Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vision Mission Values topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tumwater council reviews refreshed vision, mission and values; staff used Microsoft Copilot for wording suggestions
Summary
Council members reviewed three proposed versions of the vision and mission and discussed plain-language preferences and the use of Microsoft Copilot to generate wording suggestions; members asked staff to return with revised language reflecting council edits.
Tumwater City Council members reviewed draft vision, mission and value statements at the Sept. 9 work session and provided wording preferences to staff after seeing multiple options, including language generated with Microsoft Copilot and edited by staff.
A staff member explained they had used Microsoft Copilot to refresh the existing vision and mission language and then edited the suggestions. Council members responded with specific preferences: Council member Angela Jefferson said she preferred a concise public-facing mission that "lead[s] with plain English," while other council members favored retaining language that referenced a "supportive social fabric." One council member suggested replacing "work side by side with our community" with "work in partnership with our community," and another recommended adding "inclusive social fabric" to the mission to capture belonging and services.
Council members also asked staff to refresh, not replace, the existing value statements (people, environment, opportunity, partnership, learning, excellence) and to bring rephrased suggestions back for review. A staff member said the values date to 2010 and that the intent was to "refresh" them.
Council members discussed whether terms such as "essential services" imply utilities (water, sewer, roads) versus discretionary human-services spending. One council member clarified the budget reality: "They're discretionary services in terms of our funding. We don't have dedicated funding accounts to provide for those things." Others noted town investments in senior housing and past CDBG-funded initiatives.
Council members agreed staff should return with revised wording that incorporates the council's plain-language and inclusivity preferences; no formal vote was taken.
The council also authorized staff to continue using Copilot as a drafting aid, with the caveat that staff will edit and own the final text, and staff said technical security measures were followed when using the tool.
