It looks like the new city logo is going down in flames. Where do we go from here? From my perspective, influenced by many years of working closely with organizations as they choose logos, we are about to make a bad situation even worse.

For the armchair critics, those splattering the talk forums and our elected officials with vitriol, as well as those with more mature and thoughtful comments, here are a few things I’ve learned about logos.

First, people often expect logos to convey too much information. We know that Fort Collins possesses positive attributes around business, education, nature, culture and much more. We could create a logo that includes many of these points, which might make everyone feel included but would be cluttered and fail to leave an impression. Whether you like the new logo or not, give it credit for its simplicity, essential to any effective logo.

Second, when people get down to the tough business of evaluating designs and eventually choosing, they scrutinize a logo far more than the general public ever will. They take a magnifying glass to every font, line, symbol and color and ask: Is that us? Does that brown curve best represent our mountains? Is that blue curve on the mark for our waterways? Is that font too whimsical or too cool and professional to represent genuine and warm people?

But that’s not how casual observers see a logo. Actually, regular people – potential tourists perhaps — don’t deconstruct logos. Logos fall into a mix of many different words, images, stereotypes and preconceived notions that form an impression. Have you deconstructed every element of the Disney, Toyota or Sprint logos? Did you notice that the Starbucks logo features a buxom mermaid?

Nike has one of the most famous logos. Let’s scrutinize the Nike swoosh just like people are deconstructing the new city logo: well, it sure isn’t a shoe nor any other identifiable form of sports apparel; it might be a field hockey stick or a boomerang; it’s pointy like a weapon and maybe a little obscene; lousy way to sell shoes; better start over.

Some suggest a contest with a cash prize to the winner. That’s great. But people also are pushing for a popular vote. That’s a recipe for disaster. Logos are art and inherently subject to all kinds of interpretations. Popular vote will produce a safe, adequate logo that, like the old city logo, will neither offend nor inspire, and might contain too much information to leave any form of meaningful impression. It will be the result of over analysis and defensive political behavior, particularly after this latest brouhaha.

Instead, what should happen is a small group of people, who intimately understand (1) our city’s distinguishing features and (2) the proper role of a logo within a broader marketing effort, should be entrusted to choose among a limited set of options. Then, the populace that appointed that small group should embrace the decision.

That was the original plan. The process began tanking when erroneous information spread that the new logo cost $80,000. In reality, the logo was only a small portion of a larger and quite important effort.

Let’s take a deep breath, understand that universally appealing art is neither desirable nor possible, and have faith in our elected officials.