ATLRepair AtlantaReparations Study Commission

Results · public aggregate

What Atlanta is saying.

Every submitted survey moves these numbers. Identities stay private, and the public page shows only aggregates. The Commission's ratified direction lives in the Blueprint.

14

Voices recorded

6

Commission

8

Community

Aug 18

Last voice

01

What are reparations, for Atlanta?

Which framing should anchor Atlanta's definition of reparations?

Strong consensusn=14
Full repair, the international framework93%
Start with early wins, build toward full repair7%
Harm-specific remedies0%
Community reparations: collective investment0%

Rank the goals that should guide Atlanta's work.

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
1. Direct repair to harmed people & descendantsavg 2.4
2. Institutional change so harms cannot repeatavg 3.1
3. Closing the racial wealth gapavg 3.3
4. Political power & self-determinationavg 4
5. Truth & acknowledgmentavg 4.6
6. Healing & rehabilitation servicesavg 4.9
7. Memorialization & public memoryavg 5.8

How should Atlanta's work relate to federal and state reparations?

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
Complement the federal case36%
Build a national model36%
Act locally either way29%

"Atlanta's celebrated story of Black progress ('the Black Mecca,' 'the City Too Busy to Hate') has obscured the scale of documented harm, and our public work should directly engage with that narrative."

Strong consensusn=14
0
1
0
2
1
3
0
4
13
5
Strongly disagreemean 4.9Strongly agree

It is 2030. Atlanta's reparations process is being called the strongest in the nation. Describe what happened.

Awaiting responsesn=13

13 written responses, read in full by the Commission. Themes surface in the Blueprint.

02

Eligibility & beneficiaries

What should anchor eligibility for individual-level remedies?

Majority directionn=14
Lineage: descendants of enslaved people50%
Different rules for different programs21%
All Black Atlantans14%
Documented local harm & their descendants7%
Defer until the harm record is built7%

Which verification supports should Atlanta build, whichever eligibility rule it chooses?

Strong consensusn=14
Partnerships with genealogical societies & archives79%
Free genealogy & records support office71%
Open a descendant & harmed-family registry immediately64%
Community verification board21%
Match paperwork to benefit size7%

What geography should define Atlanta's responsibility?

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
City limits + the displaced diaspora43%
Wherever the City's documented acts caused harm36%
Coordinate the geography with Fulton County21%
Current city limits0%

"Descendants of those directly harmed should hold formal decision-making roles in designing remedies, not only advisory input."

Strong consensusn=14
0
1
1
2
1
3
3
4
9
5
Strongly disagreemean 4.4Strongly agree
03

Harms, eras & scope

Which eras should the Commission formally investigate?

Strong consensusn=14
Jim Crow: massacre, zoning, terror (1906-1954)100%
Convict leasing (1866-1908)93%
Urban renewal & the highways (1954-1975)93%
Public housing & the Olympic city (1975-2000)93%
Harms that continue (2000-present)93%
Enslavement & the founding city (1837-1865)79%

Distribute 100 research points across the harm areas Atlanta should document most deeply.

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
Housing & land19.3 pts avg
Economic exclusion13.9 pts avg
Racial terror & massacre13.6 pts avg
Stolen labor12.9 pts avg
Policing, courts & jail10.4 pts avg
Education10 pts avg
Civic exclusion7.9 pts avg
Health & environment6.1 pts avg
Cultural erasure & memory6.1 pts avg

Which parts of City government should be formally examined for their role?

Strong consensusn=14
Ordinances & zoning code100%
Police & municipal court93%
Contracting & procurement93%
Urban renewal & development agencies79%
Tax assessment & finance79%
Atlanta Housing Authority64%
Public works & utilities64%
Parks & cemeteries64%
Atlanta Public Schools (joint inquiry)64%
Olympic-era entities64%

"The Commission's mandate should include present-day harms (displacement, appraisal bias, contracting gaps), not only historical ones."

Strong consensusn=14
0
1
0
2
1
3
3
4
10
5
History onlymean 4.6Fully include ongoing harm
04

Research strategy & the harm report

How should Atlanta build its harm record?

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
Rapid synthesis, then remedies36%
A full Atlanta Harm Report29%
Truth hearings first21%
City chapters built onto Fulton's foundation14%

Who should do the research?

Strong consensusn=14
Hybrid: academic rigor + community corps + a staff core79%
University consortium leads14%
Commission-directed staff & consultants7%
Paid community researchers & oral-history corps0%

Should Atlanta put numbers on the harm, and if so, which methodologies?

Strong consensusn=14
Extraction-Accumulation accounting71%
Property-takings audit71%
Stolen-wages calculation64%
Citywide wealth-gap benchmark64%
Losses estimated per year lived under the harm43%
Keep the record qualitative36%

Which truth-telling practices should Atlanta commit to?

Strong consensusn=14
Formal public truth hearings93%
A story-collection site where each person controls their story64%
Counselors and care at every hearing64%
A paid oral-history corps57%
Anonymity & pseudonym options57%
Stipends for testimony & sustained participation43%
05

Community engagement & shared power

Rank the engagement channels Atlanta should invest in most.

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
1. NPU-based briefings & liaisonsavg 3
2. Citywide town halls & forumsavg 3.9
3. Schools & youth engagementavg 3.9
4. Going where people already areavg 4.3
5. Digital survey & storytelling portalavg 4.9
6. Arts, culture & commemorative eventsavg 5.1
7. Pay trusted community organizationsavg 5.3
8. Faith institutionsavg 5.6

How much decision power should the community hold?

