ABDUL EL-SAYED EL BLASTS DTE'S GRIP ON MICHIGAN ENERGY: 'WE'RE PAYING THE PRICE
Executive summary
Abdul El‑Sayed has repeatedly criticized Michigan’s energy status quo and DTE Energy’s role in it, arguing that customers and communities “pay the price” for utility decisions; his past plans have pushed for stronger enforcement, net metering and a shift to 100% renewables by 2030 [1] [2]. Recent reporting on DTE’s fast‑tracking of a large Saline Township data‑center power deal has renewed concerns about transparency and potential cost impacts on other customers [3].
1. El‑Sayed’s long record on energy and utilities: from net‑metering to 100% renewables
El‑Sayed’s public policy work on Michigan energy is longstanding and explicit: as a gubernatorial candidate and policy proponent he pushed a “Renew Michigan” agenda that included tougher enforcement of environmental laws, consolidating regulators into a single department of the environment and an ambition for “100% renewable energy” — and he has advocated legislation to expand net‑metering so individual renewable producers could sell power back to the grid rather than “pay DTE” [2] [1].
2. The framing: “We’re paying the price” — what he means and where it fits politically
When El‑Sayed vilifies DTE’s “grip” on Michigan energy, he is tapping two themes he’s used before: holding corporations accountable and protecting consumers from decisions that shift costs onto ordinary ratepayers. That framing aligns with his broader progressive platform — increased enforcement of environmental rules and more aggressive clean‑energy targets — and positions him against entrenched utility interests [2] [1].
3. The concrete controversy driving fresh headlines: DTE’s Saline Township data‑center deal
Local reporting in November 2025 highlights DTE’s push to fast‑track special electric contracts for a proposed $7 billion, 1.4‑gigawatt data‑center in Saline Township and a contractual deadline that opponents say creates a “false sense of urgency” [3]. Environmental groups and residents warn the contract could saddle other customers with additional costs if not scrutinized; DTE acknowledges a customer termination provision tied to a Dec. 5 approval date [3].
4. Evidence cited by critics — transparency and rate risk — and what sources say
Opponents’ concerns documented in reporting center on transparency of the proposed contract, the speed of review, and the possibility that special deals for large customers shift cost burdens. Planet Detroit’s coverage quotes renewable‑energy advocates and notes the specific approval deadline and the size of the project as grounds for caution [3]. That reporting provides the concrete facts critics use to argue El‑Sayed’s general critique has current and tangible examples to point at [3].
5. What supporters of DTE or large economic development projects say — available sources
Available sources do not include direct DTE defenses or detailed utility justifications beyond noting DTE’s statement that the customer could terminate if not approved by Dec. 5 [3]. Therefore, specific industry counterarguments (for example, jobs, tax revenue or grid‑planning rationales) are not present in the provided reporting and cannot be summarized here without further sourcing.
6. Where El‑Sayed’s policy prescriptions intersect with today’s fight
El‑Sayed’s earlier prescriptions — stronger enforcement, consolidated oversight and expanded net‑metering — would change both the regulatory posture and the financial incentives utilities face, which directly map onto concerns raised about special contracts and customer protections in the Saline center debate [2] [1]. His calls for public accountability and cleaner energy are consistent with groups pressing regulators to slow the DTE contract review [2] [1] [3].
7. Limitations, competing viewpoints and what’s missing from current reporting
The available collection of sources documents El‑Sayed’s policy positions and the Saline‑DTE controversy but lacks DTE’s full justification for the contract, regulator statements, independent cost‑impact studies and El‑Sayed’s contemporaneous comments about this specific data‑center case. Those gaps mean we cannot definitively adjudicate whether DTE’s actions are improper or whether special contracts will raise rates; we can only report that critics — and El‑Sayed’s long‑standing platform — view such deals as symptomatic of excessive utility influence [1] [2] [3].
8. Bottom line for readers
El‑Sayed’s critique that Michiganders “pay the price” for utility decisions sits on two pillars documented in the record: his progressive energy platform advocating tougher oversight and expanded net‑metering [1] [2], and recent, concrete controversy over DTE’s expedited power contract for a massive data center that critics say merits closer scrutiny [3]. Readers seeking to move beyond rhetoric should look for regulator filings, DTE’s full public statements and independent rate‑impact analyses — items not present in the sources compiled here [3].