Village of Manteno · Kankakee County, Illinois

A village at war with itself.

In the summer of 2026 the Village of Manteno's own government split in two, the mayor on one side and four trustees on the other, over who has the lawful power to run the village. It has since produced a lawsuit against four elected trustees, a meeting the mayor declared adjourned over a losing vote, and an order to send police after an absent trustee. This is the plain-English, document-based record: start with the latest below, then go as deep as you want.

Mayor vs. Board of Trustees Village Attorney removed & reinstated TRO lawsuit dismissed July 21 · Case 26CH21 Aug. 17: police sent after an absent trustee Sept. 8: no administrator, no code officer Sept. 21: the mayor vetoes a whole meeting Forensic audit of the prior administration
Latest: Sept. 21 · the mayor vetoed everything four trustees did at their Sept. 16 special meeting, and cited an ordinance that applies only to ordinances (forty-seven claims, graded). Override vote due Oct. 5; the attorney case is set for Nov. 12. Compiled from: FOIA records, the court filing & local news
How to read this site. This is an independent, non-partisan resource published by the local news team behind BradleyIllinois.com. It is not the Village's official website; that is villageofmanteno.com. It separates what is documented (in court filings and FOIA records) from what is alleged or disputed, and it presents both sides of every legal question. Nothing here is legal advice, and no allegation described here has been proven in court. Sourcing is shown throughout, and corrections are welcome. Heard a claim that isn't on this page? Check the Fact Check, a running grade of circulating claims against the record.
Where things stand

The nine live threads, as of September 22, 2026

Every open front in this story, and exactly what is settled and unsettled on each one. Updated whenever the record moves.

New

The village has no one running it

Manteno has no village administrator, no code enforcement officer, an open front-office position and no HR function. On September 8 the mayor's motion to appoint a code officer failed 2 to 3. The next morning she told the committees she will fill the vacancies by appointment rather than posting them, and does not plan to hire an administrator before the April election: "there's going to be an election in seven months… I think we can pick somebody when that happens."

Answered, September 22: we have now read the village code. The president appoints officers and department heads with the board's consent (1-5-5(A), 1-19-2, 1-22-1), and it is the administrator who hires everyone else (1-19-5(H)). On September 21 the mayor appointed Jim Paicz herself as "building inspector," a title that does not exist in the code, and in the same statement called him "our code enforcement officer." Section 1-22-4: "Any reference to the code enforcement officer in this code shall mean the director of building and zoning," the office that needs the board.

How it gets fixed: the president nominates an administrator and a director of building and zoning, and the board consents (§ 1-19-2, § 1-22-1); neither side can fill either office alone, and the board cannot appoint on its own. The clerk vacancy is filled the same way, by nomination and consent (§ 1-8-3). The board's levers are the budget line, the salary and consent; the president's is to nominate. Toolbox →

The code, section by section →
New

License plate cameras, and no vote

The first speaker on September 8 counted roughly ten automated license plate readers on Manteno roads and asked when the village voted on them. Manteno police have been an ALPR agency for years; that part is documented. What nobody has produced is a board authorization, an ordinance, or a roll call.

Answered, September 9: the police chief confirmed on camera that the department has used Flock "for years," acknowledged the potential for abuse, and, asked where the data goes, said "we know where our information goes… everybody else has access to it, too." He offered to hold a public session on the pros and cons. There is still no board vote on record.

How it gets fixed: an ordinance under the Village's general and police powers (65 ILCS 5/1-2-1, 11-1-1) requiring board authorization before any surveillance technology is acquired or renewed, with retention and sharing rules at least as strict as 625 ILCS 5/2-130: four of seven, vetoable, overridable. The mayor can bring the existing contract and policy to the board for ratification by a simple motion. Toolbox →

The chief, in his own words →
In court

The lawsuit

The Village sued four of its own trustees in July. A judge threw it out on July 21 because no complaint had ever been filed. The matter came back before Judge Parkhurst on August 17 and again on September 21, when she set the attorney case for Thursday, November 12, 10:00 a.m. The trustees' response was filed the morning of September 21. Vasselli has 14 days to reply, and the trustees' attorney, Daniel Bourgault, seven days after that.

Unsettled: who represents the Village. No ruling is expected until some days after the November 12 hearing.

How it gets fixed: a board resolution stating that the Village never authorized the suit and directing that no Village funds be spent on it: a majority of those voting, and not vetoable because it spends nothing. Or the president nominates an attorney four trustees will confirm, which moots the case. Toolbox →

The lawsuit, in full →
Unresolved since June

Who is the village attorney

Two lawyers have claimed the job since June 15. The board has voted for Joseph Cainkar three times: 4 to 2 to disapprove his removal on June 15, 4 to 0 to reinstate him on June 25, and 4 to 1 to retain him on July 6. The mayor says her appointee James Vasselli holds the office. The July 21 dismissal was procedural and decided none of it.

Unsettled: everything. No court has ruled on who represents the Village. At the September 8 meeting the mayor referred to Brian Miller, seated at the table, as "our attorney." On September 9 the village treasurer said on the record that the Village is not paying her appointed attorney: "It has not been board approved."

How it gets fixed: the standoff ends the moment the president nominates someone four trustees will confirm, or re-nominates Cainkar; nothing in the statute bars it. The board cannot hire its own village attorney (Pechous; Westmont), but its strongest ground is the missed 5-to-10-day report under 65 ILCS 5/3.1-35-10, a restoration that does not depend on counting the president. Toolbox →

What the law says →
Unresolved

Police sent after a trustee

With four trustees absent on August 17 and no quorum, the mayor directed the police chief to go get an absent trustee under a village rule written in 1974, one the attorney at the table said allows an arrest. He knocked; nobody answered. We can find no Illinois precedent for using the power this way.

Unsettled: whether a majority of the trustees present ever directed it, as the rule requires. The minutes would show, and the last board minutes the Village has posted are for June 25, 2026; there are none for July 6, July 20 or any later meeting.

How it gets fixed: the board can replace the 1974 arrest rule with a fine by ordinance, which 65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-20 expressly allows: four of seven, vetoable, overridable. Remote attendance under § 1-6-10 lets a sick or working trustee join by video, but only once four members are physically in the room (5 ILCS 120/7); it cannot create a quorum. Toolbox →

Read the rule, word for word →
Contested weekly

Who controls the agenda

The mayor said on camera August 12 that "it is my meeting and it's up to me what's on the agenda," citing her attorney's advice. Trustees called it censoring. Village Code section 1-6-5 sets out 21 rules for board meetings and none of them assigns the agenda to the president.

New, September 8: trustee comments have now been removed from the agenda entirely. The mayor's stated reason: "our meetings have been so contentious… some of it is not necessary." A resident and Trustee Crockett both objected on the record.

How it gets fixed: the board sets its own rules of proceeding (65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-15). Permanent fix: an ordinance amending § 1-6-5 to say how items reach the agenda and to restore trustee comments, four of seven, and four trustees can pass it over a veto. One-night fix: a majority of those present can suspend the rules under § 1-6-7, and that motion cannot be vetoed. Toolbox →

What was said, word for word →
Disputed

The August 3 override

A motion to adjourn failed 2 to 4. The mayor declared the meeting adjourned anyway and left. Four trustees stayed and voted 4 to 0 to override her veto of the village attorney. Her counsel says none of it binds the Village.

