Committee members spent significant time on how the public survey would be gathered and analyzed. Miss Bacchus and IT staff explained that paper surveys gathered at community centers would be entered into SurveyMonkey by committee staff who would cross-check entries. ‘‘What we're going to do is we're gonna pick them up from the rec centers, and her and I will sit down together. And as I enter 1 in and she enters 1 in, we will both check each other to make sure we're doing accurately,’’ said Miss Bacchus.

Some members worried about ballot stuffing and IP-address limits. Mister Coleman and Mister Foushee asked whether the tabulation would distinguish paper entries from online responses and whether paper ballots could be subject to abuse. Miss Pekas (clerk) explained paper responses would be entered into SurveyMonkey and Carl Vinson Institute would not be able to distinguish which responses were entered from paper versus electronic once input.

Members debated whether raw data should be distributed to committee members immediately or only after the institute analyzes it. Dr. Facer and others said the institute will produce an analysis; Miss Bacchus and multiple committee members asked to receive raw data at the same time as the institute’s results so they can prepare follow-up questions. ‘‘My understanding is that that would be a committee decision… it is public data,’’ a Carl Vinson representative said, while some members urged caution to preserve the institute’s contracted analysis work.

IT staff and committee members reported outreach steps: distributed paper surveys at community centers, use of repurposed tablets where sites had no computers or Wi-Fi, and sharing the survey on committee and personal networks. A staff update given during the meeting stated the survey had received about 1,323 responses (announced in the meeting as 1,323). Committee members proposed broader distribution ideas, including mailing surveys with water bills, but noted logistical constraints and costs.

Ending: The committee agreed to continue receiving data and requested the Carl Vinson Institute complete its analysis and share results; committee members also asked that IT and staff continue district-level outreach and that paper ballots be double-entered and cross-checked before analysis.