Manteno fire district warns Goshen facility hasn’t met required safety commitments; village schedules special meeting

The Manteno Village Board on Dec. 1 heard a formal letter from the Manteno Community Fire Protection District saying the Goshen lithium‑ion battery facility on South Spruce has not met multiple fire‑safety commitments and that the district cannot support issuance or extension of a certificate of occupancy until the issues are resolved.

Deputy Clerk Carrie Roniak read sections of the letter, signed by Fire Chief Richard Peterson, that listed six specific concerns the district said remain unfulfilled: an industrial fire brigade has not been established; the facility’s emergency action plan had not been finalized or approved; sprinkler‑holding tank inspection reports had not been received; the public‑safety bidirectional amplifier (BDA) system had not been verified; certificate‑of‑occupancy contingencies remain unresolved; and a proposed “station 3 partnership” intended as an alternative compliance method had not been addressed. The letter asked the village to condition any future certificate of occupancy or extension on a fully executed fire protection and safety compliance agreement or an implemented station‑3 partnership, and to support a joint compliance meeting within 60 days.

“The district’s priority remains the protection of residents, workers, and first responders within the village of Manteno and the surrounding community,” Roniak read from the letter, which also warned the district might request a tax‑abatement compliance review and other legal options if deficiencies continue.

Trustees asked for copies of the letter and discussed inviting Goshen leadership and the fire chief to a joint meeting. The board agreed to call a special meeting for Monday, Dec. 8, at 6:00 p.m., to give staff, the fire district and company representatives a chance to outline outstanding items and a path to verification.

The concerns in the fire district’s letter mirror points the district asked the village to enforce before occupancy, including standards referenced to NFPA and the International Fire Code. The letter cites a possible statutory remedy under 35 ILCS 200/18/165(d) if deficiencies persist.

Public comment earlier in the meeting had included a speaker who questioned Goshen’s state incentives and said the company had received large public subsidies; that commenter’s specific assertions were not addressed directly by company representatives during the meeting.

The special meeting on Dec. 8 is expected to focus on the fire district’s requested compliance steps and whether the village will condition occupancy on documented corrective actions.