Unsettled: whether those votes stand. The closest Illinois case, from Chicago's 1983 Council Wars, rejected the mayor's side of that argument.

How it gets fixed: a veto is a written objection returned at a regular meeting (65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-45; § 1-5-7): a statement from the chair is not enough on its own, and an item never returned in writing takes effect anyway. An override is four trustees at the next regular meeting, yeas and nays in the journal (3.1-40-50). The doubt over August 3 goes away when either step is done that way on the record, or when the president nominates an attorney four trustees will confirm. Toolbox →

All 33 claims, graded →
Money

The forensic audit

A $168,000 review of the prior administration, approved on the mayor's tie-breaking vote and delivered in May 2026. It raised concerns about bidding, bank deposits and a land sale. It charged no fraud and issued no clearance, and both camps quote it.

Live: on August 12 the board took up the auditors' $12,270.92 "Final Audit Invoice" (per the special-meeting agenda), paid part of it and refused the rest. The mayor warned that could bring its own lawsuit.

How it gets fixed: paying or refusing a bill is a four-of-seven spending vote, and the board holds it. If the board disputes the invoice, it adopts a written dispute to the firm citing the contract term it relies on, so the refusal is a position rather than a silence; if it does not, it pays. The mayor can put the invoice on the bills list with the contract and the statement of work attached. Toolbox →

What it found →
Underneath all of it

Gotion

The $2 billion Chinese-owned battery plant at the former Kmart distribution center is the reason this village's politics broke open in 2023. A citizens' suit over the rezoning is in discovery with 7 of 10 claims alive. The board ratified a fire-brigade agreement with the company 6 to 0 on August 3.

Answered, September 8: two trustees and the fire chief arrived unannounced at 9 p.m. on September 1 and the brigade produced six Level 1–certified members on shift. The company reports 19 firefighters on staff. The August 31 deadline was met.

The inspection, in detail →

Every problem above has a lawful fix. The Toolbox sets out who holds it and what it takes: the vote, the section, and which side has to move first. Read it →

Overview

What is actually going on in Manteno?

A separation-of-powers fight inside a village of about 9,000 people, and a rare case of a municipality suing four of its own elected trustees, in a lawsuit filed by the mayor's disputed choice of village attorney.

Every Illinois village runs on a division of labor written into state law: an elected president (commonly called the mayor) runs the executive side and nominates officials; an elected board of trustees is the legislative side that must "advise and consent" to those appointments. Manteno's crisis is what happens when those two branches stop trusting each other.

The spark was the village attorney. On June 15, 2026, Mayor Annette LaMore removed longtime village attorney Joseph Cainkar and moved to install her own choice, attorney James Vasselli. The board refused to confirm Vasselli. Ten days later, on June 25, four trustees held a special meeting, without the mayor, and voted to bring Cainkar back. The mayor called that meeting illegal and stayed home. Within two weeks, "the Village of Manteno" (through Vasselli) had sued four of its own trustees to undo the vote.

Sitting underneath the personal fight is a forensic audit, a review of the prior (20-year Nugent) administration, approved in August 2025 on a 3–3 board vote broken by Mayor LaMore, which flagged financial-management concerns. The written report neither found fraud nor cleared anyone; a newspaper sentence saying the auditors found "no serious improprieties or fraud" was the reporter's, not the auditors'. Both sides invoke that audit as their reason for acting.

There is also a second, largely unreported layer. Before running for mayor, LaMore was a leading figure in the Concerned Citizens of Manteno (CCOM), the not-for-profit organization that, since December 2023, has been suing the Village of Manteno (along with Gotion Inc. and a property LLC) over the rezoning that allowed a Chinese-owned lithium-ion battery plant to operate at the former Kmart distribution center at 333 S. Spruce St. Shaw Local reported on April 5, 2025, when she was mayor-elect, that LaMore "was the driving force behind the suit for the Concerned Citizens," and quoted her saying she was stepping away from that role: "the village is part of the lawsuit, I have to walk away from that." That CCOM lawsuit, in which a judge has allowed 7 of 10 claims to proceed, is actively in discovery. Joe Cainkar was the Village's defense attorney in that case. When the board voted 4–1–1 to retain Cainkar at the July 6 meeting, Trustee Boudreau had explicitly cited the active CCOM litigation as a reason not to switch attorneys mid-case. And the alignment is not subtle: as of July 17, 2026, the CCOM/No Gotion Illinois website's own "About" page carries a full roster of the village board with party labels: it tags Mayor LaMore, Clerk Rolniak, and Trustees Barry and Vaughn "Freedom Party – No Gotion" and the four other trustees "Choice Party – Pro Gotion." It is a roster with labels, not a list of supporters. The two disputes are legally separate; whether they are factually connected is a question the current court record does not resolve. See Fact Check c29–c36 for what is and is not established, including the Michigan parallel that shows what this fight can cost. Corrected September 22, 2026: an earlier version of this paragraph quoted Shaw Local as saying LaMore "led" the CCOM lawsuit, which the article does not say; described the No Gotion page as a list of supporters; and gave the retention vote as 4–1 on July 7.

The Executive

Runs the village day-to-day · nominates officers

  • Annette LaMore, Village President (Mayor), sworn in April 21, 2025
  • Backed by attorney James Vasselli (her appointee & the lawsuit's counsel)
  • Generally aligned: Trustees Michael Barry & Peggy Vaughn
v.

The Legislative

The Board of Trustees · must "advise & consent"

  • The four-member majority & lawsuit defendants: CJ Boudreau, Todd Crockett, Joel Gesky, Annette Zimbelman
  • Backed attorney Joseph Cainkar, whom they voted to reinstate
2
Attorneys simultaneously claiming to represent the Village
4
Elected trustees sued by their own village government
10 days
From the attorney's removal to the disputed special meeting
~$25M
Village sewer-sale proceeds examined in the forensic audit

The four votes that defined the standoff

Roll-call outcomes as reported by The Daily Journal / Shaw Local and, for the June 15 reinstatement vote, the Village's own posted minutes. The same four-trustee bloc prevailed each time. Added September 22, 2026: the June 15 reinstatement vote, which this page had not recorded before.

June 15, 2026
Confirm Vasselli as village attorney
4 against confirmation2 for

Failed 4–2. Mayor then made a 30-day temporary appointment.

June 15, 2026
Disapprove the removal and reinstate Cainkar
4 to reinstate2 against (Barry, Vaughn)

Passed 4–2 the same night, on Trustee Gesky's motion, per the Village's posted June 15 minutes. Gesky said the board "will not recognize Mr. Vasselli." The same minutes record the board overriding the mayor's veto of Ordinance 26-02 by 4–2 that night.

June 25, 2026
Reinstate Cainkar (special meeting)
4 to reinstateBarry walked out · Vaughn absent · Mayor absent

Passed 4–0 at a meeting the mayor calls void.

July 6, 2026
Retain Cainkar
4 for1 against (Vaughn)1 abstain (Barry)

Passed 4–1–1, four days before the lawsuit.

The People

Who's who

The named participants, their roles, and which "branch" they line up with. Being named here reflects a public role or a public court record, not a finding of wrongdoing.

Annette LaMore
Village President (Mayor)

Elected in 2025. Removed attorney Cainkar and appointed Vasselli. The lawsuit is filed in the Village's name on her side of the dispute.

