Residents press Manteno officials on Goshen plant safety, brownfield remediation and container fencing

Several residents used the public‑comment period at the Manteno Village Board meeting on April 21 to press officials for more transparency and safety checks related to the Goshen lithium‑ion battery project and a former Kmart site that residents described as a federally and Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)‑registered brownfield at 33333 Spruce.

Anne Gates told the board the property at 33333 Spruce qualifies as a brownfield and asked why the village had not used available funds to hire IEPA or EPA remediation work before rezoning the site: "When we know that the site at 33333 Spruce is a federally and an Illinois EPA registered Brownfield ... why did you choose to not invest in having the EPA come in, do the evaluation, do the remediation?" Gates asked.

Amanda Piper raised safety concerns about containers stored behind the Goshen plant and cited the code language in the meeting packet about energy storage systems (ESS): "Per the code, fencing, an approved fence with a locked gate or other approved barrier shall be provided to keep the general public at least 5 feet from the outer enclosure of a deployed mobile ESS," Piper said, and noted that plan review recommended guardrails and fencing around the containers. She said she had emailed Village Administrator Chris LaRocque and received a general response that did not show where compliance filings were located.

Other public speakers asked for audits or financial reviews of prior board actions and raised concerns about transparency in zoning and contracting. Bill Barnes urged trustees to delay contract votes until the new mayor had time to review staffing decisions, saying pushing contracts through immediately "will speak volumes to the residents." Karen Brzicki and others echoed calls to delay personnel votes at least one meeting so newly sworn trustees could review materials that were delivered shortly before the session.

Trustee Tim Crockett announced a planned outreach to apartment owners about exterior property maintenance and read a draft letter that will be mailed to owners. The letter cites the village property maintenance code (sections 302 and 304) and warns that deficiencies will be documented and could lead to fines up to $750 per day for ongoing violations: "Any deficiencies will be noted and you will receive a letter detailing any actions required with a deadline to bring your building into compliance. Failure to comply could result in fines up to $750 per day the violation exists," Crockett read.

Village Administrator Chris LaRocque and staff clarified regulatory oversight for the Goshen project. LaRocque said Goshen did not have full operational occupancy and was operating under temporary occupancy provisions that allow work to continue but do not permit full operations; LaRocque and the village’s electrical consultant Eric Weber said outside inspectors (identified in the meeting as B & F / BNF in the transcript) perform plan review and inspections for large industrial projects and that Goshen contracted for those inspections directly. "They have a temporary occupancy permit, which allows them to do certain things ... but they are not allowed to be operational at this point," LaRocque said.

The board did not take formal action on remediation or zoning at the meeting. Trustees and staff said they would continue to track inspections, schedule plant tours for elected officials and follow up on code compliance for containers and ESS fencing. Trustee CJ (name recorded as Michael Berry and others) said he expected outreach from Goshen for scheduled tours for county and local officials.

What residents asked for

- IEPA/EPA site evaluation and remediation funding or a public accounting of why remediation was not pursued before rezoning. - Proof of required guardrails/fencing/impact protection for ESS containers and the location of plan‑review documents and permits. - A full audit or accounting of recent village contracts and spending (requested by at least one public speaker).

What the village said it will do

- Village staff will continue permitting oversight and receive inspection reports from the outside consultant used for the project. - The village administrator indicated officials plan to schedule plant tours and follow up with documentation about temporary occupancy and inspection results. - Planning & Zoning said it will mail property maintenance notices to apartment owners under existing code (sections 302, 304) and pursue compliance steps if needed.

No ordinance or zoning reversal was proposed or adopted at the April 21 meeting; public commenters and some trustees requested additional transparency and documentation before future decisions.

Quotes

"Per the code, fencing, an approved fence with a locked gate or other approved barrier shall be provided to keep the general public at least 5 feet from the outer enclosure of a deployed mobile ESS," Amanda Piper said.

"Any deficiencies will be noted and you will receive a letter detailing any actions required with a deadline to bring your building into compliance. Failure to comply could result in fines up to $750 per day the violation exists," Trustee Tim Crockett read from the apartment owner letter.

"They have a temporary occupancy permit, which allows them to do certain things ... but they are not allowed to be operational at this point," Village Administrator Chris LaRocque said when asked about operational status.

Ending

Residents asked for clearer public records and a timeline for inspections and remediation steps. Trustees and staff said they would follow up with the requested documentation and schedule plant tours for elected officials to review the site and associated inspection reports.