An ethics complaint has been filed against a judge who ruled against the city of Fresno after the city council didn’t approve an apartment complex.

Fresno County Superior Court Judge Robert Whalen ruled July 14 that the city erred by not approving the four-story project at Herndon and Prospect avenues. Whalen gave the council until mid-September to correct course.

The developer, Park 7, LLC and LandValue Management, LLC, sued the city after it rejected his proposal in 2024. The companies are operated by James Huelskamp.

The 82-unit complex drew opposition from neighbors, complaining about traffic and privacy concerns. Whalen ruled that the project met standards mandating approval.

The complaint, filed July 30 with the Commission on Judicial Performance, alleges Whalen received campaign contributions from Huelskamp, and failed to disclose that information, or disqualify himself from the case, as required by ethics laws.

Whalen was not immediately available for comment to GV Wire.

Developer Made Prior Contributions

In 2018, LandValue 37, LLC c/o LandValue Management, LLC contributed $2,000 to Whalen when he was a Clovis City Councilmember. Whalen transferred more than $37,000 from his city council account to his judicial account when he ran for the open seat in 2022. The transfer included LandValue’s money.

The complaint was made by Paul Martin, who listed his address as 2281 Tulare Street. That is the address for the Fresno County Hall of Records. The phone number on the complaint belongs to the Fresno County Board of Supervisors clerk.

The complaint alleged that Whalen and Huelskamp “have a long history of a personal and a business relationship.”

“Whalen had a duty to disclose this relationship prior to hearing the court case,” the complaint stated. “Whalen did not disclose prior to the start of the trial, the depth of his personal relationship with Huelskamp and the extent of the projects he supported as a Clovis City Councilman for Huelskamp’s benefit.”

The publicly available court docket does not indicate if or when Whalen made any disclosure. Jeff Reid, attorney for Park 7 and LandValue Management, said he had no information pertinent to the matter. Attorneys representing the city of Fresno could not be reached.

Fresno attorney Roger Bonakdar — who is not affiliated with the lawsuit or complaint — said the disclosure does not have to be made in writing.

What Campaign Records Show

Campaign finance records show Huelskamp contributed to Whalen’s campaigns over the years, including:

• $1,000 to his 2010 campaign for state Assembly;

• $1,600 to his 2012 Assembly campaign through LandValue Management LLC and LandValue 77 LLC Sierra Vista Mall;

• $1,000 in 2004 and $2,000 in 2019 to his Clovis City Council campaigns — with the 2019 donation later transferred to Whalen’s judicial campaign account.

Whalen served on the Clovis City Council from 2003 until 2022, when he won an open seat to Fresno County Superior Court.

It is unclear what impact the complaint will have on the case.

The Fresno City Council has not met in closed session since Whalen’s ruling. City Council President Mike Karbassi declined comment Friday, as the issue is considered “quasi-judicial.”

Complaint Process

The complaint states two areas of judicial ethics Whalen allegedly violated.

A state law, CCP 170.1 (a)(9)(A), says in part:  A judge shall be disqualified if any one or more of the following are true: The judge has received a contribution in excess of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) from a party or lawyer in the proceeding, and either of the following applies: (i) The contribution was received in support of the judge’s last election, if the last election was within the last six years; or (ii) The contribution was received in anticipation of an upcoming election.

Canon 3E(2)(b)(i1) of the California Code of Judicial Ethics states a judge should disclose if any party contributed more than $100, although that does not cause an automatic disqualification.

Once a complaint is filed with the CJP, it is evaluated and discussed at a commission meeting. The commission is composed of 11 members appointed by the governor, state Senate Rules Committee, Speaker of the state Assembly, and the California Supreme Court. Most members are either judges or in the legal profession. None are from the Central Valley.

The next commission meeting is scheduled for Aug. 19-20 in San Francisco. The meetings are not open to the public.

The commission may close the complaint or open a preliminary investigation, to be conducted by CJP staff. After an investigation, actions taken range from closing the case to removing the judge from office.

Read the Complaint