Executive
Joseph Cainkar
Former / reinstated Village Attorney

Village attorney for roughly 23 years (Law Offices of Louis F. Cainkar, Ltd.), a tenure spanning the Nugent administration the forensic audit examines. Removed June 15; voted back by trustees June 25. His June 30 engagement letter ($250/hour, unsigned, sent to the administrator) is Exhibit B in the lawsuit, which calls it unauthorized.

Reinstated by board
James Vasselli
Mayor's appointed attorney

Of Vasselli Law, LLC (Oak Brook), founded 2024; also village attorney for Hampshire, Ill. Appointed by LaMore; his firm filed the lawsuit on behalf of "the Village." Separately, county land records aired by FOX 32 Chicago show his firm prepared deed work for Constellation Energy Generation's 2025 land purchases near Essex, an unrelated Kankakee County matter, noted here for completeness. In 2001 he resigned as a Cook County prosecutor over an anthrax-scare prank he publicly acknowledged at the June 15 meeting.

Mayor's counsel
CJ Boudreau
Trustee · Defendant

Made the June 25 motion to reinstate Cainkar. One of four trustees named as defendants.

Board majority
Annette Zimbelman
Trustee · Defendant

Seconded the June 25 reinstatement motion. Named defendant.

Board majority
Todd Crockett
Trustee · Defendant

Part of the four-trustee majority; named defendant. Publicly critical of the mayor's transparency.

Board majority
Joel Gesky
Trustee · Defendant

Named defendant. Publicly argued state law required the mayor to report the removal to the board within 5–10 days. Spouse of the staffer who posted the June 25 agenda.

Board majority
Michael Barry
Trustee

Objected on the record that the June 25 meeting was improperly called and walked out. Submitted a supporting affidavit for the Village.

Aligned with mayor
Peggy Vaughn
Trustee

Absent June 25; voted against retaining Cainkar on July 6. Not a defendant.

Aligned with mayor
Chris LaRocque
Village Administrator · departed

Recipient of Cainkar's June 30 engagement letter; the lawsuit says the administrator has no authority to retain counsel. Suspended five days without pay in early August. Thanked from the dais on August 20 for fourteen years of service; by September 8 the mayor was telling the board the village had been without a code enforcement officer "since Mr. LaRocque retired." He was paid a $30,000 stipend on top of his administrator salary to carry code enforcement. The Village's staff directory still listed him in the job as of September 9. The office is vacant and is not posted.

Staff
Dawn Gesky
Executive Administrative Assistant

The Village's filing says she posted the June 25 agenda at a trustee's direction; she is Trustee Joel Gesky's spouse and a focus of its discovery request. FOIA records also show her acting as the board's general clerical / FOIA conduit, forwarding materials from both camps, including the mayor's own attorney.

Staff
Crystal Wolfe
Former Village Clerk (August–September 2026)

Appointed Village Clerk on August 20, 2026, the fourth person to hold the office in roughly 15 months, and resigned after about two weeks, per Shaw Local (September 18). On September 21 the mayor named former clerk Allen Pickrel as temporary clerk. The Village's official roster still listed Wolfe as clerk on September 22. The Village Code routes special-meeting "calls" through the Clerk, which is why this office keeps landing in the middle of the dispute. Updated September 22, 2026; an earlier version described her as the sitting clerk.

Staff
Steven Orth
Former Village Clerk (June–August 2026)

Appointed clerk June 1, 2026 (after Allen Pickrel's resignation; elected clerk Kerri Rolniak had resigned in late 2025). The Village Code routes special-meeting "calls" through the Clerk, placing the office at the center of the fight over the June 25 meeting's legality. Per the Village's posted June 25 minutes, Orth gave notice on Tuesday, June 23; Trustee Barry's sworn affidavit says the Village "had no sitting Clerk" on June 25. His formal letter is dated July 14, and he served through August, effective August 28 per the August 12 meeting. Crystal Wolfe followed him on August 20. Corrected September 22, 2026: an earlier version said the date of his resignation had not been reported.

Staff
Tim Nugent
Former Village President (2005–2025)

Manteno's mayor for 20 years. The forensic audit reviews his administration. Not a party to the 2026 lawsuit.

Prior administration
Timeline

How the crisis unfolded

Dated, sourced events from the audit's approval through the September 21 veto. Items marked in red are the flashpoints.

April 21, 2025

A new administration takes office

Annette LaMore is sworn in as Village President, ending Tim Nugent's 20-year tenure. A largely new board of trustees is seated.

Source: The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (Apr. 26, 2025); Affidavit of Pres. LaMore.

June 16, 2025

The board rejects the mayor's first counsel change

Weeks into the new term, the board votes 4–2 against Mayor LaMore's first attempt to replace the village attorney (her nominee was attorney Tiffany Thompson, per the Village's June 16, 2025 minutes), the first of what will become two rejections. A year later, at the June 15, 2026 meeting, LaMore invokes exactly that history: she claims emergency appointment power "because you have turned me down twice." Cainkar, the incumbent since roughly 2003, continues serving as a statutory holdover.

Source: Village of Manteno minutes, June 16, 2025; The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (June 2025); The Vedette (June 23, 2026).

August 4, 2025

A divided board approves a forensic audit, on the mayor's tie-breaking vote

The trustees split 3–3 on hiring Greene Forensic Accounting Solutions of Chicago for a multi-year forensic review of the prior administration's finances, and Mayor LaMore votes yes to break the tie for the $168,000 engagement (Greene was the low bidder). The audit that both camps now invoke was, at its origin, the mayor's initiative as much as the board's.

Source: The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (Aug. 6, 2025); board minutes, Aug. 4, 2025 ("Mayor LaMoore Voted Yes"). Corrected September 22, 2026: an earlier version dated this vote August 5 and called it 4–3; the minutes show a 3–3 trustee vote broken by the mayor on Monday, August 4.

May 20, 2026

Audit findings presented

The auditors present their review at a special meeting. The written report raises concerns about bidding transparency, bank-deposit practices, and a land sale; it neither finds fraud nor clears anyone, and it says it does not claim to be complete. The Shaw Local story three days later said the auditors found "no serious improprieties or fraud"; that sentence was the reporter's, not a quote from the auditors. Asked from the floor whether anybody was getting arrested, the auditor answered, "That's not my call." (See the Forensic Audit section.)

Source: The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (May 23, 2026); FOIA 26-106. Corrected September 22, 2026: an earlier version dated the presentation May 23 (the article date, not the meeting date) and attributed the "no serious improprieties or fraud" line to the auditors.

June 12–15, 2026

The mayor removes the village attorney

Mayor LaMore signs a written Notice of Removal dated June 12 and emails it to Cainkar the morning of June 15, citing 65 ILCS 5/3.1-35-10 and Village Code § 1-9-2. It states her grounds (a "failure to inform," misalignment on financial oversight and transparency, and "general maladministration"), argues Cainkar was a mere "holdover" never formally reappointed, and pledges to report her reasons to the board "no less than five and no more than ten days" later. At the June 15 regular meeting she moves to appoint James Vasselli; the board votes 4–2 against confirming him, and she declares a 30-day temporary appointment. Later the same night, per the Village's posted minutes, Trustee Gesky moves "to disapprove of the removal and restore and reinstate" Cainkar; it passes 4–2, Barry and Vaughn voting no, and Gesky states that the board "will not recognize Mr. Vasselli." The same minutes record the board overriding the mayor's veto of Ordinance 26-02 by 4–2 that night.

