Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Industrial Safety Battery Plant topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise battery-fire and safety concerns about Goshen project in Manteno
Summary
Multiple residents told the board they fear fire risks from a proposed Goshen battery plant and questioned the company’s safety claims and local emergency preparedness. Speakers cited standards and an out-of-area fire that prompted a large evacuation, and one resident said the company asked the fire department to subscribe to its radio frequency.
Several speakers at the March 3 Manteno Village Board meeting expressed safety concerns about the nearby Goshen battery project and urged greater transparency and emergency planning.
Sandy Chish told trustees she was alarmed by an email exchange she saw and argued the community should be aware of the risks from a foreign-made plant; she distinguished foreign ownership from ideology when criticizing the project’s proximity to schools. “We are not fighting that it's a foreign company... What we are fighting is we don't want a communist foreign company in our neighborhood, in less than a mile from our grade schools,” Chish said during public comment.
Ann Gates described information she said she learned in conversations with the fire chief and from materials about the Goshen plant. Gates said the fire chief had observed the plant in Germany and that certain suppression systems commonly used there would not extinguish a lithium-ion battery fire. She referred to battery chemistries discussed in company materials and said such fires can release hazardous gases including carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide. Gates also said she had reviewed Freedom of Information Act materials and questioned how Goshen’s cited ISO standards applied to the facility.
Gates and other speakers pointed to an incident in Morris, Illinois, that they said led to a large evacuation after a lithium-ion battery fire. “In Morris, the lithium battery fire I talked about a few months ago, the EPA mandated a 16 square mile evacuation,” Gates said; she added that the Manteno Fire District covers about 96 square miles while the village itself is roughly 5.38 square miles with under 10,000 residents.
Gates also said Goshen prefers on-site, in-house response capacity and, according to her remarks, asked Manteno’s fire department to subscribe to a company frequency rather than use the region’s shared first-responder radio channel; Gates said that subscription would have to be paid for by the fire department. She framed that request as a taxpayer concern.
Why it matters: Speakers flagged potential health and evacuation risks from battery fires, questioned the applicability of ISO 9001 and 14001 claims to safety outcomes, and asked the village to clarify emergency planning and company commitments.
Other residents joined the concerns. Mike Barry said decisions to allow the Goshen project have affected families and that residents had unanswered questions after prior public hearings. Francine Fatima said she has repeatedly asked the board to rescind its vote allowing Goshen in Manteno and said agenda materials lacked sufficient detail about taxpayer spending.
The board did not vote on measures related to Goshen at the March 3 meeting. Trustees and staff listened while residents made public-record statements; no formal policy changes or motions related to emergency planning or company oversight were recorded at this meeting.
Ending: Residents asked the village for clearer information on battery composition, suppression strategy, evacuation planning and costs to local emergency services; speakers said those issues remain unresolved after the March 3 public comments.
