Rangeley meeting debates wording on internally illuminated signs and 100-nit limit

At a meeting in Rangeley, participants discussed proposed language for local sign and lighting rules, focusing on whether internally illuminated signs should be restricted, how a 100-nit brightness limit should apply and the effect of an existing provision labeled “381064.”

The discussion mattered because participants said the choices affect nearby residents, town aesthetics and compliance with dark-sky guidance. One participant noted that the ordinance already contains a requirement that signs be turned off an hour after business closes, while others said the draft wording could be misunderstood or rendered moot by an existing paragraph.

“That's not the intent of this, Scott,” said Resident 1 (resident) during debate over a sentence that would restrict lights pointed at windows. Resident 1 added that the sentence could be struck to avoid confusion. The group discussed whether internal lighting should be treated the same as external bulbs and how brightness metrics such as nits and lumens should be handled.

Resident 1 said an existing provision, quoted in the meeting as “billboards, roof signs, animated signs, flashing signs, internally illuminated, and signs containing visible moving parts are prohibited,” appears under Section 381064 and could make new language about internal illumination unnecessary. “If that paragraph remains intact, then really anything about internally lit signs is moot,” Resident 1 said.

Participants referred repeatedly to a 100-nit standard for electronic sign brightness. Resident 1 noted that 100 nits is much more visible at night than in daylight and that lumens and nits measure different characteristics of light: “It's lumens. Right,” Resident 1 said, later adding, “the lighting ordinance already covers a limitation on lumens. So I think that let me explore that a little bit more.”

Speakers also discussed enforcement and recordkeeping. Resident 1 said the town clerk could not locate paperwork showing how bright an existing sign is: “She had no idea how bright it was, how many nits it was, and whatnot, and couldn't even find the paperwork from when they bought it.”

No formal motion or vote was recorded in the transcript segment provided. Several participants agreed that the draft language could be rewritten or that particular sentences could be struck to avoid unintended consequences. Resident 1 said they would research distinctions between externally mounted bulbs and internally illuminated signs and follow up on the lumen/nit issue.

The discussion closed without a recorded decision on the ordinance text; participants signaled intent to refine language and to check the existing Section 381064 and the town lighting ordinance before adopting final wording.