Source: FOIA 26-133 (Notice of Removal & transmittal emails); Affidavit of Pres. LaMore; The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (June 18, 2026); Village of Manteno minutes, June 15, 2026. Added September 22, 2026: the 4–2 reinstatement vote and the Ord. 26-02 override.

June 22, 2026

Scheduling texts, and a clerk out of town

A group text thread later released under FOIA, shown as "4 People" in the phone's header (five including the mayor), shows Mayor LaMore, attorney James Vasselli, and Dennis Reboletti scheduling a meeting. Reboletti was later documented in a produced Vasselli Law invoice (#2024072819) billing 6.0 hours for a board meeting plus travel; the text thread's contact card renders his name "Rebelletti." LaMore: "Are you available Wednesday night?"; Rebelletti: "I think that will work. Im flying in from DC that afternoon." Vasselli addresses her as "Mayor" and refers to "Dennis and Julie." Trustee Barry was a member of the thread, which is how he had the same thread. The same day, LaMore texts trustees individually: "Because of a technicality, and because Steven Orth is out of town, we cannot have this meeting on Wednesday. We will try for Thursday if everything works out according to the regulations", pasting the full text of Village Code § 1-6-3 beneath it. Trustee Barry supplied his own screenshots of the same thread in response to a FOIA request on June 23.

Source: FOIA 26-138 responsive records (text messages); FOIA 26-133 (Barry screenshots, June 23).

June 23, 2026

Two competing agendas for one meeting, and the clerk gives notice

Records show Mayor LaMore signs a written "Call for Special Meeting" for June 25 (signature hand-dated June 23), listing the audit, Gotion, and "articulation of reason for removal of Cainkar", but no reinstatement vote. The same day, Trustee Joel Gesky emails the administrator at 11:53 a.m. asking that a "motion to disapprove of the removal and to restore/reinstate" Cainkar be added "for a formal vote"; LaRocque replies "Will do" at 12:26 p.m., Trustee Boudreau sends a second written request that evening, and the agenda distributed at 4:31 p.m. carries the item. Released texts also show LaRocque telling Gesky, "She's talking to the attorney to see if she can take your request off the agenda!", and that evening Boudreau texts, "So we will be going onto clerk number 4, this is unbelievable." Per the Village's posted June 25 minutes, Village Clerk Steven Orth, appointed only on June 1, gave notice that Tuesday, June 23. His formal resignation letter is dated July 14, and he served through August 28. Trustee Barry's sworn affidavit says the Village "had no sitting Clerk" on June 25, which bears on the code's requirement that a special-meeting call be presented to the clerk.

Source: FOIA 26-138 (signed call; Gesky, Boudreau & LaRocque emails and texts, June 23, 2026); Village of Manteno minutes, June 25, 2026; FOIA 26-168 (Orth letter, July 14, 2026); Affidavit of Trustee Barry; The Vedette (July 13, 2026). Corrected September 22, 2026: an earlier version said the date of Orth's resignation had not been reported.

June 25, 2026 · 7:00 p.m.

Four trustees reinstate Cainkar, mayor absent

At a special meeting held without the mayor, trustees Boudreau, Zimbelman, Crockett and Gesky vote 4–0 to "disapprove the removal" and reinstate Cainkar "effective immediately." Trustee Barry reads an objection that the meeting was not properly called and walks out; Trustee Vaughn is absent. The agenda also listed an item to articulate the reasons for Cainkar's removal.

Source: The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (June 26, 2026); Village TRO motion, Exhibit A (agenda).

June 25, 2026 · 9:34 p.m.

The mayor's written "articulation": the same letter, re-sent

Hours after the special meeting she skipped, Mayor LaMore emails the trustees: "I am resending you the email you already received on June 15 with all the reasons why I dismissed Joe Cainkar… You have had this information for over a week." Whether re-sending the removal letter by email satisfies § 3.1-35-10's requirement to report reasons "at a meeting" held 5–10 days after removal is one of the questions a court may have to answer. Earlier that afternoon (4:15 p.m.), Vasselli had emailed a legal memorandum, signed as "Village Attorney," arguing the meeting was not properly called under Village Code § 1-6-3.

Source: FOIA 26-138 (LaMore email, June 25, 9:34 p.m.; Vasselli memo & transmittal email, June 25, 4:15 p.m.).

June 30, 2026

An unsigned engagement letter arrives

Cainkar transmits an "Engagement Letter" to Village Administrator LaRocque, purporting to retain his firm at $250/hour through April 30, 2027 for the residents' suit against the Village and Gotion (Concerned Citizens of Manteno v. Village of Manteno, No. 2023 CH 37) and pending LIUNA Local 751 labor matters. The Village says it is unauthorized and unsigned.

Source: Village TRO motion, Exhibit B (engagement letter).

July 6, 2026

Two attorneys, one board table

Cainkar appears at the regular meeting and seeks to act as village attorney. According to WFAV 95.1, the mayor asked the police chief to remove Cainkar; the chief and Cainkar declined. The board votes 4–1–1 to retain Cainkar. The village now effectively has two attorneys claiming authority.

Source: WFAV 95.1 (July 7, 2026); The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (July 11, 2026).

July 10, 2026

The Village sues four of its own trustees

"The Village of Manteno," through Vasselli Law, files an Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Declaratory Relief and Expedited Discovery (Case No. 26CH21) against the four trustees, and seeks to bar Cainkar and his firm from acting as village counsel.

Source: Village TRO motion & memorandum (filed July 10, 2026); The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (July 14, 2026).

Mid-July 2026

A veto threat hangs over the next meeting

Per The Vedette, Mayor LaMore has said she will veto the board's July 6 vote retaining Cainkar at an upcoming meeting (whether a mayoral veto even applies to that kind of board action is itself a disputed legal question) and has said "an attorney from Vasselli Law will be the village attorney at the next meeting." The next regular board meeting falls on Monday, July 20 (1st and 3rd Mondays, 6:00 p.m., Leo Hassett Community Center). Meanwhile, the clerk's office sits in flux following Steven Orth's June 23 notice.

Source: The Vedette (July 13, 2026).

July 20, 2026

A veto announced from the chair, and a trip to court

At the regular board meeting, Mayor LaMore announced from the chair, at 53:42 of the recording, "under old business tonight, I'm vetoing the Cainkar appointment that was made at the last meeting." No written objection was returned, and the Village later certified in writing that no veto message exists (FOIA 26-168). Whether an oral announcement is a veto at all under 65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-45 is the question the August 3 override turns on. In the same report she said she had also sought a temporary restraining order and expected a judge to "determine the appropriate legal representation for the village" at a hearing the next morning. She also denied, on the record, ever holding a leadership position in CCOM: "I have never had a leadership position with CCOM" (see Fact Check c29).

Source: Manteno Village View recording of the July 20, 2026 meeting (President's Report, 53:42); WFAV 95.1 (July 21, 2026). Corrected September 22, 2026: an earlier version said the mayor did not veto; that rested on a caption capture that cut off at 51:40, before her announcement. The error was ours.

July 21, 2026

Judge dismisses the Village's lawsuit: no complaint was ever filed

At the expedited hearing, Kankakee County Circuit Judge Lindsay Parkhurst dismissed the Village's suit against the four trustees (26CH21) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction: the Village had moved for an emergency restraining order without ever filing an underlying complaint; in the judge's words, "no complaint was filed to vest the court with jurisdiction." The judge did not decide who represents the Village, so the Cainkar-versus-Vasselli question remains open. Vasselli Law had moved a day earlier for leave to file a complaint within 72 hours, leaving the door open to a refile. See Fact Check c28.