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
Residents draft, Commission ratifies43%
Voting community seats21%
Descendant sign-off21%
Input only14%

Should sustained community participation be paid?

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
No43%
Yes, broadly29%
Yes, narrowly29%

"The Commission should create a formal youth council and a schools strategy, so the generation that inherits this plan helps write it."

Strong consensusn=14
0
1
0
2
2
3
5
4
7
5
Strongly disagreemean 4.4Strongly agree
06

Remedies & priorities

Distribute 100 points across the remedy families Atlanta should prioritize.

Majority directionn=14
Direct payments37.9 pts avg
Policy reform so harms cannot repeat11.8 pts avg
Guaranteed income pilot11.1 pts avg
Land return & community land trusts8.9 pts avg
Housing repair & ownership8.2 pts avg
Education7.9 pts avg
Black business & wealth-building5 pts avg
Health & healing4.6 pts avg
Memory & memorials4.6 pts avg

What is Atlanta's stance on direct cash payments?

Majority directionn=14
An essential centerpiece50%
One tool among several43%
Prioritize communal investment instead7%
Later, deliberately0%

Where should the balance sit between individual-level and community-level repair?

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
5
1
0
2
5
3
4
4
0
5
Fully individualmean 2.6Fully community

Early wins or the whole plan first?

Strong consensusn=14
Both at once, on separate tracks71%
Deliver early wins in year one14%
Comprehensive plan first14%

Describe one remedy Atlanta should pioneer that no other city has done.

Awaiting responsesn=10

10 written responses, read in full by the Commission. Themes surface in the Blueprint.

07

Legal strategy & durability

Which legal design should anchor eligibility and program structure?

Majority directionn=14
Eligibility by descent57%
Groups defined by documented harm21%
Parallel tracks21%
Repair by neighborhood0%

How should repair money and benefits be delivered?

Strong consensusn=14
City ordinance + dedicated fund93%
Settling documented claims43%
Private charitable trust36%
Community land trust & land transfers36%
Services & benefits structured as an exchange29%
Nonprofits as go-betweens14%

"We should design every recommendation assuming it will be challenged in court, and build the evidence accordingly."

Strong consensusn=14
0
1
1
2
2
3
2
4
9
5
Overcautious: design for justice, not lawyersmean 4.4Exactly right: build for litigation

How should the Commission handle the State of Georgia?

Divided — needs deliberationn=14
Build a state-level alliance early43%
Make the public case loudly43%
Head down, build quietly14%
08

Funding the work & the remedies

How should the Commission's own work be funded?

Strong consensusn=14
City budget appropriation100%
Philanthropic support for research & engagement86%
University contributions of time and staff71%
External grants64%
Pro bono legal & professional services64%

Rank the funding sources Atlanta should pursue for remedies themselves.

Majority directionn=14
1. A dedicated revenue sourceavg 1.9
2. Annual general-fund commitmentavg 2.7
3. Contributions from implicated institutionsavg 3.6
4. Land & asset transfersavg 4.3
5. Private & philanthropic trustavg 4.4
6. Municipal bond issueavg 5.4
7. A negotiated settlement fundavg 5.9

What scale of ambition should Atlanta declare?

Majority directionn=14
Let the assessment set the number64%
A standing share of the budget21%
Commit to $100M or more14%
Start at proven municipal scale ($10-25M)0%
09

Commission operations & partnerships

How should CARSC organize its committees?

Majority directionn=6
Both at once67%
By harm area17%
By function17%

What staffing should the Commission secure this year?

Strong consensusn=6
A research manager & research team100%
A community engagement lead67%
Communications capacity67%
Dedicated legal counsel33%
Borrowed City staff & departmental liaisons33%
University fellows & graduate researchers33%
A dedicated director / project executive17%

What should the relationship with Fulton County's completed work be?

Majority directionn=14
Independent but aligned57%
Formal joint structure21%
Divide the work by written agreement21%
Push toward one metro program0%

Which transparency commitments should the Commission adopt as standing practice?

Strong consensusn=6
Published agendas, minutes & votes100%
A public progress dashboard83%
Meetings rotating through the NPUs83%
Open research data50%
A public 'you said, we did' log50%
10

Accountability, narrative & success

Which success measures should the Commission publicly commit to?

Strong consensusn=14
Descendant & community satisfaction86%
Programs funded & operating71%
Repair delivered to identifiable people64%
Recommendations adopted by Council57%
Measurable change in disparities57%
Structural policy changes enacted57%
A model other cities adopt36%
Breadth of participation14%

Which risks worry you most for Atlanta's process?

Strong consensusn=14
Litigation freezing the program71%
The state overriding or blocking the program71%
Endless study without decisions57%
A symbolic outcome only50%
Community distrust36%
Funding evaporating in a budget cycle29%
Political turnover21%
Commissioner burnout & attrition21%
A scandal in how a program is run7%

"I am prepared to spend real political and personal capital to see this through, including on the parts that will be attacked."

Strong consensusn=6
0
1
0
2
0
3
1
4
5
5
Not there yetmean 4.8All in

What should this survey have asked that it didn't?

Awaiting responsesn=6

6 written responses, read in full by the Commission. Themes surface in the Blueprint.

See it differently? Add your answers.

Take the survey →