A residential property developer sought approval for a development project from a local agency. The agency’s approval of the project was contingent upon the developer’s agreement to construct the public improvements and infrastructure necessary to support the residents of the new development. The agency and the developer agreed that partial funding for the construction of the public improvements and infrastructure would be provided by Mello-Roos bonds, and the developer would privately fund the remaining cost. Later, the developer refused to pay the local prevailing wage to individuals employed to construct the public improvements and infrastructure not funded by the Mello-Roos bonds. The agency claimed the developer was required to pay the local prevailing wage to anyone employed to construct any of the public improvements and infrastructure since all public work is subject to prevailing wage laws. The developer claimed the privately funded portion of the public improvements did not constitute public works since those improvements were not paid for by public funding. The developer refused to pay the local prevailing wage to individuals employed to construct the public improvements and infrastructure not funded by the Mello-Roos bonds, claiming the privately funded portion of the public improvements did not constitute public works since those improvements were not paid for by public funding. A California court of appeals held the developer was required to pay the local prevailing wage to anyone employed to construct any portion of the public improvements and infrastructure since all public improvement work is subject to prevailing wage law regardless of whether it is publicly funded. [Azusa Land Partners v. Department of Industrial Relations (2010) 191 CA4th 1]
