| Show I bv by million Henry Weinstein Los Angeles Times The Los Angeles Department of Water Vater and Power overcharged the county the school district and other government entities for electricity for more than a decade costing those customers more than million a judge has ruled After a week six-week trial San Bernardino Superior Court Judge John P. P Wade in a tentative decision issued late Monday held that the must pay in damages for its illegal conduct The court finds that the and the city have for many years since at least 1988 intentionally ignored the plain language of the California Government Code and failed to determine how much it should legally charge Wade Vade wrote in his ruling The judge also ruled that the transfer of funds o from the to the city treasury was a prohibited tax a decision that could have stark implications for forthe forthe forthe the city budget H. H David president of the board said the agency found the decision surprising and obviously disappointing and noted that it will be appealed bythe bythe by bythe the city attorney It is position that it has not acted in a way that thatis is illegal or unwarranted said The thinks it has provided cost- cost effective power to these entities which we are proud to serve The budget shows that power revenue transferred to the city's general funds was estimated to be about 1747 million in fiscal year 2006 In Inthe Inthe Inthe the 2007 08 budget passed last month 1846 million from power revenue was projected to be transferred to the city That's about 27 percent of or city revenue the city's sixth-highest sixth J source of revenue The coming years year's budget is prohibited from including money from water revenue Last year million was was was' transferred from water revenue to the city But a acourt acourt acourt court ruling stopped that Under Wades Wade's decision the Los Angeles Unified School District would get million Los Angeles County million the Metropolitan Transportation Agency million the Community College District 78 million the University of California Los Angeles 53 million and several state agencies s million boosted its revenues at the expense of schools and county taxpayers for years said Eric R. R Havian a San Francisco lawyer who was the lead attorney for the plaintiffs The ruling was hailed by state Attorney General I II i I Jerry Brown whose office i represented the state I agencies We think the judge is correct that the is improperly charging its customers including the state and the other plaintiffs and passed on the overcharges to the Los Angeles City Council to 1 fund city programs Brown said It is a little shocking j I that the city would try to fund its programs on the I backs of other taxpayers who are equally hard- hard j I pressed Originally the case I Iwas was filed under seal After an investigation several governmental entities joined the lawsuit and it was unsealed but drew little attention because i ithe the case was conducted In in j- j San Bernardino County I Wade Vade concluded the I plaintiffs were entitled to compensation because the violated California statutes and the had unjustly enriched itself |
