The checkered flag has flown over this year’s Detroit Grand Prix.

IndyCar driver Kyle Kirkwood took the win in the final race of the weekend on the downtown street track, and hometown Team Penske is moving forward, away from controversy that erupted the weekend before at the Indianapolis 500.

Roger Penske owns both the Indianapolis Motor Speedway and the IndyCar series itself, so his team faced extra criticism when two Penske cars were penalized at Indy for using an illegal part.

But Penske says there are many positives he’s taking away from the famed 500.

The following interviews have been edited for clarity and length.

Roger Penske: We had a great race at Indy, first class winner (driver Alex Palou), great team. We personally were disappointed, as (Penske driver) Josef Newgarden was right where he wanted to be and we had a fuel pump situation. But putting all that aside, I think the most important thing is the fans that we had. We had at least 30,000 more people in ’25 than we did in ’24. I would say the number of real people on the ground was 330,000-plus. And just to see the excitement and the momentum and the kids and the demographics, they just can’t beat it. I think we set a record with over 7 million watching the race, up to almost 8.5 or 9 million at the peak. So I would say we get a 10-plus there.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: Obviously there was the controversy over the penalties that happened from the tech inspections at Indy. You’ve had so much respect at the speedway and now you were getting criticized. Looking back at it, what’s your view everything that happened?

RP: Well, I’m not hiding. We had an incident there which, quite honestly, I felt was unfortunate. We had run the same parts and the same pieces for a year and a half. So to me, to have it thrown out on qualification day was disappointing, because it’s a tight game here in terms of the competition. But look, I’ve got to respect the officials and they’re holding other people to the same level. And we moved on.

QK: There were some critics saying, “It’s different because it’s Penske’s cars and he owns the series, he owns the track.” What’s your response to those kind of comments?

RP: Well look, everybody has their own opinion. We’ve been racing for five decades and people know who we are. This isn’t the first time a car didn’t pass inspection. But we’re not denying anything. We moved on. And whatever people want to say about me or about our team, it’s unfortunate, but we’re going to continue on the way we are.

QK: Are you thinking about bringing in some outside officials for tech inspection and Race Control, that kind of thing?

RP: I’m not ready to announce anything. That’s going to be up to (IndyCar President) Doug Boles from the standpoint of exactly what we do. I think each year we get better. This is a time for us to reassess all aspects of the sport, the competition, the tracks, specifications, all of it. It’s not just the officials separately. I think there’s a lot we can do to make it better, and that’s our focus.

QK: Now you’re here, back home in Detroit, with the track downtown. What’s your view of how it’s been working here compared to Belle Isle?

RP: It’s been amazing down here. The fact that General Motors and the city of Detroit allow us to use their backyard for this race is amazing. And I think when you look at what’s been able to be done here, people that worked with us to help Detroit host the Super Bowl are the ones helping us here. So, I couldn’t be more thrilled. It’s terrific.

The excitement over the downtown scene in Detroit is shared by six-time IndyCar driving champion Scott Dixon. He won the Detroit race in 2024 and finished 11th this year.

But Dixon says he also shares the concerns over officiating revealed at the Indy 500.

Scott Dixon: It’s kind of a tough one. I think it’s great to see maybe a turning of the page for enforcement on a lot of stuff. I think it will set a precedent moving forward, which will maybe deter some situations. You never want to see it, for sure. You don’t want to see anybody have opportunities taken away from them from something that’s totally out of their control. For the drivers, we kind of just drive the cars. Some of the things on the car you don’t even know too much about. So, I think it’s good for the sport.

Quinn Klinefelter: They had problems in the tech inspections during qualifying and then penalized some cars after the race as well. There had been some concerns raised that IndyCar should perhaps bring in outside officials for at least Race Control and tech. Do you think that’s an idea that should be pursued?

SD: Yeah, I think for a series that’s so big, the technical department doesn’t have a whole lot of resources. Like a lot of sports, even in Formula One, it’s kind of self-controlled by other teams, what they see. And I think that’s what we’ve seen play out, I think that’s what’s really happened in the past. The difficult part for the series right now is that with Penske, they own the series, they run a three-car team and they’re also the engine supplier for one of the manufacturers. They own the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. You hope there’s not any conflicts, but at least that can be the perception of it. I think for them to try and distance as much as they can would be good, not just for themselves, but also for the sport.

QK: When Roger first bought the Speedway and the series, people said if there’s anyone that we can trust to do both, run a team and the series, it would be him. Is there some trust that’s been broken among other teams at this point?