Source: Shaw Local/The Daily Journal, July 21, 2026 ("Judge dismisses temporary restraining order against Manteno trustees…").

After July 21

Two return dates, then a hearing set for November

Because the July 21 dismissal was jurisdictional (the suit was tossed for having no complaint on file), the case-management conference that had been set for July 30 was overtaken by the dismissal. The matter came back before Judge Parkhurst on August 17, when the trustees' counsel was given time to prepare a brief and the case was continued to September 21. On September 21 the judge set the attorney case for a hearing at 10 a.m. on Thursday, November 12; the trustees' response was filed that morning, Vasselli has 14 days to reply, and the trustees' attorney, Daniel Bourgault, seven days after that.

Source: Shaw Local/The Daily Journal, July 21 and Sept. 21, 2026; Manteno Village View recording (Aug. 17, 2026, President's Report). Updated September 22, 2026.

August 3, 2026

The walkout, and the override

Two agendas show up to one meeting: the 4-page version posted on the village website since July 30 carries the veto reconsideration; the mayor's shorter version doesn't. She announces she has suspended Administrator Chris LaRocque five days without pay over the paper copies. The board ratifies the Gotion fire-brigade agreement 6-0, its one unanimous moment, then the bills fail 2-4. A motion to adjourn fails 2-4; the mayor declares "meeting is adjourned" anyway and leaves. Four trustees stay and vote the Cainkar veto override 4-0. Every claim from the night is graded on the August 3 page.

Source: Manteno Village View recording (Aug. 3, 2026); The Daily Journal/Shaw Local (Aug. 4, 2026).

August 12, 2026

"It is my meeting and it's up to me what's on the agenda"

At an 8:00 a.m. special meeting, itself called under § 1-6-3, the two-trustee provision at the heart of the June 25 fight, Mayor LaMore states her position on camera: "I have the right to set the agenda," and, citing her attorney's advice, "it is my meeting and it's up to me what's on the agenda." Trustees describe items not reaching the agenda as being "censored," using the word three times. Clerk Steven Orth's resignation, effective August 28, is also discussed. (Quotes transcribed from the stream's auto-captions.)

Source: Manteno Village View recording (Aug. 12, 2026), at 39:54–51:18; posted notice. Corrected September 22, 2026: the special meeting was at 8:00 a.m., not 7:00; the 7:00 a.m. session that day was the committee meeting.

August 17, 2026

No quorum, and the police are sent after a trustee

Four of six trustees don't come to the regular meeting, leaving the board one short of a quorum. The attorney present reads Village Code § 1-6-5, Rule 21 (a 1974 rule allowing a majority of the trustees present to send a police officer after absentees), and the mayor asks whether the trustees wish to use it and then directs Chief Swinford to "send somebody to Annette's house" and "bring her in." Trustee Annette Zimbelman had messaged that she was not feeling well. The word "arrest" on the tape comes from the chief, asking, and the attorney citing Rule 21; the captions carry no speaker labels and we have asked for the audio. The chief asks for confirmation three times, goes, and reports back 38 minutes later: "There was no answer at her door." The rule's text, its five built-in limits, and six graded claims are on the August 17 page.

Source: Manteno Village View recording (Aug. 17, 2026), 27:31–32:29 and 1:10:22; Manteno Code § 1-6-5, Rule 21.

August 20, 2026

All six trustees return, and agree on everything

At a special meeting three days after the quorum failure, every trustee answers the roll and every recorded vote is unanimous, including $123,948.81 in bills. The board spends 54 of the meeting's 76 minutes in closed session under 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(1), returns, and tables the appointment of a code enforcement officer. A special meeting is called for Tuesday, August 25 at 6:00 p.m. to finish it. Trustee Boudreau thanks Village Administrator Chris LaRocque for fourteen years of service, and announces from the dais that he will also miss the September 8 meeting for a golf match.

Source: Manteno Village View recording (Aug. 20, 2026). The full breakdown.

August 25, 2026

The special meeting called to fill the vacancy is cancelled

The Village's meeting index records the August 25 Village Board special meeting as cancelled, along with the Public Works and General Government committee meetings the same day. On September 8 Mayor LaMore explains: a family emergency, and the advice of the village attorney. The appointment vote lands instead on September 8, the one date a trustee had said publicly, nineteen days in advance, that he could not attend.

Source: Village of Manteno meeting index; Manteno Village View recording (Sept. 8, 2026).

September 8, 2026

The appointment fails 2–3, and trustee comments come off the agenda

With Trustee Boudreau at a golf match, the motion to appoint Jim Paicz as Director of Building and Zoning / Code Enforcement Officer fails 2–3: Vaughn and Barry yes; Crockett, Gesky and Zimbelman no. Crockett says he emailed the mayor weeks earlier asking how the $60,000 position would be funded and never got a reply; she apologizes on camera and then gives the number in open session. The village is left with no administrator, no code officer, and no posted jobs. A resident asks who authorized the license plate cameras appearing on village roads. Trustees Barry and Gesky report that they and Fire Chief Rick Petersen inspected Gotion's fire brigade unannounced at 9 p.m. on September 1 and found six certified members on shift, with 19 on staff. Asked why trustee comments were removed from the agenda, the mayor answers: "Because our meetings have been so contentious… some of it is not necessary."

Source: Manteno Village View recording (Sept. 8, 2026); posted agenda. Twenty claims, graded.

September 9, 2026

"I will be making appointments", and the chief answers on Flock

Planning & Zoning and Properties & Recreation meet jointly with the board at 7:00 a.m. Asked whether the administrator, building inspector and front-office jobs will be posted, Mayor LaMore says: "As village president, I will be making appointments… So you don't need to worry about that." A trustee replies that any appointment needs board approval; she answers "Yeah, that's a tough thing to get these days, isn't it?" She adds that she does not plan to hire an administrator before April: "there's going to be an election in seven months." Treasurer Sheila Martin, asked why the Village is not paying the mayor's attorney: "It has not been board approved. It was on the agenda for the special committee meeting and that meeting didn't have a quorum." Asked how she found Vasselli Law, the mayor says "through friends from another community." Trustee Vaughn raises the license plate cameras and the police chief answers on camera: the department has used Flock "for years," there is "potential for abuse," and while the Village does not sell the data, "other people use Flock cameras. Everybody else has access to it, too." He offers a public pros-and-cons session. A member of the public tells the room the Village is "$1.6 million in deficit", unchallenged, and not verified by us. The Plan Commission meeting set for that evening, whose only new business was "Clean Energy Design Group, Inc.: Discussion of Zoning for Battery Energy Storage Systems," is cancelled.

Source: Manteno Village View recording (Sept. 9, 2026); committee agenda; Plan Commission agenda. Twenty claims, graded.

September 16, 2026 · 7:00 a.m.

