San Bernardino City Council Meeting Sees Tensions Rise Over City Attorney’s Evaluation

On November 20, a San Bernardino City Council meeting erupted into chaos, marked by heated arguments, accusations, and political drama. The catalyst for the discord was Mayor Helen Tran’s decision to remove the performance evaluation of City Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho from the closed session agenda, setting off a series of confrontations that laid bare the growing rift between the city’s leadership and its staff.

The Fateful Meeting

The meeting, which commenced at 4:05 p.m., quickly spiraled into turmoil as Tran announced that the evaluation of Carvalho would not be discussed. Tran cited procedural violations in the agenda-setting process, but the decision was not without backlash. Adding fuel to the fire, Carvalho, who was stuck in traffic, could not defend herself during the initial stage of the meeting.

“As mayor of San Bernardino, I have a responsibility to uphold the rules and procedures that govern our city—ensuring fairness, transparency, and adherence to the law in our council proceedings,” Tran said, justifying her move. “It was inappropriate of the city attorney to place her evaluation on the agenda without following the proper process.”

Tran’s explanation referenced the city charter and council procedures, which grant authority to the mayor, city manager, or a majority of council members to set the agenda—not the city attorney.

Heated Exchanges and Accusations

The meeting quickly descended into chaos, with Mayor Pro Tem Fred Shorett leading the charge against Tran. Shorett accused the mayor of acting out of personal bias and described the procedural decision as a personal vendetta. “What you’re doing here tonight is absolutely egregious,” Shorett exclaimed. “This is a political vendetta.”

Shorett also confronted Tran multiple times, demanding to know who had been advising her. “Who has been advising you, [Jim] Penman?” he shouted, referencing the former city attorney. His outbursts led to further disruptions, and at one point, Shorett announced that he would not participate in the meeting.

Councilmember Theodore Sanchez attempted to calm tensions, proposing a recess until both the city attorney and interim city manager Rochelle Clayton were present. However, his motion to delay the discussion failed.

Dr. Ortiz Weighs In on Facebook Live

On December 3, Ward 7 Councilmember-elect Dr. Treasure Ortiz took to Facebook Live to share her perspective on the unfolding chaos, accusing the city attorney and certain council members of creating a hostile work environment. Ortiz claimed that the turmoil was part of a broader struggle for power and potential corruption within the city government.

“What we witnessed at the last meeting is extremely problematic,” Ortiz said. “This is all potential for more lawsuits. What we have right now is a battle for power.”

Ortiz also pointed to the tensions between the city attorney’s office and Interim City Manager Rochelle Clayton, alleging that Carvalho had resisted working with Clayton, who she claims had exposed deep-seated corruption. According to Ortiz, a public records request revealed that issues with a $17 million Homekey grant predated Clayton’s tenure and that the city had been engaging in fraudulent practices long before her arrival.

Ortiz did not stop there—she also accused council members of holding private meetings with Carvalho in Florida, allegedly violating transparency rules. “Chaos is what these people thrive on—instability and money,” Ortiz claimed, accusing some council members of fraternizing with Carvalho and ignoring ethical boundaries.

Interrogating Interim City Manager

Later in the meeting, when Interim City Manager Rochelle Clayton arrived, she was immediately interrogated by Shorett, who questioned her role in preparing the agenda. Clayton explained that she had not approved the item and had only been informed about it late on Friday, November 15, just days before the meeting.

“I was not in the office; I was in a meeting,” Clayton clarified. “I did not see the message until after 1:20–1:30 p.m., and I believe the agenda was posted between 3 and 3:30 p.m. on Friday.” Despite this, Shorett pressed further, dismissing her explanation with sarcasm.

A War of Words Over the Brown Act

When Carvalho finally arrived, she defended her actions, asserting that the agenda had been posted in compliance with the Brown Act. “The Brown Act required you to post an agenda, and an agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act,” Carvalho stated. “You guys decide what you want to do, but that is the law.”

Tran quickly responded, rejecting Carvalho’s justification. “Madam City Attorney, you placed the item on this agenda without authority. Let me finish!” Tran retorted, further escalating the tension.

During the public comment period, Ortiz criticized Carvalho, accusing her of wielding undue influence over council operations. “What it looks like right now, guys is that the city attorney controls this dais,” Ortiz said.

Looking Ahead

With allegations of corruption, procedural missteps, and ethical breaches flying, the Nov. 20 meeting revealed just how fractured San Bernardino’s leadership has become. Public trust in city governance is now at risk, as leaders face mounting scrutiny over handling the city’s affairs.

As of December 2024, the next city council meeting is scheduled for December 4, where some of these issues are expected to be addressed. However, whether the deepening rift among city leaders will be resolved remains uncertain.