A long-serving member of the Los Angeles City Council is facing intensified legal trouble after prosecutors added new corruption charges that dramatically expand an already serious criminal case.
This week, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office announced two additional felony charges against Curren Price, a Democrat who has represented the city’s Ninth District since 2013. Prosecutors allege that Price improperly used his public office to benefit himself and his family financially, including steering public contracts to entities connected to his wife while voting on matters directly tied to those payments.
The newly filed charges add to an existing case that has been unfolding for more than two years and now alleges widespread embezzlement, perjury, and conflicts of interest involving hundreds of thousands of dollars in public and quasi-public funds.
New Allegations Expand Scope of Case
According to prosecutors, investigators uncovered evidence that public agencies paid more than $800,000 to a company owned by Price’s wife during periods when Price voted to approve major contracts involving those same agencies.
The District Attorney’s Office said the payments were made by the Los Angeles Housing Authority and LA Metro, both of which are subject to City Council oversight and approval processes. At the same time, Price allegedly participated in official votes authorizing multimillion-dollar agreements involving those entities.
Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said the conduct described in the charges strikes at the heart of public trust.
“Embezzling public funds and awarding contracts for personal financial gain is the antithesis of public service,” Hochman said in a statement. “Our communities expect and deserve better from their elected officials.”
He emphasized that the Public Integrity Division pursued the case aggressively and that the office remains committed to holding public officials accountable regardless of rank or political affiliation.
Wife’s Company at Center of Investigation
At the center of the allegations is Del Richardson & Associates, a firm solely owned by Price’s wife, Delbra Pettice Richardson. Prosecutors allege that the company received substantial payments from developers and public-adjacent agencies at the same time Price exercised his official authority over related projects.
According to court filings, Richardson’s firm allegedly collected:
- Over $150,000 from developers between 2019 and 2021, before Price voted to approve projects involving those same developers
- Hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional payments linked to public agencies whose contracts Price voted on or influenced
Under California law and City Council ethics rules, councilmembers are strictly prohibited from participating in votes or decisions in which they or immediate family members have a financial interest.
Prosecutors argue that Price not only violated those prohibitions but also failed to disclose relevant financial ties as required by law.
Original Charges Still Pending
The latest charges build on a sweeping 2023 indictment in which Price was charged with 10 felony counts, including:
- Five counts of embezzlement of government funds
- Three counts of perjury
- Two counts of conflict of interest
Those earlier allegations included claims that Price improperly used city funds to pay for medical benefits for Richardson over a four-year period by falsely identifying her as eligible.
Prosecutors contend that between 2013 and 2017, Price misrepresented his wife’s employment status in official records, allowing her to receive benefits she was not entitled to under city rules.
Price pleaded not guilty to all charges in the original case and has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.
Pattern of Alleged Self-Dealing
Investigators say the expanded charges reveal a consistent pattern rather than isolated incidents. The District Attorney’s Office alleges that Price repeatedly:
- Participated in official votes while concealing financial ties
- Failed to recuse himself from matters involving entities that paid his wife
- Provided false or misleading disclosures on required ethics filings
If proven, the conduct could amount to a sustained abuse of public office for private gain, carrying serious criminal penalties.
Legal analysts note that conflict-of-interest cases involving elected officials are often complex but become significantly more serious when accompanied by allegations of perjury and concealment.
Political and Institutional Fallout
Price has served on the City Council for more than a decade and held influence over housing, transportation, and economic development issues affecting South Los Angeles. His district includes some of the city’s most economically challenged neighborhoods, where public trust in government institutions is already fragile.
The expanding case raises uncomfortable questions for city leadership about oversight, ethics enforcement, and transparency within Los Angeles government.
While City Council rules allow members to continue serving while facing criminal charges, pressure is growing from civic groups and watchdog organizations for stronger accountability mechanisms.
Some critics argue that the case underscores the need for:
- Stricter enforcement of recusal rules
- More frequent audits of councilmember disclosures
- Faster suspension or removal processes when serious felony charges are filed
Presumption of Innocence Still Applies
Despite the seriousness of the allegations, Price remains legally innocent unless and until proven guilty in court. His defense team has previously argued that the charges are politically motivated and based on misinterpretations of complex financial arrangements.
Price has not yet publicly responded to the latest round of charges, but in prior statements he insisted that his actions were lawful and that he never knowingly violated ethics rules.
The case is expected to return to court in the coming weeks, where prosecutors will formally present the new charges and outline how they intend to prove their case at trial.
Broader Context: Public Corruption Prosecutions in California
California prosecutors have increasingly prioritized public-integrity cases in recent years amid growing concerns about corruption at the local and state level. High-profile prosecutions have targeted officials across party lines, signaling a renewed focus on ethics enforcement.
District Attorney Hochman emphasized that the office’s approach is nonpartisan.
“Self-dealing and pay-to-play politics will not be tolerated in Los Angeles County,” he said.
If convicted on all counts, Price could face significant prison time, financial penalties, and permanent disqualification from public office.
What Happens Next
The case now moves into a critical phase. Prosecutors must demonstrate not only that payments were made but that Price knowingly and willfully acted to benefit himself or his family while violating disclosure and recusal laws.
Observers expect the trial to focus heavily on:
- Voting records
- Financial disclosures
- Email and communications evidence
- Testimony from developers and agency officials
As the legal process unfolds, the case is likely to remain a major political story in Los Angeles, with implications extending beyond one council district to the credibility of city governance as a whole.