SD: I don’t think so. I think Roger is a is an extremely stand-up person. Look at what he’s done in his whole career and what he’s done for our sport. I think Roger, as far as owning the Speedway and the series, came at a very fitting time. And they’re very good at what they’re doing. We’ve seen that with the deals that they’ve done, whether it’s with Fox to broadcast it or the rejuvenation of the Speedway, all of these things are extremely important for IndyCar racing as such. But there’s always going to be people that kind of nitpick and try to peel back the layers on things that maybe necessarily aren’t there. I think what they’ve done is huge.

QK: Now you’re here in Detroit. What’s your view of how it’s working here on the downtown streets compared to Belle Isle a few years past?

SD: It’s always a tough one here. I think the track layout, especially in practice, is quite tough to even get two or three consecutive laps at speed. It funnels a lot from turn four to turn five before everybody preps out of seven. There’s some very inviting moments on the course too, like the hairpin after a very long straight. It creates some chaos. And I don’t think that’s necessarily bad. It’s just a different place and a different style of racing. I think at the forefront, if you can stay out of trouble, you’re probably going to have a pretty good day here. And strategy-wise, it’s always interesting. The atmosphere downtown is very cool. It’s definitely very different from what we had at Belle Isle. As far as the circuit, Belle Isle was a lot of fun, just because it was quite technical, it had a good flow to it. It raced really well. But it’s a different mood and generation, I think, for a downtown street race and I think it’s cool. It’s going to build on it.

QK: Street tracks are often very narrow. Some people feared drivers might be really squished together at the downtown Detroit track, with very limited passing opportunities. Are you finding that, or were those concerns overblown?

SD: The racing situation the last couple of years has been pretty wild. And I think that’s good for the series. It’s not just your typical “follow the leader.” This year we’ve had three races in a row that went from green to checker with no cautions, which is kind of unheard of for our sport. So I think it’s always challenging but it’s the same for everybody. You got to make the most of the event. It’s in the early stages of it. Could there be some changes down the road, where they maybe extend the circuit a little bit or open up different kind of pathways and widen some of the parts of it? For sure. But that will be the evolution of the downtown Detroit street race.

A new survey by the University of Michigan finds confidence in the U.S. economy is steadily eroding.

Researchers say the widely-watched Consumer Sentiment Index has shown a sharp decline throughout this year.

The director of the survey, Joanne Hsu, told WDET those responding have a somber view of the nation’s financial future.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Joanne Hsu: One of the huge factors that we’re hearing from consumers is that they’re worried about the impact of trade policy on the economy. This month we had over 2/3 of consumers telling us spontaneously about the impact of tariffs. And largely speaking, these concerns are not positive. People who mentioned tariffs are really worried about inflation coming back. They’re worried that unemployment is going to get worse. It’s not just about tariffs being high. After all, we did capture a few days of interviews after the pause on China tariffs. They’re really worried about uncertainty, unpredictability and instability with policy. They know it makes it really hard for businesses to plan and for consumers to plan as well.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: I understand that this is the lowest that you have seen the Consumer Index be in three years?

JH: That is correct. We are near historic lows. Consumers are really feeling quite negative about the economy across multiple dimensions, their personal finances, buying conditions for big-ticket items, business conditions and labor markets. It’s very loud and clear across demographics and across aspects of the economy.

QK: If it’s been going down for a number of years then that would include the previous occupants of the White House. Have you noticed a difference among consumers since the Trump administration took over from the Biden administration?

JH: The sentiment did rise right after the election. There was a temporary post-election bump. But in December, as Trump started talking more about his planned tariff policy, that’s really when sentiment started to take a turn for the worse. And when we look at the impact from the major policy announcements that happened, tariffs on our North American neighbors, reciprocal global tariffs, after each of these consumer sentiment worsened. Again, the major reason for this is people are concerned that inflation is going to come roaring back. And inflation has been the number one thing on people’s minds for several years now. In 2022, when we hit the all-time historic low, inflation was raging. Consumers have been telling us loud and clear since then that they’re really worried about the cost of living.

QK: Is there any positives you can take from what you’re seeing in the index?

 JH: I’d say the positive thing is that it hasn’t gotten that much worse from last month. We had three consecutive months of very, very steep decline. So the fact that it didn’t tank further this month, I think, should be welcome news. The other thing is that consumers are bracing for the impact of tariffs, but they don’t actually believe that inflation has already gotten out of control. They recognize that inflation slowed over the last couple of years. Of course, they remain frustrated by high prices.

