Four battery containers by a quarry and a railroad. An hour of questions, no vote, and a call for a special-use rule.

Chairman Paul Motel opened by saying ⚠ "since we have no clerk this evening, I'll do roll call." Commissioners Pilbeam, Carson, Dole and Lee answered, and the chairman counted himself present. Commissioner Weiland's name was called and no answer is audible, and he was not called on the vote that followed; Commissioner Hupe's name was not called. The Village lists seven members.

The minutes of August 11 were approved on a motion by Commissioner Dole, seconded by Commissioner Lee. On the roll call Pilbeam, Carson, Dole, Lee and Motel each answered yes: 5–0. At the end, the meeting adjourned on a motion by Carson, seconded by Pilbeam, by voice vote.

The clerk vacancy. The August 11 minutes were prepared by Village Clerk Steven Orth, who served through August 28 (see the main record). The commission had no meeting in September (the September 9 meeting was cancelled), so October 13 was its first meeting without him. Minutes deadline: the Open Meetings Act says a public body "shall approve the minutes of its open meeting within 30 days after that meeting or at the public body's second subsequent regular meeting, whichever is later" (5 ILCS 120/2.06(b)). The August 11 minutes were approved at the next meeting held, and they are posted on the Village's index. The October 13 minutes are due for approval by the commission's November 10 meeting at the latest under the "whichever is later" rule if that meeting is held, and must be posted within 10 days after approval.

Sources: recording, 11:00–12:00 and 1:20:30; posted agenda; August 11 minutes; Planning Commission page; 5 ILCS 120/2.06(b), read November 3, 2026.

The agenda listed no public hearings and only one item of new business: "Clean Energy Design Group Inc., presenting information regarding Battery Energy Storage Systems. RE: Discussion of Zoning for Battery Energy Storage Systems." No application or petition was before the commission. After about an hour of questions, the chairman asked whether commissioners had anything to add ⚠ "in the event we do hear a matter like that," and said he would contact the company's Mr. Maloney about the commission's concerns, including the railroad. No motion on battery storage was made.

Context. The Village describes the Plan Commission as "a recommending body to the Village Board." Because it made no recommendation, nothing from this meeting is headed to the board. The same item was on the commission's September 9 agenda, and that meeting was cancelled (see September 8 and October 5). Old business was listed as "None" on the agenda; the chairman said the village growth discussion was on hold.

Sources: recording, 16:00, 1:17:00–1:19:30; posted agenda; Village Planning Commission page.

The chairman called for "Mr. Maloney." The man who came up said he was filling in, and spelled his name: Ian Cardosi. He said the company wants to participate in PJM grid services with ⚠ "four Tesla batteries that they use if they need load support" and called it ⚠ "a simple project where you're putting basically four cargo containers on a piece of property and then it ties directly into the grid." He later said they would be Tesla Megapack 3s: ⚠ "It's a one mega block, but there's four basically cargo containers of batteries sitting there into one transformer." He said ⚠ "This isn't related to any data center stuff."

He described himself as new to the project, more on the engineering and utility side, with 15 years at a utility, and said he was filling in for "Dan." He did not know whether Clean Energy Design Group or someone else would own the finished project.

Context. PJM Interconnection is the regional grid operator that serves ComEd's territory; the presenter said PJM would control when the batteries charge and discharge. Tesla introduced the Megapack 3 and the Megablock, a set of four Megapack 3 units with a shared transformer and switchgear, in September 2025 (ESS News). The company's packet went to commissioners and is not public.

Sources: recording, 16:00–17:30, 22:30, 41:00–41:30, 53:30, 55:00; ESS News, September 2025.

Asked the wattage, Mr. Cardosi said ⚠ "about 4.8 megawatts of power." Near the end of the commission's questions, a commissioner said Tesla's own configurator lists the product at 9.6 megawatts and a larger energy figure (the caption renders it "13 or 19.3"), and that 4.8 megawatts fits the four-hour configuration. Asked whether the 4.8 was capped by software or by the interconnection, he said ⚠ "Both," and that capacity could only increase to ⚠ "what the allowable is." He later said the line is ⚠ "a 34 5 connection" (34.5 kV) and that the feeder had about 10 megawatts available.