Four trustees call a special meeting; the mayor reads a statement and leaves

Trustees Boudreau, Crockett, Gesky and Zimbelman call a special meeting under § 1-6-3, the two-trustee provision. Mayor LaMore arrives, reads a prepared statement calling the meeting illegal, names the four as "the Manteno Choice Party," says "I will veto every action taken by the board at the supposed special meeting" before any motion is made, and leaves. Trustee Boudreau is elected mayor pro tem and Trustee Gesky recording secretary, because the village has no clerk. In twenty-five minutes the board amends the August 3 minutes, approves the August 17 minutes (a date correction: the packet said August 7), and approves a professional service agreement with B&F Construction Code Services, each 4 to 0. Gesky on why not wait five days for the regular meeting: "she controls the agenda on Mondays and will not allow us to put on the agenda anything that we wish to discuss."

Source: Manteno Village View recording (Sept. 16, 2026); posted agenda. Fourteen claims, graded.

September 21, 2026

The veto, and an ordinance that does not say what it was said to say

Two meetings. At 5:00 p.m. the Public Safety and Finance committees meet, and the finance chair tells the room that with no administrator "there's one person that's verifying payroll in the village" and that staff have left owed vacation and pay. Both that meeting and the 6:00 p.m. board meeting were streamed, and neither recording is linked from the Village's own meetings index. At 6:00 p.m. the mayor vetoes all three September 16 actions, citing Village Code § 1-5-7 and quoting it as covering "items considered at a board meeting." The section is titled Approval And Veto Of Ordinances and covers ordinances; none of the three items was an ordinance. Under 65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-45 a motion is vetoable only if it creates a liability, spends money or sells property, so the two minutes motions were beyond the power and only the B&F contract was reachable. Told the special meeting was called by four trustees, she answers "you do have a mayor. It should have been approved by me", the opposite of the ordinance she had read aloud fourteen minutes earlier. She also appoints Jim Paicz herself and a temporary village clerk, on a section of the code that governs appointed officers when Manteno's clerk is elected. The board unanimously confirms Fire Chief Rick Petersen (the Village agenda spells it "Peterson") as chief of the village's fire bureau; the motion as agendized and read said "Fire Protection Bureau," while the office in the code (§ 2-2-2) is the fire prevention bureau. It also tables a fire inspection agreement it received that evening, and approves $118,472.98 in bills.

Earlier the same day, in Kankakee County court, Judge Lindsay Parkhurst set the attorney case for 10 a.m. Thursday, Nov. 12. The trustees' response to the suit was filed that morning and Vasselli said he was seeing it for the first time; the judge gave him 14 days to respond and the trustees' attorney, Daniel Bourgault, seven days to reply. A ruling is not expected for several days after the hearing.

Source: Manteno Village View recordings of the board meeting and the committee meeting; board agenda; Manteno Village Code; Illinois Compiled Statutes. Forty-seven claims, graded; The Daily Journal, September 21.

The Meetings

Every meeting we've covered

Eleven meetings since June, each one recorded and gone through line by line. The claim-by-claim pages grade what was said against the documents; the video page holds the full recordings with context.

Monday, September 21, 2026 · committee of the whole 5:00 p.m. and regular board meeting 6:00 p.m.

The veto

The mayor vetoed all three actions taken at the September 16 special meeting and read the ordinance she relied on into the record. We pulled it, along with the Illinois Municipal Code and the village code chapters on the clerk, the building department and the administrator. Most of what was said does not match the text, and some of it does. An hour earlier the same board spent an hour on playground fall protection, chipper debris and a warning from its own finance chair that one person verifies the village payroll.

Wednesday, September 16, 2026 · 7:00 a.m. special meeting

Twenty-five minutes, and the mayor walked out of it

Four trustees called it, the mayor called it illegal and left before the first vote, and the board then amended one set of minutes, corrected the date on another and put a long-standing inspection vendor under a written contract for the first time. Every vote was 4 to 0. Five days later all three were vetoed, which is why this meeting matters.

Wednesday, September 9, 2026 · 7:00 a.m. committee of the whole

"I will be making appointments"

Half an hour of trees, pickleball lights and a gaming licence, handled quickly and without a fight, and then the mayor told the committees she will fill the empty jobs by appointment rather than posting them, and does not plan to hire a village administrator before April's election. The treasurer said on the record that the Village is not paying the mayor's attorney. And the police chief answered questions about the license plate cameras for the first time on camera.

Tuesday, September 8, 2026

No administrator, no code officer

The mayor's motion to appoint a code enforcement officer failed 2 to 3 over a budget question a trustee said he had emailed her about weeks earlier and never had answered. Trustee comments came off the agenda. A resident asked about license plate cameras nobody voted on. And Gotion's fire brigade passed a surprise 9 p.m. inspection with six certified members on shift.

Thursday, August 20, 2026 · special

Six trustees, and every vote unanimous

Three days after the quorum failure, the full board came back and agreed on everything, after 54 of the meeting's 76 minutes behind closed doors. They tabled the code enforcement appointment and set a special meeting for August 25 to finish it. That meeting was cancelled.

Monday, August 17, 2026

The arrest order

Four of six trustees absent, no quorum, and an order to send the police chief after one of them under a rule from 1974. He reported back 38 minutes later that nobody answered the door. In her report the same night the mayor said there had been court that morning, continued now to September 21.

Wednesday, August 12, 2026 · 8:00 a.m. special

"It is my meeting"

The mayor stated her agenda position on camera and named her attorney's advice as the basis for it. Trustees used the word censor three times. The board also cleared the bills it had deadlocked on nine days earlier, 4 to 0, at $367,125, with Barry and Vaughn absent for work.

Monday, August 3, 2026

The walkout and the override

Two agendas, a suspended village administrator, a unanimous 6 to 0 vote on the Gotion fire brigade, a bills package that failed 2 to 4, and then an adjournment the mayor declared after losing the vote on it. Four trustees stayed and overrode her veto 4 to 0.

Monday, July 20, 2026

A veto from the chair, and a courtroom

The mayor announced from the chair that she was vetoing the July 6 vote retaining Cainkar; no written objection followed. She also said she had sought a restraining order and expected a judge to settle the representation question the next morning. She also denied ever holding a leadership position in CCOM.

Monday, July 6, 2026

Two attorneys, one table

Cainkar came to the meeting and acted as village attorney. By one radio account the mayor asked the police chief to remove him and both the chief and Cainkar declined. The board voted 4 to 1 with one abstention to retain him. Four days later the Village sued.

Thursday, June 25, 2026 · special

Reinstatement, without the mayor

Four trustees voted 4 to 0 to disapprove the removal and bring Cainkar back. Trustee Barry read an objection that the meeting was not properly called and walked out; Vaughn and the mayor were absent. Whether this meeting was lawfully convened is the central question in the lawsuit.

The recordings, with context on each →

On the calendar

What we're watching next

Sep 24–27

Oktoberfest

Thursday through Sunday. The village approved a $5,000 in-kind sponsorship on September 8, co-sponsoring the Second Street stage with the American Legion.

Sep 25

Deadline to file the Public Access Counselor request on Manteno's ALPR audit-log denial

The 60-day window to ask the Illinois Attorney General's Public Access Counselor to review Manteno police's July 27 refusal to release its license plate reader audit logs closes on this date (5 ILCS 140/9.5). The request is being filed this week.

Oct 5

Regular board meeting: the override vote, and the director appointment

The mayor's September 21 veto of the three September 16 actions returns to the board; an override needs four of six trustees. The Director of Building and Zoning appointment, defeated 2 to 3 on September 8 and made by the mayor on her own on September 21, is still an open question for the board. The September 22 Public Works and General Government committee meetings were posted as cancelled.