We had historically low sentiment in 2022 but consumers were still willing to spend despite that lack of confidence. One of the big differences between then and now are consumer views of labor markets and their incomes. After the pandemic labor markets were very, very strong. Consumers’ incomes were very reliable. So in spite of the fact that they felt terrible about the economy they were willing to spend because they had the income to support it. Today, it’s different. Consumers are starting to tell us that their incomes are getting weaker. The expected probability of job loss has gone up. We have 2/3 of consumers expecting unemployment to worsen in the year ahead. That labor market confidence we saw three years ago just isn’t here anymore, which does not bode well for consumer spending going forward.

Editor’s note: This interview was re-aired on The Metro on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. Listen to the Metro segment below.

More stories from The Metro

The Catholic Church’s selection of its first American Pope took many observers by surprise, both worldwide and those present at the event.

That includes Michigan native and WDET photographer Dawn Uhl-Zifilippo.

She was in Vatican City during the conclave to elect the new Pope.

She described the electrifying moments after Cardinal Robert Prevost stepped to a balcony and delivered his first address as Pope Leo XIV.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Dawn Uhl-Zifilippo: It sounds like a soccer match right now in St Peter’s. It’s just unleashed joy right now. All this energy that’s been held back waiting for that decision has just sprung out. Just a lot of happiness, a lot of joy in that square right now. And a lot of people.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: It looks like a vast crowd from all the scenes there. It also sounds as if the announcement that a new pope had been elected made a big difference in the mood of the crowd.

DZ: When I was there earlier it was still a sea of people. But it was actually rather quiet. You would expect a higher crowd noise from the amount of people that were there. I wouldn’t say it was quite reverent, but they were using their “inside” voices, almost like when you’re walking through a museum. But under that was this energy, a vibration, if you will, that felt like a coiled spring. So there was a lot of anticipation, but it was a calm, quiet anticipation. You knew when the announcement was made that the crowd would just explode. And that’s exactly what’s happened.

QK: You’ve traveled a bit, you’ve seen various places. Now you’re there during this historic event. Is there anything that has surprised you, something that you weren’t expecting?

DZ: Once again, it is the way the crowd conducted itself, the huge amount of people there. The first day there was 45,000 people. The Vatican City is about 109 acres of land and everywhere you went, it was full of thousands of people. But it didn’t sound like you had that many people there. I guess it was the respect and almost reverence. It was not quite that because not everybody there was waiting to see who the new pope was going to be. There’s a lot of people who are simply tourists. But still, the kind of respect there among that many people, it was really kind of impressive.

QK: Have you heard any talk among those people or others in hotels, bars, etc., about their reaction now that the church has actually named its’ first-ever pope from the U.S.?

DZ: I think a lot of people are a little surprised. The top two contenders were Italian, so it was a bit of a shocker. There was some conversation before the announcement was made, where I was at, hoping that there would be someone to follow in the footsteps of Pope Francis and continue the church on that trajectory. Because, in their opinion, the church needed that progressive stance. So after the announcement was made and we found out who the new pope is, his address to everyone thanking Pope Francis, it was obvious that he was going to be following in that line. I think there was a bit of relief, quite honestly, that this is where it was going. Now, of course, not everybody feels that way. But among the groups that I overheard, that was the general feeling.

QK: Obviously this is a global event. You see pictures of people waving flags, carrying them around. Did you ever see anybody with any U.S. flags or anyone there saying, “Yeah, go American?”

DZ: Not that I saw to begin with. And I was in the space for quite a while. I stood in place just listening and I counted somewhere around maybe eight different languages that I’m aware of. But not very many English-speaking people there. You saw pride of place, people carrying flags and wrapping themselves in the flag of their home country. I did not see any American flags then. Now that the announcements have been made you do see some people that have American flags in the square celebrating. Clearly this position as pope has impact across the world and it was reflected in the people that were walking around the square. There is a lot of people with hope. We’ve always known this as a powerful position. But being on the ground, seeing the amount of people, the diversity, it really drives home how powerful this position is.

QK: For people that would have just watched the event on television or online, is there something that you’ve seen, felt, heard, that people wouldn’t get from just a flat screen video of the event?

DZ: Being on the ground it was, I don’t know how to put this, heartening, I guess. There was this underlying feeling of hope and anticipation. And walking in that space, again with everyone being calm and relatively quiet, it really was powerful. That this position would have that kind of impact, that someone embodied that kind of hope and almost unity, honestly. It’s under a particular religion, but it was something lovely to see with all of the violence and acrimony that’s going on now. This amount of people having a peaceful gathering with the hope and the anticipation behind it. It was refreshing. And the contrast over three hours’ time. It being very full in the area around St. Peter’s but still some space, to now being just solid human beings. In three hours’ time. The contrast is stunning, the calm and now the joy and the energy. It’s like you flipped a switch.

This year marks a time of transition in the city of Detroit.