Context. Published specifications put each Megapack 3 at about 5 megawatt-hours and the four-unit Megablock at about 20 megawatt-hours, which at a four-hour discharge works out to roughly 5 megawatts, consistent with the 4.8 figure (Energy-Storage.news). The company did not state the energy capacity in megawatt-hours on the recording; that number matters for the property tax (card q15).

Sources: recording, 21:00, 42:00–42:30, 55:30–58:00; Energy-Storage.news.

A man in the audience asked whether they were lithium ion or lithium phosphate. Mr. Cardosi: ⚠ "Lithium iron phosphate." The questioner noted that chemistry has a higher temperature before it burns, and he agreed.

Context. Lithium iron phosphate is a type of lithium-ion battery. Industry reporting on the Megapack 3 describes its cells as lithium iron phosphate (Energy-Storage.news). It is a different product from the battery cells Gotion makes in Manteno; nothing on the recording connects the two companies.

Sources: recording, 48:30; Energy-Storage.news.

Commissioner Lee opened the questions: the units sit close to railroad tracks, and across the street is a stone quarry ⚠ "that does exploding." Would blasting or train vibration affect the batteries? Mr. Cardosi said engineering studies through Tesla would check, and that the railroad would be notified and have input once interconnection is approved. A commissioner described the parcel as ⚠ "Route 50 and 6000," by a property with satellite dishes, and said it is in Manteno Township, ⚠ "That's why it's been brought to us."

The chairman said the area has had a derailment, that his concern is how close the unit sits to the property line and the railroad's easement, and asked whether anyone from the company had contacted the railroad (the caption says "Canadian Northern"; Mr. Bergdahl later said Canadian National). Mr. Cardosi said he would find out. Late in the meeting Commissioner Carson, called on by the chairman, said the packet shows the equipment 8.6 feet from the property line, and Commissioner Dole, answering a question put to him by name, read it as about 8½ feet. Mr. Cardosi called it ⚠ "the initial design." A commissioner asked about the overhead power lines; he said ComEd would set the separation.

Context. The 8.6-foot figure is from the company's packet as read aloud; we have not seen it. On October 5, Trustee Boudreau said the site being looked at was on Career Center Road. We have not matched the two descriptions to a parcel number, and the derailment the chairman mentioned is not verified. The Village posts quarry blasting information on its website.

Sources: recording, 17:30–19:30, 25:00–26:00, 33:30, 35:00–35:30, 1:04:30, 1:13:30.

Asked when the project would start and how long it would take, Mr. Cardosi said tying into the grid takes ⚠ "at least 12 months... for interconnection cuz it has to go through all the approvals," so ⚠ "at the earliest a year from now."

Context. That is the company's estimate for the grid approvals only. Local approvals (section 5) would be separate, and none has been applied for.

Sources: recording, 28:30–29:00.

A commissioner said the packet's executive summary calls it a "Made in America" battery system, but Tesla's Megapack configurations list four battery module options: BM01 made in Malaysia, BM02 in China, and BM03 and BM04 in the United States, and Tesla's standard configuration uses the first two. ⚠ "So, where's the made in the USA?" Mr. Cardosi said these would be Megapack 3s and that federal rules and tax credits push American-made equipment.

The same commissioner said Tesla began manufacturing them in August with deliveries due in the second half of 2026, and asked how anyone knows they will work. Mr. Cardosi said earlier generations have run a long time and there will be data on the new ones before this project.

Context. Tesla builds the Megapack 3 at a new factory near Houston, Texas, and industry reporting says deliveries were expected to start in the second half or toward the end of 2026 (ESS News; Energy-Storage.news). ESS News reported at launch that the cells come from the United States, Southeast Asia and China. So "assembled in Texas" is supported; whether the cells in this project would be American-made depends on the module chosen, which the company did not say.

Sources: recording, 26:00–28:30; ESS News, September 2025; Energy-Storage.news.

Asked what kind of onboard fire suppression the Megapack 3 has, Mr. Cardosi said monitoring is built in and runs 24/7, but ⚠ "I'm not for sure on the new ones," and specifications would come later. Asked what kind of FDC (a fire department connection port) the company uses: ⚠ "I will find out on that." Liability insurance: ⚠ "we'll have plenty," deferred to later. Vibration testing near a quarry: he would find out. Where damaged units would be stored before going back to Tesla: in the forthcoming commissioning and decommissioning plans. A decommissioning bond: ⚠ "You can require that, yes." Nobody would be on site; a fence would surround the units. He said the fire department would need no special equipment and he had been talking with local fire departments.

