City Manager Retaliation: What Public Employees Must Know
Workplace retaliation doesn’t only happen in corporate boardrooms. It happens inside government institutions—city halls, police departments, and public agencies—where power is concentrated, bureaucratic loyalty runs deep, and the cost of speaking up can be severe.
Travis Martinez, a 30-year veteran of the Redlands Police Department and deputy police chief, found this out firsthand. After reporting alleged sexual misconduct by a senior officer, raising public safety concerns about a fatal Metrolink crash, and advocating for an employee unfairly denied bilingual pay, Martinez alleges he was stripped of responsibilities, passed over for promotion, and publicly undermined. In April 2025, the Redlands City Council voted 3-2 to settle his whistleblower claim for $871,956—a figure that reflects the serious legal and financial consequences of retaliation in public institutions.
His case is not an outlier. It is a warning.
This post explains what workplace retaliation is, which activities the law protects, and what steps you should take if you believe you’re being punished for doing the right thing.
What Is Workplace Retaliation?
Retaliation occurs when an employer takes a “materially adverse” action against an employee for engaging in a protected activity. In plain terms: it is punishment designed to silence you or make your working conditions so unbearable that you quit.
According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), retaliation is the most frequently alleged basis of discrimination in the federal sector and the most common finding in federal sector cases. That prevalence is even more troubling in city and municipal environments, where wrongdoers often have the added protection of bureaucratic hierarchy and institutional loyalty.
One important clarification: not every unpleasant workplace experience qualifies. A rude comment or a petty slight typically doesn’t meet the legal standard. To be actionable, the employer’s behavior must be severe enough to deter a reasonable person from reporting discrimination or illegal conduct in the future.
How Retaliation Manifests: Recognizing the Signs
Retaliation is rarely as clean-cut as a termination letter. City managers and public officials often deploy subtler tactics—incremental, deniable, and designed to erode an employee’s standing over time.
Legally recognized forms of adverse action include:
- Demotion: A reduction in rank, pay, or professional status
- Exclusion: Being shut out of key meetings, training opportunities, or career advancement pathways
- Unwarranted Discipline: Negative performance reviews that contradict an employee’s documented history
- Responsibility Changes: Having duties stripped or being reassigned to less desirable roles
- Hostility: Verbal abuse or a deliberately hostile work environment intended to force resignation
Martinez’s allegations illustrate this pattern precisely. Despite his qualifications, decades of experience, and national reputation in community policing, he claims he was bypassed for the police chief role in favor of a candidate with less experience—a decision he attributes directly to retaliation for his whistleblowing.
What Activities Does the Law Protect?
Central to any retaliation claim is the concept of a “protected activity.” These are specific actions the law shields from employer punishment. Under California and federal law, you cannot legally be retaliated against for:
- Reporting corporate wrongdoing, fraud, or illegal conduct (whistleblowing)
- Reporting workplace harassment or discrimination based on race, gender, age, or disability
- Refusing to participate in unlawful or unethical conduct
- Advocating for employees’ rights, such as fair pay practices
- Filing a workers’ compensation claim
- Reporting safety hazards to government agencies or law enforcement
The breadth of Martinez’s allegations is instructive. His claim spans multiple protected activities: reporting alleged sexual misconduct to the FBI, raising concerns about a fatal public safety risk, advocating for an officer denied bilingual pay, and supporting the findings of a DEI instructor who was later let go. Each action, on its own, would likely qualify for legal protection.
Your Rights Under California Law: Labor Code Section 1102.5
California Labor Code Section 1102.5 is one of the most powerful whistleblower protection statutes in the country. It prohibits employers—including public agencies—from retaliating against employees who disclose information to a government or law-enforcement agency when the employee has reasonable cause to believe that a legal violation has occurred.
The most critical word in that statute is reasonable. California law protects you even if the reported violation did not ultimately occur or cannot be proven, provided your belief was reasonable at the time you made the report. This standard matters enormously. It prevents employers from using “no violation was found” as a legal shield against retaliation claims, and it substantially lowers the threshold for employee protection.
