Residents press Manteno board over proposed police firing range near Sunny Acres

Residents of the Sunny Acres Mobile Home Park urged the Village of Manteno board on March 3 to relocate a proposed outdoor police firing range that would be sited behind the new Public Works building.

At public participation, Linda Jansma, who identified herself as a Sunny Acres resident, said she supports officer training but not at the planned location, telling trustees, “As a licensed gun owner myself, I'm all for a range for our officers for gun safety and training, just not in that location.” Jansma said the site is close to homes and one of Manteno’s largest parks and that gunfire would be disruptive to veterans and families.

Why it matters: Residents said the proposed range would be within yards of private property and raised questions about notification and safety planning. Officials and residents differed on whether the location can be made safe and whether proper notice was given to neighbors.

Multiple speakers echoed Jansma’s concerns. George Reichert asked whether the village could pay to hang veterans’ banners and said he did not believe Manteno needed a gun range. Mike Barry said the board’s prior decisions on the related industrial project have already affected local children and blasted officials for not answering questions directly. Paul Motel, who spoke as a resident and candidate for trustee, noted zoning and state-public-act language he said could restrict ranges and said the proximity to homes was troubling.

Trustee Geske asked the Manteno police chief for details about firearms qualifications and range design. The chief, identified in the meeting as the department chief, said officers typically requalify or conduct firearms training quarterly — “3 or 4 times a year” — and that any village range would be used only by police officers. When asked about distances, the chief and trustees said a GIS measurement showed about 160 yards from the furthest east portion of the neighboring property to the proposed firing point and roughly 77 yards from the back of one residence to the closest range area; the board discussed the site being about “230 yards” from some neighboring properties.

Trustees described planned safety measures. Geske said the range layout calls for firing east, toward the railroad tracks rather than toward housing, and noted plans to construct a berm — discussed as a roughly 50-foot berm with concrete Jersey barriers inside it — and to use fill from pond expansion at Legacy to help shield the area.

Several residents told the board they had not received direct notification about the plan. Greg Olajars said the board failed to notify neighboring property owners and that he would have opposed a private variance for a range on similar land. “If this board deems it’s not safe or legal for me to shoot on my property, then it’s also not safe or legal to have a police range in my and my neighbor’s backyard,” Olajars said.

The board did not take a formal vote on the firing range at the March 3 meeting. Trustees and the chief answered residents’ questions and described proposed mitigation steps; residents continued to press for the village to find an alternative site farther from housing.

The comment period and follow-up discussion occurred during public participation and later during trustee reports; no formal direction to staff or a binding decision was recorded at the meeting. The board’s next related committee meetings were not set during the discussion.

Ending: Residents who addressed the board asked trustees to move the range to land farther from homes or parks. Trustees said they had heard the concerns and explained design and training needs; additional public discussion or formal agenda action was not recorded at the March 3 meeting.