What's open. Every one of these is a promise to answer later. If the company files an application, the answers belong in the record before any hearing.

Sources: recording, 29:30–35:30, 40:30–41:30.

A commissioner, whom the chairman answered by name as Carson, read that UL 9540A is ⚠ "a test method for evaluating thermal runaway fire propagation" and asked whether the commission would get the results. Mr. Cardosi recommended writing that into any special use permit, ⚠ "that requires it annually." The chairman then said that, as he understood it, UL 9540A is a test toward the UL 9540 rating, and that the information sent to the commission says all current Tesla Megapacks meet that standard.

Context. That matches how the standards work: UL 9540 is the safety listing for energy storage systems and UL 9540A is the fire-propagation test method used in that process and by fire codes. The new state law requires batteries in systems it covers to be listed under UL 1973 and UL 9540 (55 ILCS 5/5-12024(ee)). The same standards came up at the October 19 board meeting, where a resident who had watched this presentation asked about them.

Sources: recording, 36:00–38:30; 55 ILCS 5/5-12024(ee), read November 3, 2026.

The chairman said that in one of the most recent notable battery storage fires in California the pack reignited five days after the fire was believed extinguished, and that ⚠ "right now the standard is 48 hours" for someone to stand watch afterward. He asked whether the company's monitoring contractor would cover that. Mr. Cardosi said yes, and that Tesla is involved in monitoring temperatures.

What we found. Reignitions are documented: the Gateway Energy Storage fire in San Diego reignited about two days after it began in May 2024 (BEST Magazine). We have not identified the five-day case or a 48-hour watch standard, so we leave both open.

Sources: recording, 39:00–40:00; BEST Magazine, May 17, 2024.

The audience member who later gave his name as Belluso said he has worked with Tesla battery systems, that they are well self-contained but must be maintained ⚠ "quarterly," especially with dust from fields and the quarry, and that ⚠ "they are not liquid-cooled," so there is no water draw or leak-off to worry about.

What we found. Published descriptions of earlier Megapack models describe a thermal system using a water and ethylene glycol coolant. We have not found Tesla's cooling specification for the Megapack 3, so we cannot confirm or refute the statement for this product. The company's specifications, which Mr. Cardosi said would come later, would settle it.

Sources: recording, 53:30–55:00.

Commissioner Carson, whom the chairman called on after Mr. Bergdahl, said the packet's noise figure stops at 33 feet while the equipment sits 8.6 feet from the line, and that by the commissioner's math the level at the line would be roughly 80 dBA. Mr. Cardosi said he is not a sound expert and would present a figure as the study goes on. Mr. Belluso said the sound depends on load, ⚠ "like a beehive," and quieter than a home standby generator. A man in the room said 80 decibels is very busy street traffic or a vacuum cleaner.

Context. The 80 dBA figure is a commissioner's estimate, not a measurement. For counties, the new state law bars sound limits on storage stricter than the Illinois Pollution Control Board's (55 ILCS 5/5-12024(g)); that section does not govern a village.

Sources: recording, 1:04:00–1:07:30, 1:12:00; 55 ILCS 5/5-12024(g).

Near the end, a trustee in the audience said something sent to them says ⚠ "the square wave frequency that comes off the panels" on a battery unit can disrupt defibrillators and pacemakers and is difficult for people on the autism spectrum, and asked that it be on the record. The trustee said residents' health would be a main consideration. The chairman thanked the speaker as a trustee; the caption renders the name "Yvonne," which may be Trustee Vaughn, but we have not confirmed it against the audio, so we do not name who spoke. Earlier, an audience member asked about long-term health effects of "waves" from the units; Mr. Cardosi said he was not aware of any.

What we checked. We have not seen the material the trustee referred to and found no source for the claim as stated. We report it as said.

Sources: recording, 45:30–46:30, 1:17:30–1:19:00.

Asked the benefit to Manteno, Mr. Cardosi said ⚠ "Tax dollars and then hopefully to help the grid." A commissioner asked whether the tax might be $20,000 or $30,000 a year; he said it would depend on the assessment. Asked whether it would lower ComEd bills: ⚠ "It will not have a direct impact." An audience member asked about incentives; he said utilities offer them, and the Village would get none ⚠ "directly." Asked where the tax goes, the answer given was ⚠ "the local tax assessment of the property tax will go directly to the county."

