s action: by unanimous consent, members voted to return the contract item to the committee in one week for OCP’s explanation and documentation before formal approval.

Background and scope: Hanselman told members the firm’s work did not result in a formal administrative challenge to the FCC or Michigan’s MiHi office because the parties “reached a resolution” through the city’s Office of Digital Equity and Inclusion. Hanselman said the firm’s engagement concerned mapping and availability determinations used in BEAD eligibility decisions, with the goal of increasing funding to serve low‑income Detroit households.

Next steps: OCP is to appear at the next Internal Operations meeting to explain why a contract that references work in 2023 is presented now, to provide a payment history and any outstanding invoices, and to clarify the contract’s end date and whether additional billing is expected.