TO: Honorable Mayor & Members of the North Port Commission
FROM: A. Jerome Fletcher II, ICMA-CM, MPA, City Manager
TITLE: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding Selecting and Adopting the City of North Port’s Logo, Color Scheme, and Tagline and Revisions to the Mission, Vision and Values.
Recommended Action
Logo, Color Scheme and Tagline:
Option 1: Select a logo, color scheme, and tagline presented.
Mission, Vision and Values:
Option 1: Adopt suggested Mission, Vision and Values.
City Commission Options
Logo, Color Scheme and Tagline:
• Option1: Select a logo, color scheme, and tagline presented.
o Pros: Provides clarity and closure to a multi-phase process that has included professional design work, community input, and prior Commission discussion. Allows staff to move forward with development of brand guidelines and a fiscally responsible, phased implementation plan. Maintains project momentum, avoiding delays that could increase costs or extend uncertainty for staff, partners, and the community. Reflects community engagement, as the final options were informed by resident feedback and refined following the previous Commission Meeting. Supports consistency and alignment across City communications, marketing, and materials.
o Cons: Limits opportunity for further refinement, which may leave some community or Commissioner preferences unaddressed. May not satisfy all stakeholders, particularly those who preferred the existing logo or alternative concepts. Commits the City to implementation, even if minor adjustments are identified after adoption.
• Option 2: Provide directions to staff on revisions to proposed logo, color scheme, and tagline to be brought back to the City Commission for consideration at a later date.
o Pros: Allows additional refinement based on Commission feedback or specific areas of concern. Provides opportunity to address additional comments by Commissioners or segments of the community. May increase confidence in the final selection by ensuring additional perspectives have been more considered.
o Cons: Extends the timeline for adoption and delays development of brand guidelines and implementation, this will specifically impact on a number of activities which have been on hold waiting for final agreement, which could in turn impact budgets. May result in additional costs, including design revisions and extended staff and consultant time. Risks project fatigue among residents and stakeholders who have already participated in multiple feedback phases. Continues uncertainty for staff and external partners who are awaiting final direction for branding and communications.
Mission, Vision and Values:
• Option 1: Adopt suggested Mission, Vision and Values.
o Pros: Reflects extensive work already completed using community feedback, competitor analysis, the insights report and brand strategy documentation. Allows the project to move forward on schedule, supporting timely internal alignment and next-phase deliverables. Provides clarity and consistency for staff, partners and the community by establishing an agreed foundation. Reduces the risk of prolonged revision cycles that could delay implementation.
o Cons: Limits opportunity for Commissioners to reflect individual perspectives. May require later adjustments if additional priorities or nuances emerge during strategy workshops. Perception that changes were approved with minimal modification may raise questions from some community members.
• Option 2: Make minor amendments to suggested Mission, Vision and Values.
o Pros: Enables Commissioners to refine language while preserving alignment with research, community input and strategic direction. Allows clarification of tone, emphasis, or phrasing without reopening the full development process. Maintains project momentum while ensuring the final content reflects Commission guidance. Balances efficiency with governance oversight.
o Cons: Minor revisions may still require additional staff time to reconcile edits and ensure consistency across documents. Risk of incremental changes creating ambiguity if not clearly defined. May not fully satisfy community members seeking more significant changes.
• Option 3: Retain current Mission, Vision and Values.
o Pros: Maintains continuity with existing City identity and long-standing organizational language. Avoids immediate change management for staff, partners and the community. Requires no additional staff time or resources for revisions, alignment, or implementation.
o Cons: Does not reflect extensive research, community feedback, insights reporting, and strategic analysis completed as part of the brand refresh process. Misses an opportunity to better align the City’s guiding statements with current priorities, future growth, and evolving community expectations. May limit the effectiveness of the updated brand, as visual identity and messaging would not be fully supported by refreshed foundational statements. Could create misalignment between the adopted brand elements and the City’s existing Mission, Vision and Values, requiring future reconsideration.
Background Information
The following provides a chronological order of events regarding the City Identity Refresh project:
Ø May 2024: The City Identity Refresh project was initiated to ensure North Port’s brand accurately reflects who we are today and where we are headed as a growing, evolving community. Over the past phases of the project, staff and partners have conducted extensive research, including broad community engagement, stakeholder feedback, competitor and peer City analysis and review of existing brand assets and messaging. Insights gathered through surveys, focus groups and data analysis were consolidated into an Insights Report, which informed the development of a brand strategy framework. This framework establishes the foundation for updated Mission, Vision and Values, as well as the exploration of logo and tagline concepts. The materials presented to the Commission are the result of this research-driven process and are intended to support discussion, guidance and direction prior to advancing into final design, refinement and implementation phases.
Ø December 1, 2025: During the City Commission Workshop, staff provided a presentation on the overall brand strategy, recommended Mission, Vision and Values to see Commission input and guidance to finalize the Mission, Vision and Values. The City Commission did not take action at this meeting but provided feedback for staff to incorporate and bring back at a future date.
Ø January 5, 2026: During the City Commission Workshop, staff provided a presentation on the City’s Mission, Vision, Values, Logo, and Taglines. The City Commission provided feedback on the Mission, Vision, Values, Logos and Taglines presented. Two logos were preferred and two color palettes were preferred.
Following the City Commission Workshops and feedback, the Communications Division further refined the logos and color palettes selected and shared these with the community for voting via social media, email and at two in person locations (City Hall and The North Port Area Chamber of Commerce). Community voting and feedback will be completed on January 30, 2026.
The City Commission will be presented with the data compiled through the public engagement portion of the process during the Commission Meeting for consideration.
Vision, Mission and Values have further been refined, and these refinements will be presented to commission for discussion and action.
Strategic Plan Pillar
Good Governance
Financial Impact
Not applicable.
Procurement
Not applicable.
Attachments:
1. Presentation
2. Community Feedback
Prepared by: Katya Sutherland, Marketing and Engagement Manager
Jason Bartolone, Communications Manager, PIO
Department Director: A. Jerome Fletcher II, ICMA-CM, MPA, City Manager