~Oct 5

Vasselli's brief due

Judge Parkhurst gave Vasselli 14 days from September 21 to respond to the trustees' filing.

~Oct 12

Trustees' reply due

Daniel Bourgault, for the four trustees, has seven days after Vasselli's brief to reply.

Nov 12

Hearing on the attorney case, 10:00 a.m.

Set by Judge Lindsay Parkhurst on September 21 at the Kankakee County Courthouse. A ruling is not expected for several days after the hearing.

April

The next municipal election

A speaker at the August 17 meeting called this a lame duck board until April. Every seat in this dispute answers to voters then.

Latest Updates

The running log

Every development we have published, newest first, each linking to the full write-up. Every edit we make to the site itself is logged separately on the change log.

September 22, 2026New

The mayor vetoed a whole meeting, and cited an ordinance about ordinances

On September 21 Mayor LaMore vetoed all three actions taken at the September 16 special meeting, telling the board that Village Code § 1-5-7 lets her return "an item considered at a board meeting." Section 1-5-7 is titled Approval And Veto Of Ordinances and its text covers ordinances. None of the three items was an ordinance. Under 65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-45 a motion can be vetoed only if it creates a liability, spends money or sells property, so the two motions approving minutes were outside the veto power altogether. The one item that was reachable, the B&F contract, is the one two trustees say was emailed to the whole board a week in advance. The override vote is due at the October 5 meeting and needs four of six trustees.

September 22, 2026New

Three reasons the temporary clerk appointment does not work

Asked for the statutory language allowing the mayor to appoint a temporary village clerk, the answer given from the table was § 1-5-5(E), which governs appointed officers where the office is emptied by death, disability, a disqualifying conviction, dismissal or abandonment. Manteno's clerk is an elected office (§ 1-8-1). The clerk's own chapter says a vacancy is filled by "the president and board of trustees" (§ 1-8-3). And inside 1-5-5, resignation has its own subsection, (C), which was not the one read. The clerk resigned.

September 22, 2026New

"There's one person that's verifying payroll in the village"

Said by the finance committee chair at the 5:00 p.m. committee meeting on September 21, a meeting the Village's own meetings index carries no video link for. With no village administrator there is no second review of payroll, staff have left owed vacation time and pay, and, in his words, "I don't think anybody in this room knows how much vacation time someone's owed, how much pay they're owed, or how that process works." Nobody disagreed. The same meeting set an informal $5,000 email threshold for large purchases; the village code sets $3,000 and requires board approval.

September 22, 2026New

The meeting we missed: September 16

We had no page for the September 16 special meeting until now, and we are saying so rather than backdating one. It is on the Village's own meetings index with its agenda and video. Four trustees called it, the mayor read a statement and left, and the board did three things in twenty-five minutes. It is the meeting the veto is about.

September 9, 2026

"I will be making appointments. So you don't need to worry about that."

The morning after the code enforcement vote failed, the committees met to work out how Manteno fills the jobs it no longer has anyone in. Asked whether the administrator, building inspector and front-office positions would be posted, the mayor said she will appoint them. A trustee answered that appointments need board approval; she replied, "Yeah, that's a tough thing to get these days, isn't it?" She also said she does not plan to hire a village administrator at all before April: "there's going to be an election in seven months and we're going to have new trustees and I think we can pick somebody when that happens."

September 9, 2026

The police chief answers on the license plate cameras

Trustee Vaughn brought Tuesday night's public comment back to the table, and the chief answered it directly. "I support Flock, obviously. That's why we have it. We've had it for years", which settles the part of the resident's claim that didn't hold. Then: "Is there potential for abuse? Yes." And, asked where the data goes and whether the village sells it: "No, we don't… we know where our information goes. I mean, now, other people use Flock cameras. Everybody else has access to it, too." He offered to hold a public session on the pros and cons. We are asking for it in writing. What still doesn't exist is a board vote.

September 9, 2026

The village isn't paying the mayor's attorney, and the August 17 quorum failure is why

The mayor asked the question herself: "Sheila, why aren't we paying Vasselli?" The treasurer's answer: "It has not been board approved. It was on the agenda for the special committee meeting and that meeting didn't have a quorum and all the agenda items were never voted on." She was referring to a committee meeting that lacked a quorum; the Aug. 17 evening board meeting, the one that ended with the police being sent after an absent trustee, was a separate session, and which one she meant is not settled to a bill sitting unpaid three weeks later. Asked how she found her attorneys, the mayor said: "through friends from another community."

September 8, 2026

The village ran out of staff, and then voted down the fix

Manteno has no village administrator and no code enforcement officer. The mayor's motion to appoint one failed 2 to 3; the trustee who had told the board he would vote yes was at a high school golf match, which he had announced from the dais nineteen days earlier. The dispute wasn't the candidate; it was a budget question Trustee Crockett says he emailed the mayor weeks ago and never had answered. She apologized on camera for not answering, and then gave the number: $30,000 of the $60,000 salary is already in the budget, the stipend the departing administrator was paid to do the same job. Twenty claims from that night, graded.

September 8, 2026

A resident counted ten license plate cameras and asked who voted on them

The first speaker of the night described roughly ten automated license plate readers that appeared on Manteno roads about three weeks ago: two on Route 50, five near the interstate ramps, one by Maple Ridge Park, one on North E Road, one near Duncan. Part of her claim doesn't hold: Manteno police have been an ALPR agency for years, and produced their policy and a 24-page sharing roster in response to our FOIA. The part that does hold is the part that matters. Nobody has produced a board vote, an ordinance, or a roll call authorizing any of it.

September 8, 2026

Gotion's fire brigade passed a surprise inspection

Two trustees and Fire Chief Rick Petersen went to the plant unannounced at 9:00 p.m. on September 1 and were stopped at the door. An hour later the company had produced all six brigade members on shift, every one Level 1 certified. Gotion now reports 19 firefighters on staff working 24-on, 48-off, with two more being hired. The agreement the board ratified 6 to 0 in August required eighteen by August 31. On the Village's own account, that deadline was met, the first thing in this story that has gone the way it was supposed to.

September 8, 2026

Trustee comments have been removed from the board agenda

A resident raised it in public comment; Trustee Crockett put it to the mayor directly at the end of his report. Her answer, on the tape: "Because our meetings have been so contentious and some people want to give a lot more information at the end of the meeting and some of it is not necessary." Crockett: "It's been a tradition for years… I don't think that by you taking the comments off the agenda that you'll silence us." The mayor: "Perhaps not." Under 65 ILCS 5/3.1-40-15 the board sets its own rules of proceeding.

August 25, 2026

The special meeting called to fill the vacancy was cancelled

On August 20 the board tabled the code enforcement appointment and set a special meeting for Tuesday, August 25 at 6:00 p.m. to handle it. The Village's meeting index records that meeting, and the Public Works and General Government committee meetings the same day, as cancelled. The mayor explained on September 8: a family emergency, and the advice of the village attorney. The vote landed instead on September 8, the one date a trustee had publicly said he could not attend.

August 20, 2026

A meeting we missed: six trustees, and every vote unanimous

We did not cover this one when it happened, so we have gone back and done it. Three days after the quorum failure, all six trustees returned for a special meeting, spent 54 of its 76 minutes in closed session under the personnel exception, and then agreed on everything: motions, the tabling of the appointment, and $123,948.81 in bills. Somebody at the table said out loud: "Wow. Look at that. It could actually happen, can it?" It is also where a trustee publicly thanked the departing village administrator for fourteen years of service; three days earlier, on August 17, Trustee Barry had already said on camera that "Mr. LaRocque is retiring."

