When the City of Vancouver unveiled a new logo in February, it resulted in a wave of criticism from the local design community.

More than 100 people working in this sector signed a letter declaring that the city "severely failed to produce an  inspirational mark that authentically represents and makes us proud of who we are and can be".

“Redesigning a city’s logo should not be reduced to an administrative communications exercise as it has been for the approval of this new wordmark,” they declared at the time.

So yesterday as a result of a motion from Mayor Gregor Robertson, council officially halted the its rollout.

In fact, the new logo was already dead at the end of February when the mayor capitulated in the face of such vehement opposition.

At first, he was flummoxed by the criticism, noting that the media seemed obsessed about a wordmark as the city was in the throes of a drug-overdose crisis.

But eventually, he realized that journalists and designers weren't going to let the logo go unchallenged. 

Yesterday, council also voted to approve a new public process, which will be launched in cooperation with the B.C. chapter of Graphic Designers of Canada.

It's intended "to bring forward professional design options for a new wordmark", according to the mayor's motion.

The finalists will then be put forward for an online public vote in the fall of 2017.

Imagine that: an election for a new city logo.

The city is already holding a pubic vote for its official city bird.

At the rate things are going, the Vision-controlled council just might allow citizens to vote on the names of city streets, public-art projects, and new civic buildings.

Vox pop has a way of enhancing democratic decision-making, but the tyranny of the majority also has its downside.

That was apparent in 2015 when suburban and older voters kiboshed much-needed transportation improvements in Metro Vancouver. And all because they didn't want to pay a measly 0.5 percent sales tax.

It was also demonstrated when American voters elected a racist demogogue as their president.

The public is not always the ideal judge of what's best for society.

Politicians who go down this road too often do so at their peril.