Access Press Release PDF Here ->>
The ADOS Advocacy Foundation Maryland Chapter is the state’s leading lineage-based advocacy organization, dedicated to the political education and material advancement of Negro, African-American, ADOS residents. Our work focuses on the implementation of a “Black Agenda” through rigorous legislative research, budget analysis, and data-driven advocacy. We seek to build stable, collaborative relationships with municipal and state leaders to ensure that reparative policies are anchored in the specific historical debt owed to the descendant class of U.S. chattel slavery.
As an organization, we recognize that the effectiveness of any restorative justice initiative depends on the practicalities of administrative clarity. Our work is built on the principle that effective policy requires a precise, shared understanding of a mission’s scope. In any complex policy project—much like a public-private partnership where distinct stakeholders must align on specific technical definitions—the success of a commission depends on the rigorous application of its founding mandate.
Legislative Analysis and Operational Distinctions
The real issue is the operational clarity of enabling legislation. The Greenbelt City Council Motion of March 28, 2022, established a mandate to research inequities among “African-American and Native American” residents. While well-intentioned, this combined phrasing necessitates a rigorous logical distinction to be successful. Logically, Native American reparative frameworks are often centered on tribal sovereignty and indigenous dispossession—matters frequently handled at the state level by specialized entities like the Maryland Commission on Indian Affairs. Conversely, the “Negro, African-American, ADOS” portion of the Greenbelt mandate requires an equally specific focus. A primary challenge lies in the fact that the pursuit of a broad “reparations” narrative must not come at the expense of data-driven specificity. When municipal mandates group distinct historical harms together without clear sub-categories, it can lead to administrative friction. A focus on lineage is a strict constructionist approach to fulfilling this research requirement: identifying the specific class of persons whose ancestors were subject to U.S. chattel slavery and the local exclusion that followed. Documenting exact lineage fulfills the mandate to study “Negro, African-American, ADOS” populations without obstructing parallel work for indigenous studies.
Historical Precedents for Specialized Mandates
Maryland’s history of commission governance supports the separation of research tracks. In the past, attempts to merge indigenous and “Negro, African-American, ADOS” histories into a single state-level commission were abandoned in favor of the current, specialized model—such as the transition of the Maryland Commission on Negro History and Culture into the independent Maryland Commission on African-American History and Culture. The fundamental concern here is not that both groups do not deserve study, but that the research required for each is operationally distinct. We understand why municipal leaders might seek to group these issues to build political consensus. However, the “New Narrative” of positive-sum growth suggests that we must be more precise. Targeted investments in the ADOS community are a high-yield investment in the future of our state’s economy. By repairing the specific legacy of slavery and Jim Crow, we unlock untapped potential and build a more resilient economy for everyone.
Proposed Resolution: Adopting State-Level Best Practices
To ensure the integrity of municipal redress missions, we recommend the formal adoption of administrative “best practices” modeled after established Maryland state standards. A significant factor in previous governance difficulties is that a merged mandate for “Negro, African-American, ADOS and Native American” residents often lacks the operational clarity found at the state level. Maryland’s own administrative history confirms that the research methodologies for indigenous land claims and “Negro, African-American, ADOS” financial redress are operationally distinct. In previous decades, attempts to merge these histories into a single commission were corrected through administrative separation. To avoid future governance deadlocks, municipal bodies should adopt the state’s proven “Parallel Workstream” model through the following structural refinements:
- Establishment of Autonomous Workstreams: Formally bifurcate research activities into two distinct sub-commissions or workstreams: one dedicated to Piscataway Nation and other indigenous claims, and a second dedicated to “Negro, African-American, ADOS” lineage-based claims.
- Adoption of Lineage-Based Data Standards: Utilize data disaggregation to distinguish between general racial equity and the specific reparative debt owed to the descendant class.
- Operational Independence: Much like the Maryland Commission on Indian Affairs operates separately from ethnic commissions within the Governor’s Office, ensure that the methodologies for indigenous land claims do not dilute the specific jurisprudential requirements for “Negro, African-American, ADOS” redress.
By implementing these structural refinements, municipal bodies can fulfill their original legislative promise to both indigenous and descendant populations with the transparency and accuracy they deserve. This approach ensures that Piscataway Nation and other indigenous claims receive the sovereignty-focused research they require, while the “Negro, African-American, ADOS” lineage-based debt is documented with the exactitude that only specialized, disaggregated research can provide. We remain committed to serving as a resource for municipal partners to ensure that commissions are equipped with the economic expertise and disaggregated data sets necessary to achieve their legislative goals.