Beyond California, similar whistleblower protections exist across a range of federal statutes, broadening the scope of potential claims for employees in other states.
Case Spotlight: Martinez v. City of Redlands
In June 2023, Travis Martinez filed a 16-page government claim against the City of Redlands—a required step under California law before suing a public agency.
The claim detailed an alleged pattern of retaliation following his reports of serious misconduct. Martinez alleged that after reviewing security footage of the April 4, 2023 Metrolink crash—which killed 47-year-old Heather Lynn Woolard and her 11-year-old daughter Presley—he raised concerns about dangerous conditions at the rail crossing. According to the claim, city officials sought to suppress that information to protect the city from litigation exposure.
He also alleged that high-ranking city officials had been aware of sexual misconduct allegations against then-Deputy Chief Mike Reiss for months and took no action. When Martinez reported his concerns to the FBI, he claims the city retaliated by denying him the interim police chief position—a role he describes as one he was the most qualified candidate for. The city instead appointed Commander Rachel Tolber, whom the claim characterizes as a less experienced choice made partly to signal reform amid ongoing harassment lawsuits.
Martinez’s case was not isolated. The City of Redlands had already paid $1.7 million to settle a related sexual harassment lawsuit brought by two officers who alleged a “culture of pervasive sexual favoritism.” A separate case, Alvarado-Salcido v. City of Redlands, remains active in San Bernardino Superior Court.
On April 15, 2025, the Redlands City Council voted 3-2 to settle Martinez’s claim for $871,956. Under the terms of the agreement, Martinez retired within 10 days and received additional benefits, including the right to review his personnel file and the designation of an honorably retired officer’s badge.
The Consequences of Retaliation for Employers
Organizations that ignore or facilitate retaliation pay dearly for it—in courtrooms, in public trust, and at the taxpayer’s expense.
In Redlands, the $871,956 settlement with Martinez followed a $1.7 million payout in the Reiss-related lawsuit, with additional litigation still pending. The cumulative cost of mishandling misconduct complaints represents a significant financial burden on the community the city was elected to serve.
The exposure isn’t limited to public agencies. Helmer Friedman LLP recently secured a $6 million verdict against California State University in a gender discrimination and retaliation case—a result that demonstrates the scale of liability employers can face when courts side with employees.
Beyond financial damages, organizations found liable for retaliation face leadership turnover, reputational harm, diminished employee morale, and heightened regulatory scrutiny. The lesson is consistent: the cost of suppressing misconduct reports almost always exceeds the cost of addressing them.
Steps to Take If You Suspect Retaliation
If you recognize the warning signs, swift and deliberate action is essential.
- Document Everything: Keep a detailed record of events—dates, times, locations, and the names of any witnesses. Save emails, memos, and any communications that reflect a shift in how you are treated after your protected activity.
- Report Internally: If your organization has a retaliation reporting policy, use it and document that you did. Creating a formal paper trail establishes that the agency or employer was on notice.
- Preserve Evidence: Collect copies of performance reviews, especially positive ones that predate your protected activity. A clear before-and-after contrast can be critical to your case.
- Seek Legal Counsel Immediately: Retaliation cases are complex, fact-specific, and time-sensitive. In California, government employees must file a public claim before suing a public agency—a procedural requirement the Martinez case illustrates clearly. An experienced retaliation attorney can assess the merits of your claim and guide you through each step.
Protecting the People Who Speak Up
Retaliation is pervasive. It takes many forms, operates across every sector, and carries real legal consequences for employers—particularly when employees understand their rights and act on them.
The “reasonable belief” standard is a powerful tool in your corner. You don’t need to prove a law was broken to deserve legal protection. You need only to have reasonably believed one was at the time you came forward.
If you believe you have been retaliated against for reporting wrongdoing, advocating for your rights, or refusing to participate in illegal conduct, you don’t have to face it alone. Helmer Friedman LLP offers confidential consultations to evaluate your situation. With over 20 years of experience and a proven track record of settlements and court victories—including a $6 million verdict in a retaliation case—the firm provides the personalized legal advocacy needed to hold employers accountable, whether they operate in a corporation or a city hall.