Reparations Roundup: July-August 2025
Suing for reparations in Wichita
An activist is suing the City of Wichita and its city council in federal court for not considering a reparations ordinance. Mary Dean’s pro se lawsuit alleges that the city council directed Dean to present her proposed ordinance to the Diversity, Inclusion, and Civil Rights Advisory Board instead of presenting it before the council for a vote. The ordinance did not make it past the Board after the council voted to abolish all diversity, equity, and inclusion measures, Dean’s complaint asserts. Wichita Mayor Lily Wu then allegedly ordered Dean removed from a meeting after she asked the council why it had not advanced the ordinance.
Dean is claiming that the City’s actions violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by creating a hostile environment and depriving her of her liberty and right to petition without due process of the law. She is seeking $1,842,482,472 in damages.
Dean previously filed a complaint with the City’s Ethics Board against Mayor Wu for not engaging with reparations proposals. The Board concluded that Wu did not commit any ethics violations.
This land is not your land
California’s Agricultural Land Equity Task Force is recommending that the State transfer state-owned property to Native American tribes as a way to advance “agricultural land equity.” The Task Force, which the State Legislature established in 2022, is responsible for submitting a report of recommendations to address system barriers and racial disparities in land access. In addition to land transfers, the Task Force’s draft report released in August recommends funding for “socially disadvantaged” and “underserved producers” to acquire land. The definition of a socially disadvantaged producer includes only minority groups. The Task Force’s final report is due in January 2026.
California Legislature set to vote on reparations bills
Several bills from the “Road to Repair 2025 Priority Bill Package” that are grounded in the recommendations of the California Reparations Task Force have made their way through committee hearings and could soon face a vote by the legislature. They are:
AB 7 – Admission Preferences for Descendants – California universities would be able to consider giving a preference in admissions to applicants who are descendants of slaves. California’s Prop 209 notably prohibits the State from granting preferential treatment to individuals on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, and national origin.
AB 57 – Home Purchase Assistance Program – Ten percent of funds for the State’s home purchase assistance programs would be made available to applicants who meet the requirements for a loan under the program and are descendants of formerly enslaved persons.
AB 62 – Compensation for Racially Motivated Eminent Domain – Establishes a process for reviewing, investigating, and recommending compensation of claims for property taken by eminent domain or uncompensated due to the owners’ race.
AB 742 – License Priority for Descendants – Licensing boards under the Department of Consumer Affairs would expedite the license applications of descendants of enslaved persons.
SB 437 – Descendant Genealogy and Descendancy – The State would allocate $6 million to The California State University to conduct research in furtherance of the Reparations Task Force recommendations. This would include exploring ways to confirm that an individual is a descendant of an enslaved person.
SB 518 – Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery – This agency would also determine how to confirm descendants of enslaved persons.
