Several residents told the Mesquite City Council on July 22 that a nightclub at the Red Hills Commercial Center is operating out of compliance with parking and fire codes and that nearby businesses and owners have experienced harassment. The complaints were made during the meeting’s public-comment period.

Why it matters: Speakers said code violations are affecting safety, business operations and the viability of other tenants at the center and asked the city to enforce its existing land‑use and fire‑safety rules.

Raelene Chavanna, a business owner who said she had reviewed certificate-of-occupancy records, told the council the nightclub’s site plan used incorrect parcel information and failed to provide required parking. "MV Nightclub is supposed to have 53 spaces," Chavanna said. "But it also falls under an A‑2 occupancy...they have to have a fire lane completely around the building. MV Nightclub doesn't have a fire lane at all." She described vehicles parked in areas she identified as needed for fire access and showed the council photographs of the parking and curb markings.

Erica Nicholas, who said she has been subject to prolonged harassment, said the nightclub operator had represented himself as a tenant on a site plan and later acquired a smaller parcel with far fewer parking spaces. "The CUP holder is required to have 53 parking spots and he has 3," Nicholas said, and added she has filed a restraining order after repeated harassment and trespass incidents she said were not resolved by the city.

Marcus Bender, who identified himself as an investor planning a large project at the former Red Hills cinema, said the city’s inaction is a financial threat to his planned investment. "It's not gonna stop until [the] city decides to enforce their codes," Bender told the council, saying the nightclub had three parking spaces where 53 were required and asserting selective code enforcement.

Discussion versus decision: These remarks occurred during public comment; the council did not take new formal action on the record at the meeting to enforce or investigate the specific code allegations. Council staff previously pulled an item (2.1) from the consent agenda for correction and noted other items that will return for public hearing; the speakers asked that the city’s code‑enforcement office investigate the Red Hills property and confirm occupancy classifications, parking requirements and fire‑lane compliance.

What the council heard and next steps: No council motion or formal vote tied directly to these public comments appears in the record. Speakers asked that the city (1) confirm the certificate(s) of occupancy and parcel mapping used for site plans, (2) verify whether the nightclub’s conditional use permit (CUP) accurately reflected the parcel and parking provided, and (3) inspect the site for required fire lanes and signage. Council members and city staff did not announce at the meeting a specific follow‑up timeline or an enforcement action; residents were told they may present evidence and staff will process code complaints through established enforcement channels.

Background and context: At the meeting speakers referenced a conditional use permit and the city’s municipal codes and fire codes; staff and council noted that permit, zoning and code‑adoption items on the consent agenda will return to public hearing where code specifics can be examined. Residents said the parking and safety concerns date back several years and have affected both day‑to‑day operations and larger investment decisions.

Ending note: City staff did not provide a formal enforcement action during the July 22 meeting. Residents who raised the complaints said they will continue to press the council and expect staff to review the CUP, parcel mapping and fire‑lane compliance and to report back in a public meeting.