L.A. Councilman Curren Price appears in court on corruption charges, legacy at stake

Los Angeles City Councilmember Curren Price is facing a preliminary hearing on criminal charges including embezzlement, perjury, and conflict of interest.

The veteran lawmaker was indicted in 2023 following allegations that he repeatedly voted on projects that provided financial benefits to his wife’s consulting firm, Del Richardson & Associates. Prosecutors say the firm received hundreds of thousands of dollars from developers and city agencies shortly before Price voted to approve their related projects.

In addition to the conflict of interest charges, the 75-year-old councilmember is accused of failing to disclose his wife’s income and embezzling approximately $30,000 in city health insurance funds.

Price has denied any intentional wrongdoing, characterizing the legal issues as a "paperwork error."

The case is expected to extend through late 2026, the same time Price is scheduled to leave office due to term limits. Legal analysts suggest that even if convicted, it is unlikely the councilmember will serve prison time.

The prosecution of Los Angeles City Councilmember Curren Price is more than an isolated legal matter; it is a symptomatic indictment of a political culture at City Hall that has been besieged by a relentless cycle of scandals. While the legal proceedings will play out in court, the most immediate political fallout is centered on the race to succeed him in the 9th District.

Jose Ugarte, the candidate handpicked by Price, now finds his path to office significantly complicated. Ugarte’s long-standing ties to Price and his vocal defense of the councilmember have created a glaring vulnerability, handing his rivals a potent political cudgel. As evidence from the preliminary hearings enters the public record, what was once viewed as a predictable succession has shifted into a volatile contest. Opponents are already leveraging the trial to frame the election as a referendum on the status quo, calling for a "clean break" from a political establishment increasingly synonymous with corruption.

Price’s defense strategy—characterizing the allegations as mere "paperwork errors"—is a familiar political tactic designed to minimize the gravity of the conduct. However, in a case involving substantial sums and alleged direct financial benefits to family members, this "technicality" narrative is struggling to gain traction with a skeptical public.

A conviction would permanently cement Price’s name in the growing roster of Los Angeles officials felled by corruption probes, effectively eclipsing his legislative record on affordable housing and living-wage advocacy. Ultimately, this case serves as a critical litmus test for municipal accountability in one of the nation’s largest urban centers, questioning whether the city can finally move past an era defined by ethical erosion.

While this incident may not have a direct or unique impact on the Vietnamese-American community, it serves as a sobering reminder for Vietnamese voters in Los Angeles about the importance of oversight. From the business owners in our nail salon industry to families in Little Saigon, we must demand transparency from our local government. These scandals ultimately affect the taxes we pay and the public services we rely on—issues that impact our daily lives as much as remittances or the processing of F2B, H-1B, and EB-5 visas.