The CAB played three short videos introducing a 'Dignity Index' — a one‑to‑eight scale intended to help participants identify language that signals contempt versus dignity and to encourage phrases such as 'be curious, not furious.' The chair proposed occasional short videos or a brief pledge at the start of future meetings and asked how the index might be integrated into bylaws or agendas.
Board members generally supported a light‑touch trial (for example, a short video and a feedback loop), while several residents urged caution. Tom Green said he liked the concept but warned it could become a "slippery slope" if used to police speech, noting First Amendment protections for abrasive or 'prickly' language. Joni Hammond and other attendees questioned whether the CAB should risk consuming significant meeting time and recommended passive approaches (a short reminder or agenda language) and a short pilot period.
The chair asked staff to record scribe notes and suggested Brandon would act as scribe; members proposed adding a sentence about treating others with dignity to the public‑comment agenda language or adding a short video intro on a trial basis for several meetings.
What happens next: The CAB agreed to consider a short pilot (videos or an agenda reminder) and to solicit feedback from attendees about whether the approach is useful, while ensuring the initiative does not restrict constitutionally protected speech.