Council reports $4.875 million settlement; city denies Councilmember Ortiz’s $2 million claim amid public allegations of illegal CLETS queries

The San Bernardino City Council on May 7 reported a closed‑session settlement of $4,875,000 and the city issued a public statement denying a $2 million claim filed by Councilmember Treasure Ortiz.

City staff reported that the council approved a proposed settlement in a closed session matter captioned as a personal‑representative action involving Robert (Robert Brown) and Victoria Brown; the motion to approve that settlement was made by Councilmember Sanchez, seconded by Councilmember Flores and passed unanimously. City staff said the settlement amount is $4,875,000.

The meeting record also included a public reading of the city’s evaluation of a separate claim filed March 28 by Councilmember Ortiz for $2,000,000. The city said its review found the claim “false and dishonest,” concluded that the California Law Enforcement Telecommunication System (CLETS) was lawfully accessed in March 2020 by authorized personnel, and denied Ortiz’s claim. The city’s statement noted that, if Ortiz files suit, the city would seek to recover attorney fees and that possible criminal conduct connected to filing a false claim is under review. (The city’s reading of its determination appears in the transcript; the city said Ortiz will have six months to file a lawsuit.)

Public comment that preceded the city statement included allegations about unauthorized CLETS searches and claims about a police‑union endorsement withdrawal after disclosures. A caller who identified herself at the start of public comment said she was “present at the meeting between the POA president, Loria, and then‑candidate Ortiz, where he admitted to the illegally running of her while she was a private resident through Kletz and apologized to her for it.” That speaker said the admission implicated a now‑retired former POA board member and linked the matter to a withdrawn POA endorsement of a local candidate. Resident John Schallenberger said he supported Ortiz and said the alleged conduct had damaged rank‑and‑file officers and the community. Interim city manager Christian Sobrano urged elected officials to “follow the law” and to pursue the facts soberly.

The transcript records a city determination and a separate closed‑session vote to settle one case. It does not record a council vote approving denial of Ortiz’s claim; the denial was presented as the city’s decision after an internal review and described next steps if litigation is filed. The city repeatedly referenced CLETS during the statement and said its review found lawful access; members of the public disputed that characterization and urged further review.

The council did not take additional open‑session action on the Ortiz claim during the meeting. Councilmember Ortiz and other speakers raised the need for transparent investigation and for safeguards to prevent improper access to law‑enforcement databases.

City officials and any parties considering litigation have statutory timelines and remedies under California law; the city’s spoken statement referenced the California Code of Civil Procedure regarding recovery of attorney fees but did not identify a council vote on the claim denial. The council’s recorded, unanimous closed‑session action to approve the $4,875,000 settlement was entered into the record at the open meeting.

The council will reconvene on May 21; if any party files suit related to the Ortiz claim the city said it will seek to recover fees in court.