30333843

601 South Figueroa StreetSuite 2500Los Angeles, CA 90017-5704213.623.9300213.623.9924 faxwww.sonnenschein.com

Brussels Charlotte Chicago Dallas Kansas City Los Angeles New York Phoenix St. Louis San Francisco Short Hills, N.J. Silicon Valley Washington, D.C. West Palm Beach Zurich

Christopher E. Prince

213.892.5049cprince@sonnenschein.com

February 19, 2009

VIA E-MAIL

California Public Utilities Commission505 Van Ness AvenueSan Francisco, California 94102Re: A.06-12-005 and associated applications; Revised Alternate Decision of Commissioner ChongDear Commissioners:United Community Associations, Inc. joins in the Los Angeles Unified School District’srequest for an all parties meeting. UCA shares the LAUSD’s concern about the direction thatthis proceeding has taken. As a threshold matter, the entire evidentiary process was, in our view,tainted by serious discovery-related misconduct on the part of Expo (specifically, Expo’s secretwithholding of documents based on undisclosed and frivolous assertions of privilege). Thismisconduct was compounded when UCA was denied the opportunity to conduct any pre-hearingdiscovery beyond written document requests and was further denied the opportunity to reviewcritical documents that were improperly withheld.Although the evidentiary hearing was flawed in that respect, it did conform to certain basic standards of fairness: all parties had the opportunity to be heard on the issues, and all parties had the opportunity to hear the arguments presented to the decisionmakers. Since theAssigned Commissioner issued his proposed decision, however, both the appearance and realityof fairness have all but disappeared:Expo has made ex parte contact with a Commissioner without giving the appropriate 3-day advance notice to all parties;UCA’s requests for “equal time” with Commissioners who have granted requests for ex parte communication have been ignored; andAn Alternate Decision was issued and revised apparently based on evidence that wasexcluded from the evidentiary hearing, thus violating Public Utilities Code Section 1701(3)(e).Beyond the outright violations of CPUC rules and governing statutes, an air of politicshas descended over this proceeding. The sheer number of ex parte contacts by Expo is highly