Voters will elect a new leader of the city to replace long-time Mayor Mike Duggan, who is leaving to run for governor.

And experts at the think tank Detroit Future City predict the new mayor will face several challenges, like building new infrastructure to handle flooding and power outages.

But the group’s CEO, Anika Goss, told WDET one of the core issues the city must focus on is growing a sector some analysts say is disappearing — Detroit’s middle class.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Anika Goss, Detroit Future City: We use the language of “middle class,” but you can also use the language of “middle wage,” those within the median income for Detroit. And this particular demographic trend we really feel is important, because this is generally your tax base. They are staying in homes, buying homes, investing in their communities. And we want to focus on this because it is the largest demographic to leave Detroit.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: What would you advise Detroit’s next mayor to do to help grow that segment of the populace?

AG: First, develop the neighborhoods. Make the neighborhoods places that would retain and attract middle-class households. The second issue is, how can Detroiters grow wealth and remain in Detroit? What kind of jobs are there nearby and available that actually have a middle-class wage, not only entry wages but also growth wages. It’s an environment that also creates strong businesses and entrepreneurs that can actually grow their own business. These are elements that can appeal to middle-class households. Two other things that I think are really important, and this can be tough for mayors, but they’re going to have to figure out property taxes. They are still uneven and very, very high in Detroit. So really thinking about what can we do to stabilize and lower the property tax rate. And second, work cooperatively with the schools, public and private and charter, so that the education system in Detroit also becomes something to attract and retain families.

QK: When you talk about raising incomes, outgoing Mayor Mike Duggan has touted how many companies he says have located in the city over the last decade or so. And oftentimes those businesses are supposed to give first preference for new hires to Detroiters. The city also has work training programs available. Would you say the next mayor should they try to build on that or go beyond it somehow?

AG: I think build AND go beyond. I think what was great about the Duggan administration is that he did really set this environment of Detroit being a place for you to invest in. And it was at a time when a lot of companies were not thinking of coming here. Now they are. But what we found is that a lot of the companies are still looking at Detroit proper as a place for low-wage labor. We have to really market Detroit as a place that has talent for a diversity of income ranges. Really work with these companies to ensure the jobs that we’re receiving in Detroit are jobs where you can actually grow your wage over time. I feel like there were really good deals made for low and moderate wages earners. There are people who are out of work that definitely need those jobs. But we can’t just stop there and declare it a success. We have to also really consider how we bring in other jobs and prepare Detroiters for those other jobs that are making a higher wage.

QK: Along with the income and job situation, people in the city have talked for years about the overall development in Detroit seeming to focus on the downtown area. And how does it get out to the neighborhoods? Duggan, for one, had launched a series of projects to try to strengthen various blocks in the city. Again, is there something you think the next mayor should do to go beyond that? Or should they try some entirely new approach?

AG: I think that it will be imperative for the next mayor to take the Strategic Neighborhood Fund and other neighborhood initiatives even further. To really create neighborhoods that have a diversity of housing choices, that have amenities and that are looking at places for investment in these areas. There’s still several neighborhoods in Detroit where there are no mortgages, whole census tracts that do not have mortgages in Detroit. The next mayor will have that challenge of not just stabilizing the strategic neighborhood places but also thinking about where else throughout the city can we target for a variety of households and a variety of incomes. You should be able to live in a neighborhood and increase your income and not have to move out of the city. You should be able to identify neighborhoods where you can do that. And right now, even with the Strategic Neighborhood Fund initiative, there’s still only 12 middle-class neighborhoods in Detroit out of more than 200 census tracts. We still have a long way to go.

QK: Do you think there’ll be enough funding available to push such efforts?

AG: There’s never enough money to do all of the things that we want to do. You really are going to have to prioritize. And if the North Star for the next mayor is, “How do we actually lay out a growth plan for Detroit and Detroiters?” That’s a very different proposition than thinking broadly about how to make Detroit better. I feel like the Duggan administration got us to this point. It’s really important now for the next mayor to take it even further. It’s something that is absolutely imperative. I don’t see an alternative.

Some university faculty members across the Big Ten system want the schools to pool resources to help defend each other if the Trump administration threatens their funding or programs.

Those schools include the University of Michigan, where the faculty senate voted overwhelmingly to approve a non-binding resolution creating such an alliance.

Michigan State University’s faculty senate also voted recently to ask the school’s administration to enact the joint-defense proposal.