Context. Illinois has no state property tax; the county collects it and distributes it to the local taxing districts the parcel sits in. Whether the Village itself would get a share depends on whether the parcel is inside village limits (card q18). The new state energy law sets how these systems are assessed starting with assessment year 2026: a cost basis of $65 per kilowatt-hour of rated energy capacity, trended for inflation, less depreciation (35 ILCS 200/10-920 and 10-925, added by Public Act 104-0458). Because the company gave power (4.8 MW) but not energy capacity, no one at the meeting could compute a tax figure, and neither can we.

Sources: recording, 20:00–22:30, 44:30–45:30; Public Act 104-0458, new 35 ILCS 200/10-920 and 10-925, read November 3, 2026.

Commissioner Dole said the bigger question for the commission and the Village Board is whether battery storage fits the I-2 industrial zone as the code stands. As he understood it, approving it under I-2 as written would mean ⚠ "anybody can come here in any I-2 and put these in without any of our approval," and he suggested a special use and even a text amendment, ⚠ "because these are not going away." The chairman agreed it ⚠ "should be case by case basis with a special use permit."

What the law says. Illinois lets a village classify uses as special uses; a special use “shall be permitted only after a public hearing before some commission or committee designated by the corporate authorities,” with published notice, and a special use the commission does not approve can pass the Village Board only “by a favorable majority vote of all” trustees then in office (65 ILCS 5/11-13-1.1). Changing the zoning text itself needs a hearing with newspaper notice published 15 to 30 days before (65 ILCS 5/11-13-14). We have not checked how Manteno's current code classifies battery storage in I-2; that is the question Commissioner Dole raised, and it remains open.

Sources: recording, 1:10:30–1:13:00, 1:16:00; 65 ILCS 5/11-13-1.1; 65 ILCS 5/11-13-14, both read November 3, 2026.

The chairman said that under the Clean and Reliable Grid Affordability Act, together with NFPA 855, the minimum setbacks would be ⚠ "150 ft from occupied community buildings. 150 ft from non-participating residences 50 ft from property lines 50 ft from public rights of way and waivers from affected owners. So, what you currently propose to the commission wouldn't fit at all." Mr. Cardosi: ⚠ "Correct."

What the law says. The numbers are right; the reach is narrower. The act, Public Act 104-0458 (effective June 1, 2026), added 55 ILCS 5/5-12024, which says "a county shall require" those setbacks, measured from the nearest battery enclosure: 150 feet from occupied community buildings and non-participating residences, 50 feet to the property line of an occupied community building or non-participating property, and 50 feet from a public road right-of-way, waivable with the affected owner's written consent. It covers systems over 1,000 kilowatts, so a 4.8 MW project would qualify. But county standards apply only "in areas of the county that are not within the zoning jurisdiction of a municipality," and we found no matching section for villages: the act's only new Municipal Code division is a "Solar Bill of Rights." So for a site under Village zoning, these are a model the Village may adopt, not a legal minimum, and the 50-foot line applies to non-participating neighbors, not every property line. If the site is unincorporated and under county zoning, they are mandatory, and the county may not be stricter (card q18).

Sources: recording, 30:00, 1:13:30–1:14:30; 55 ILCS 5/5-12024, subsections (a), (b), (f), (h); Public Act 104-0458, section list, read November 3, 2026.

A commissioner said the parcel is in Manteno Township, not Bourbonnais Township, ⚠ "That's why it's been brought to us." A township is not the village. Later Mr. Barnes asked whether this was the property a landowner and his lawyer had talked about annexing last year; a voice at the dais answered that the annexed property is ⚠ "actually on the west side of Cypress," a different property.

Why it matters. Under the Municipal Code, "No municipality shall exercise any power set forth in this Division 13 outside the corporate limits thereof, if the county in which such municipality is situated has adopted" county zoning (65 ILCS 5/11-13-1). Kankakee County has a zoning ordinance and a Zoning Board of Appeals. If this parcel is unincorporated, the zoning decision would sit with the county, unless the land is annexed first. A county that adopts battery standards under 55 ILCS 5/5-12024 must hold a zoning board hearing, decide within 30 days after it, and approve a request that meets the standards. If it is inside the Village, the Village's own code and the special-use process in card q16 apply. We are asking the Village for the parcel's status.

