Judge rules city violated state law even as court rules against civil rights group
AI-generated summary reviewed by our newsroom.
- Judge Whalen ruled the budget subcommittee was a standing committee violating the Brown Act since Jan 2023.
- Fresnoland’s investigation found the subcommittee privately discussed over $70 million in public spending from 2019–2023.
- The First Amendment Coalition sent a cease-and-desist before suing when the city refused to stop the meetings.
A Fresno County judge has ruled that the City of Fresno violated the state’s open meetings laws by not informing the public about closed-door subcommittee meetings to discuss the city’s budget.
Judge Robert Whalen, in a written decision issued Monday, rejected the city’s argument that the subcommittee that included three city council members was not an official committee but merely an ad hoc committee and should not be subject to the Brown Act.
Spurred by an investigative report from local media outlet, Fresnoland, the American Civil Liberties Union and the First Amendment Coalition filed a lawsuit asking a judge to force the city to follow the Brown Act.
In its investigative report, Fresnoland uncovered that from 2019–2023 the budget subcommittee privately discussed funding projects involving more than $70 million in public funds.
Whalen ruled that the subcommittee was in fact a standing committee and should be subject to the Brown Act, the 1953 law that ensures public access to local government meetings and notice of those meetings.
“The City of Fresno was in violation of the Brown Act by not posting any agenda or opening the Budget Subcommittee to the public since January 2023,” Whalen wrote.
David Loy, legal director for the First Amendment Coalition, called Whalen’s ruling a “clear win for the people’s right to open government.”
Loy said the coalition, based in San Rafael, sent the city a cease and desist letter before filing the lawsuit, asking them to stop holding the subcommittee meetings, but the city refused.
“If they would have just promised not to hold those meetings again then this whole thing would have been over,” Loy said. “Instead they chose to double and triple down. I can’t imagine why they chose to die on this hill.”
City Attorney Andrew Janz said he is perplexed by how the ruling is being interpreted by the civil rights groups.
Janz called Whalen’s ruling a victory for the city because he rejected the organization’s request for declaratory relief.
“The ruling and discussion from court hearings makes clear that the Mayor is permitted to seek advice from any City official, including councilmembers so long there is less than a quorum present, during the budget development and that he has immense authority over the process,” Janz said in a statement.
Janz said the subcommittee was disbanded in 2023.
Two council members also weighed in on the judge’s decision.
Councilmember Annalisa Perea said: “From day one, the City followed a public budget-making process. It’s deeply unfortunate that taxpayer dollars had to be wasted defending against this unnecessary injunction - resources that should have been used for neighborhood improvement projects
Councilmember Mike Karbassi also said he was frustrated with the use of taxpayer dollars to defend a “nonsense lawsuit.”
This story was originally published May 5, 2026 at 4:48 PM.