MSU Faculty Senate Vice Chair Jack Lipton told WDET the measure stems from a recommendation first developed and passed by educators at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Jack Lipton, Michigan State University Faculty Senate: They had come up with this idea to create an agreement that ran like NATO, “an attack on one is an attack on all,” and propose this out to the schools who are part of the Big Ten Academic Alliance. We took it up with the idea that the federal government, through executive orders, is trying to control what universities are doing through intimidation, through loss of funding. And by going after schools one at a time, it’s difficult for schools to mount an effective defense when they are looking at potentially losses of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars in their funding. Soultimately the faculty senate, which is an advisory body, asks that our president lead with the other presidents of the Big Ten in pushing back against what we consider to be inappropriate and unlawful incursions into the academic mission of private and public universities.

Quinn Klinefelter, WDET News: What would this have the university do if, in fact, administrators accepted it?

JL: The university would put funds into a central repository that would be accessible to all members of the Big Ten, and also utilize human capital, with respect to the offices of the General Counsel and their attorneys. They would work together to mount defenses of any member school if they are challenged by the federal government, through these executive orders, with a loss of funding where they’re targeted based upon perfectly legal actions as universities. They’re all following Title 9 regulations related to students. A lot of what the federal government is trying to do is to say that schools are involved in unlawful discrimination, when the schools are actually supporting equity and inclusion, which this particular administration doesn’t seem to be particularly fond of. Giving all people equal opportunity to gain access to higher education, whether it’s through their work or through education or through jobs.

QK: Have you had any reaction yet from the Michigan State administration as to whether or not they might follow your recommendations?

JL: I’ve not. Anything that we pass in the faculty senate is strictly advisory. It’s our sense of what should be done and the university president has no obligation to act on our resolution. I would hope that as it garners continued public attention, the president will work with other big Ten leaders to try and figure out some way to support each other so that we’re not essentially picked off one by one.

QK: There have been a number of faculty senates now throughout Big Ten schools that have either voted for this proposal or seem to be considering it. There were some on your faculty that were a little iffy about doing it. Why is that?

JL: Everyone looks at this differently, right? Some individuals feared that by the very fact we’re considering this, we are putting a target on our backs for the federal government to act specifically against Michigan State University. And there were some that had some trepidation regarding passing it. But then there were others who specifically study things like authoritarian regimes and human rights, they felt this is really that critical point when we have to decide whether we are going to do the right thing or we’re going to do the safe thing. While differences of opinion were clearly present, ultimately, when it came to a vote, we shut off debate and it passed. I think that most faculty are obviously concerned about passing something like this. But even despite that, they saw the value and the appropriateness of taking a stand and making a recommendation. We really want to ensure that higher education can continue to maintain its high ideals and be a place where academic freedom and free speech can be lauded and expected.

“Seeing an administration that is so contemptuous of higher education, so contemptuous of freedom of thought and freedom of expression, is really alarming; they are trying to silence faculty by using the power of the purse and withholding federal funding.”

– Jack Lipton, MSU Faculty Senate Vice Chair

QK: You’ve been involved in high-level academia for decades now. Have you ever seen something similar to this in regards to the federal government’s view of and actions towards higher education?

JL: I don’t think anyone has ever seen anything like this. The post-World War II expansion of higher education has been kind of a crown jewel of the United States. The growth of higher education, the growth of universities, particularly public universities like Michigan State University, have been such a gift to this country. And seeing an administration that is so contemptuous of higher education, so contemptuous of freedom of thought and freedom of expression, is really alarming. They are trying to silence faculty by using the power of the purse and withholding federal funding. We all use those funds in our research, like I and the people in my department do to work on neurodegenerative diseases and find the causes and cures of Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease. They are trying to hold those kinds of funds hostage so that we’ll be quiet. I think that’s wrong, and I’m hopeful that this is a sad, yet brief chapter in American history when it comes to higher education.

Michigan Congresswoman Debbie Dingell is one of 50 U.S. House Democrats demanding a full explanation of an alleged National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) data breach. 

Whistleblower Daniel Berulis, who did IT work for the NLRB, says a representative from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) did more than search for fraud and waste when it visited the agency last month. 

Berulis says DOGE appears to have uploaded a huge amount of data from NLRB’s computers, erased traces of what it did and then left all of the system’s security features turned off. Then someone with an internet address based in Russia repeatedly, but unsuccessfully, tried to access the NLRB computers. 

DOGE never requested access to their systems and the agency’s own internal investigation found no sign of a computer breach,  a spokesperson for the NLRB said. 

Dingell spoke to WDET Senior News Editor Quinn Klinefelter about her concerns and what DOGE could have done with the data. Klinefelter also joined The Metro on Tuesday to recap their conversation.

Use the media player above to hear the full conversation.

Listen to The Metro weekdays from 10 a.m. to noon ET on 101.9 FM and streaming on-demand.

More stories from The Metro