POLAND — The clock tower in the village might get a modern update, but whether it will fit with the community’s character is up for debate.

Larry Warren and John Scotford, representatives of Town One Streetscapes and Peterson Park, requested approval to swap the old message board with an LED sign that can be updated remotely with public service announcements. Currently, the sign is a letter board that has to be updated in person.

“Many have said ‘I didn’t know the word Christmas was spelled so long’ when they’re out there in December and it’s 10 degrees,” Scotford said.

Town One Streetscapes and Peterson Park manage the clock tower, but it was recently discovered the village owns it during a “procedural hiccup,” according to village solicitor Jay Macejko.

Warren and Scotford went before the Architectural Review Board before it was discovered the village owns the tower. LED signs are not permitted in the village by zoning ordinance, but because the village owns the clock tower, it does not have to adhere to the ordinance.

Some council members are concerned about the prospective update and said the village should be held to the same standard.

“I think it makes some sense for the village to be held to the same standard that it would hold every other business or citizen to in the village,” councilwoman Martha Morgan said.

Morgan is a member of the ARB and was present during the meeting discussing the sign. Morgan said the main question the ARB had is whether the sign is appropriate for the village, along with questions about its hours of operation and its overall display brightness.

The ARB also was concerned whether a precedent would be set if the sign is approved, but Macejko said that it would not be set in this case.

In November, a proposal to update the sign was sent to council, and from there an ordinance was uncovered that detailed how the ownership transitioned back to the village. Macejko said that because the village owns it, the issue should be brought directly to council, and council can then decide whether to refer the issue to a committee for further discussion.

Council voted to refer the issue back to the ARB to answer two questions: whether the sign should be approved, and what limitations on the sign should be placed on its approval.

lnickel@tribtoday.com