The San Bernardino City Council on Wednesday voted 6-0 to censure Councilwoman Treasure Ortiz, who said she won’t resign and will pursue to trial her $2 million lawsuit against the city over an alleged records search by police.
After a more than four-hour public hearing, the council censured Ortiz for allegedly violating city laws that “require honesty, integrity, transparency, and conduct above reproach from elected officials,” according to a statement from the city Thursday.
The City Charter does not afford a vote to the mayor, and Ortiz also did not vote.
Council members found that Ortiz used her elected position and city funds to promote false claims against the city and police department for her own political and personal benefit, according to city officials, who contend that Ortiz filed a “bogus $2 million lawsuit to bury her arrest history” and publicize her council race with taxpayers footing the bill.
“Ortiz’s arrest history threatened to damage her politically, so Ortiz not only falsely accused the City and police of accessing her arrest records, but she also then tried to legitimize her lie with a lawsuit seeking a $2 million taxpayer payout for herself,” according to the city.
“I’m not going anywhere. I’m not resigning,” Ortiz said at the censure hearing. “I’m not gonna keep telling the truth. I’m not gonna keep exposing things. I’m gonna keep doing the job I was elected, which is to defend the Constitution of The United States and the Constitution of the state of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And as long as I am holding this office, I will continue to do so.”
The Ward 7 councilwoman said she “filed a claim, and then I was called a liar and a swindler and a crook from you guys, and it was denied without due process. And then more press releases go out, and more press releases go out. And I’m not supposed to speak. I’m not supposed to present a side as an elected official,” Ortiz continued. “You think my duty is not to speak out against corruption and wrongdoing and mismanagement? That is the job. That’s the essence of what we do. …
“You want to censure me for what? Telling the truth? I told the truth, and that’s why I go out these doors and I tell the truth. That’s why I’m going to trial because I’m going to make sure that the people I met with are put under oath in a court of law, not a court of public opinion, a court of law. Because that’s where it’s supposed to be done. And the beauty is each and every one of you can also be subpoenaed to testify because there’s not going to be a settlement behind closed doors. … This is going to go as far as it needs to go so that this never happens again in our city. That’s my commitment. That’s what I’m here to do.”
Ortiz filed a legal claim in March 2025, then sued the city in federal court in November after city officials rejected it. An outside investigation found her allegations to be false and the lawsuit an attempt to obtain millions in taxpayer dollars, officials said.
Ortiz also illegally recorded police officials to prop up her false claims, city officials allege. California law requires all parties to give consent to a recording. Ortiz secretly recorded Lt. Jose Loera on Aug. 15, 2024, and Chief Darren Goodman on Aug. 29, 2024, while trying to gather evidence for her claims that police and city officials had illegally accessed her records and targeted her. The San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office later filed criminal charges against her.
The council’s censure resolution additionally found that Ortiz lied about her arrest history and falsely claimed the records were fabricated. Records show arrests on June 22, 2006, for domestic battery and March 7, 2015, for battery, even though Ortiz publicly denied being arrested.
She also falsely claimed no public arrest records existed and that the records used during the 2024 election were fabricated, officials said.
“That lie was designed to mitigate damage to her City Council race and keep her political career alive,” according to the city. “Ortiz claimed she had never been arrested, and that there were no public arrest records, because she had those online arrest records deleted to try to hide them from public scrutiny. In fact, she contacted a website that contained her arrest records and asked them to be deleted.”
Ortiz said if the council had reconciled with her over the legal claim, she would have dropped it.
“I told you if you shook my hand and apologize, I’d walk away from my claim. … All you had to do was say ‘I’m sorry’ publicly. You’re forced to do that. I’m not here because of me. I’m here because of you. I’m here because I was illegally run,” she said, referring to the alleged search of her records on the statewide CLETS database. “I was told I was illegally run. I was given documentation, sat with witnesses. If any of that has changed, why have you … never even accepted that I was told any of that? That’s the problem with a one-sided investigation and a one-sided narrative. And so we must go to court.”
Officials said the council was obligated “to protect taxpayers, uphold transparency and put the truth on the public record. Censure is the strongest action the council is allowed to take under its charter.”
The council’s censure resolution also cancels Ortiz’s access to city office space.
“April 16, 2025, in an office at San Bernardino City Hall that she was granted the privilege to use for work related to her duties as a Councilmember, Councilmember Ortiz authorized and participated in a news media interview for the purpose of promoting her false, personal claim against the City, thereby improperly using her official position, creating a clear conflict of interest, and misusing public resources,” according to the resolution.
“While we may not be directly, designated office space, we are in our city,” Ortiz told her council colleagues. “Each one of you are designated your own independent office because those offices exist, and they’re not given to you by the grace of the council. They’re given to you by the power vested in the people when they elect you.”
California law and the City Charter prevent the council from removing an elected official from office. Voters can remove a council member via a recall election or by voting against the incumbent in the next election.