August 17, 2026

No quorum, and an order to arrest a trustee

Four of six trustees didn't come to the regular board meeting, leaving the board one short of a quorum. The attorney present read a 1974 village rule aloud, and the mayor directed the police chief to go get an absent trustee. He asked three times whether the board really meant it, went, and reported back 38 minutes later that nobody answered the door. We publish the rule word for word, along with the five limits written into it and six graded claims.

August 17, 2026

A court hearing, continued to September 21

In her president's report the same night, the mayor said there had been court that morning, that opposing counsel got an extension to prepare a brief, that Judge Parkhurst agreed, and that roughly 20 Manteno residents came to watch. The matter is continued to Monday, September 21 at 9:00 a.m. in Room 204. She did not name the case, so we are not yet reporting which one it was.

August 12, 2026

"It is my meeting and it's up to me what's on the agenda"

At an 8:00 a.m. special meeting, the mayor stated her agenda position on camera and cited her attorney's advice as its basis. Trustees used the word "censor" three times. The board also approved the bills it had deadlocked on nine days earlier, 4-0, at $367,125.

August 3, 2026

The walkout, and the 4-0 override

Two agendas showed up to one meeting. The mayor announced she had suspended the village administrator, the board ratified the Gotion fire-brigade agreement 6-0, the bills failed 2-4, and then a motion to adjourn failed 2-4 and the mayor declared the meeting adjourned anyway and left. Four trustees stayed and voted to override her veto of the village attorney. Thirty-three claims from that night, graded.

July 20, 2026

A veto from the chair, and a courtroom

The mayor announced from the chair that she was vetoing the July 6 vote retaining Cainkar, with no written objection to follow (corrected September 22, 2026; an earlier version said there was no veto). She also said she had sought a temporary restraining order and expected a judge to settle the representation question the next morning. Twenty-eight claims from that meeting, graded.

The Deep Files

The three long reads

The parts of this story that need room. Each one now has its own page, kept current as the record changes.

Document Library

Read the primary records yourself

The public records this site is built on: the court filing and the FOIA responses obtained from the Village. Every PDF opens in a new tab. Don't take our word for it; read the originals.

The Transparency Record

What the Village won't release, and who's deciding

A public-accountability site is only as strong as the records it can obtain. Here is what happened when the documents behind the attorney firing were requested under the Freedom of Information Act.

The Village has released a great deal: the forensic audit, roughly 150 pages of attorney-dispute communications, the group texts in the library above. This is not wholesale stonewalling. But on the central request about the attorney's removal (FOIA 26-133), the Village withheld an unspecified set of records under attorney-client privilege, and the way it did so is part of the story.

In a July 2, 2026 email, the Village's FOIA officer wrote that she had forwarded the request to Mayor LaMore and that "Mayor LaMore informed me that anything else she has is attorney client privileged." On its face, the official whose own communications were sought, and whose administration then sued four trustees, personally decided what to withhold from her own records. No index of the withheld documents was provided. Illinois law requires a written denial giving the reasons, "a detailed factual basis for the application of any exemption claimed," the specific exemption with supporting legal authority, and the names of those responsible (5 ILCS 140/9(a)-(b)). It does not itself require a document-by-document index; a court may order one.

Two things make the privilege claim contestable. First, the privilege protects communications with an attorney who represents the public body, and the board rejected Vasselli's appointment 4–2 and reinstated Cainkar. The Village has since produced a Vasselli Law engagement letter dated June 4, 2026, signed by the mayor alone at $220 an hour, and an invoice with entries starting June 8 (a June 9 "Phone call with Mayor," a June 12 conference call with Dennis Reboletti, a June 14 entry for a Manteno board meeting), all before the board ever saw his name. So the question is not whether Vasselli had a relationship with the Village before June 15; he had one with the mayor. The question is whether a mayor's unilateral engagement, never consented to by the board, creates a privilege for the Village. The same June 4 letter also sits awkwardly beside two of the Village's written "no documents" certifications (FOIA 26-167 and 26-168). Second, Trustee Barry produced some of the very records the Village withheld, the LaMore–Vasselli scheduling texts, showing they exist and were not treated as privileged by another custodian. Scheduling a meeting is not legal advice. Corrected September 22, 2026: an earlier version said Vasselli had "no relationship to the Village" before June 15; the June 4 engagement letter shows otherwise.

Full disclosure & caveats. The FOIA requests described here were filed by the reporter who publishes this site (BradleyIllinois.com); we flag that so you can weigh it. A public body is entitled to assert privilege, and whether this withholding was proper is contested and unadjudicated; the requester's remedy is a Request for Review by the Illinois Attorney General's Public Access Counselor. Nothing here is a finding that any law was broken. The full record, with the fairness caveats, is in the Fact Check (c37).
Sources & Method

Sourcing & corrections

This site favors primary documents (the court filing and FOIA records) and corroborates dates and quotes against local news reporting. Statutes and cases were checked against the Illinois Compiled Statutes and published opinions.

Statutes & legal authority

  • 65 ILCS 5/3.1-30-5: Appointed officers; president appoints attorney with advice & consent
  • 65 ILCS 5/3.1-35-10: Removal of appointed officer; the "5–10 day" reporting rule & automatic restoration
  • Manteno Code § 1-9-2 (office of village attorney) · § 1-6-3 (special meetings) · § 1-9-4 (legislative counsel)
  • Ill. Att'y Gen. Op. 94-012: limits on serial mayoral temporary appointments
  • 65 ILCS 5/3.1-35-25: "Calling out militia" (the section mis-cited in the filing)
  • Village of Westmont v. Lenihan, 301 Ill. App. 3d 1050 (1998) (opinion)
  • Pechous v. Slawko, 64 Ill. 2d 576 (1976), cited in the filing
  • 5 ILCS 120/2.02: Open Meetings Act, special-meeting notice

News reporting & records

  • The Daily Journal / Shaw Local, "Village of Manteno sues 4 of its trustees…" (July 14, 2026)
  • Shaw Local, "Village of Manteno has two village attorneys" (July 11, 2026)
  • Shaw Local, "Manteno mayor absent as Cainkar reinstated…" (June 26, 2026)
  • Shaw Local, "Manteno mayor dismisses village attorney" (June 18, 2026)
  • Shaw Local, "Manteno collectively exhales after forensic audit presentation" (May 23, 2026)
  • WFAV 95.1, "Questions persist about Manteno Village Attorney" (July 7, 2026)
  • The Vedette, "Manteno board clashes over legal counsel appointment" (June 23, 2026)
  • The Vedette, "Vote, veto, vote: Manteno dysfunction continues" (July 13, 2026)
  • FOX 32 Chicago, "Data center fears grow after massive land purchases in Chicago suburb" (July 13, 2026); Essex/Constellation land records
  • Village of Manteno FOIA responses 26-106, 26-133, 26-138 (see Documents)
Tips & Corrections

Send us something

Got a document, a tip, or a correction? We want to hear it. Name and email are optional; you can send anonymously.

No name or email required. Submissions are delivered to the reporter by a third-party form service (FormSubmit), which processes the message in transit; for maximum sensitivity, mail records to the address on BradleyIllinois.com instead. We don't publish or share tipster information.