Sources: recording, 35:00, 58:30–59:00; 65 ILCS 5/11-13-1; 55 ILCS 5/5-12024(b), (d), (j); Kankakee County zoning page, all read November 3, 2026.

The chairman said the commission would most likely need a hearing to create Village code, ⚠ "much like we did back in September of '25 for photovoltaic devices," incorporating state law and tailoring it to Manteno. He said he forwarded commissioners another central Illinois municipality's packet that kept battery systems at least 500 feet from non-participating residences. He would ask that a Manteno code contain much of the state act, require the UL 9540 rating and NFPA 855, and require a fire department connection piped about 15 to 20 feet away from the unit, ⚠ "because in the event there was a situation and our fire department can't reach that FDC fitting, it kind of defeats the purpose."

Context. The commission's September 9, 2025 agenda lists a public hearing on "PC-TEXT 25-01," a request by the Village "to amend Zoning Chapter 16, Photovoltaic Systems to update and align with State of Illinois statutes." We have not checked the final ordinance. We have not identified the other municipality.

Sources: recording, 1:14:30–1:17:00; September 9, 2025 Plan Commission agenda.

Mr. Barnes, the first speaker, asked the commission to ask many questions and make no zoning decision that night. He said quick research showed ⚠ "a federal lawsuit... against clean energy regarding solar" that is set for trial in July 2027, and suggested holding off until it ends. After the presentation he asked why Manteno would want more lithium batteries near the Gotion plant and asked about benefits beyond tax revenue: ⚠ "There's no jobs, just the tax revenue?"

What we checked. We searched for a federal case naming Clean Energy Design Group and found none. That does not mean there is none; we need a case number. The company was not asked about it on the recording.

Sources: recording, 12:00–13:30, 43:00–45:00.

Mr. Barnes said ⚠ "I think there was just a something that somebody suffered severe burns at the Goshen plant last week, right? That Goshen is investigating" (the captions render Gotion as "Goshen" throughout).

What we checked. We found no published report of a burn injury at Gotion's Manteno plant in early October 2026. He framed it as a question. If you have a source, the form below reaches us.

Sources: recording, 47:30–48:00.

The second speaker, whom the chair called Sandy (the caption renders the surname "Chez"; we have not confirmed the spelling), said she believed this was groundwork for a data center, which would bring taxes but not jobs and would raise utility costs. She compared it to Schaumburg and said such development ⚠ "on top of" Gotion would ⚠ "kill Manteno as we know it." She offered the chairman a data center brochure from a friend who designs them. Mr. Cardosi later said the project is for grid support and ⚠ "actually not because of the data centers."

Context. Nothing on the recording ties this project to a data center beyond speculation in the room. Mr. Belluso guessed the line serves heavy industrial users nearby and asked why so much capacity is needed in ⚠ "essentially a dead area." Both are opinions about the future, which we note without grading.

Sources: recording, 13:30–15:30, 22:30–23:30, 56:30–58:30, 1:08:30–1:10:00.

Called on by the chairman, Mr. Bergdahl said Duke Energy proposed a natural gas-fired power plant in that vicinity some 25 to 27 years ago, because the power lines draw energy developers. He asked how far the stored power can reach, citing Momence's brownouts; Mr. Cardosi said ComEd's line studies would show. Mr. Bergdahl said the Village's agreement with Gotion, ⚠ "the whole fire brigade, the whole thing," should be considered for any battery project, even an unstaffed one.

Context. The Gotion fire-brigade agreement is real: the board ratified it 6–0 on August 3 (see Videos and August 3). We have not verified the Duke Energy proposal.

Sources: recording, 1:00:30–1:04:00.

The chairman said the state representative referred him to a website with basic information saying they were very close to reaching out to the Village about the next phase of the overpass project. He said Public Works' Jim Hanley's last update was that the concrete-laying machine for the 9000 Road expansion had been malfunctioning, and he had not seen it in about three weeks. He asked Mayor LaMore whether she had anything; she did not.

Context. Six days later, at the October 19 meetings, the public works director said the county told him concrete pouring would continue after the stall. The lawsuit over the Village attorney, FOIA and the minutes dispute did not come up at this meeting.

Sources: recording, 1:19:30–1:20:30; October 19 page.