Mesquite council ratifies termination of Police Chief McQuaid Chesley amid injunction, public dispute

The Mesquite City Council voted March 17 to ratify the termination of Police Chief McQuaid Chesley after public comment and council discussion that repeatedly referenced a court injunction and alleged violations of officers’ procedural rights.

The vote capped a session dominated by debate over whether the council should proceed while state and federal courts review claims that the city violated Nevada statutory protections for police. Councilwoman Gallo said she would not ratify the action and repeatedly cited the Police Officers’ Bill of Rights; other council members and dozens of public speakers urged either ratification or caution because of the pending litigation.

Mr. Branham, speaking at the council dais when the item was called, described the purpose of the agenda item as procedural. He told the council, “the purpose of agenda item 2.1 was to allow Mr. Joseph Chesley the opportunity to present anything to council he wanted them to” before they moved on to ratification.

Councilwoman Gallo directly objected to taking final action at the meeting. “I will not be ratifying this tonight. I'm not going to be part of breaking the NRS 2 89, which was Chesley's Pobar, which is Police Officers' Bill of Rights,” she said, repeating concerns that documents and procedures had violated statutory and judge-ordered limits. (Transcript quotes are reproduced as spoken.)

Several residents and attorneys warned council members about legal exposure if they proceeded. Al Litman told the council the federal judge had found violations and said the city could face significant monetary awards; Steve Clutterham urged the council to “call this meeting off right now and ask for Mike's resignation.” Multiple speakers referenced a hearing record, a temporary restraining order or injunction, and the prospect of a settlement hearing in federal court.

Other speakers represented current and former Mesquite officers and the Mesquite Police Officers Association (MPOA). Ryan Hughes, speaking for officers who said they had worked under Chesley, said the council’s action should focus on whether Chesley should be terminated, not on process: “We have a right to protect us. A lot of us have suffered dearly at the decisions that were made by him.” Wendy Stuve, a member of the MPOA, thanked the council for the decision and said morale at the department improved after recent changes.

During public comment, residents emphasized competing concerns: some said the city must proceed to restore department morale and safety; others said the council’s actions violated due process and would cost the city heavily. Multiple commenters estimated legal costs could be “tens of thousands” to “millions” of dollars, and several speakers urged the council to pause until court transcripts and rulings were final.

Councilwoman Fielding made a motion to ratify the termination of McQuaid Chesley; a second was entered on the record. At roll call, Councilwoman Gallo voted no. The mayor announced, “Motion passes.” The official record as captured in the meeting transcript does not include a full roll-call tally in the audio transcript excerpt; the council placed the ratification on the record as approved at the meeting.

Council remarks and public comments repeatedly noted next steps in litigation and the possibility of a settlement hearing in federal court; speakers also cited the impending release of transcript material in related court proceedings. Several residents urged the council to form a citizen oversight group or to involve an independent law-enforcement investigatory body to avoid further litigation.

The meeting closed with repeated acknowledgements of strain on city employees and the Mesquite Police Department. The city council did not announce additional personnel actions during the session; legal counsel and court schedules were described by multiple speakers as shaping the next steps.

Copies of the court transcripts and pending court dates were referenced during public comment; the council did not postpone the ratification motion and adjourned after the vote.