In August 2024, the city of Los Angeles approved an agreement to pay more than a half-billion dollars to resolve a substantial number of schedule and compensation related disputes with the main contractor it hired to design, build and operate the LAX Automated People Mover.
It was thought at the time that some of that money would be passed down to subcontractors who were working on the 2.25-mile long elevated train, which is still scheduled to begin shuttling travelers around airport terminals and to the greater L.A. Metro system later this year.
A year and a half later, a major subcontractor alleges it still hasn’t received a penny of the tens of millions of dollars it says it’s owed from the settlement, which the city funded using public money it generates from airport-related fees and charges.
Early last year, LINXS, the main contractor, initiated a lawsuit blaming the subcontractor, Rosendin Electric, for deficient work. Rosendin Electric has responded in court filings, calling the lawsuit part of LINXS’ scheme to withhold settlement proceeds. The subcontractor has accused LINXS of engaging in “secretive, deceptive and improper conduct” and blocking testimony on key documents.
“Subcontractors whose work generated those funds are entitled to understand and recover their rightful share,” lawyers for Rosendin Electric wrote in court documents from October 2025. “Transparency here is not merely procedural; it is a matter of public trust and legal obligation.”
The design and construction of the train has been rife with disputes between the city and main contractor, leading to cost overruns that have eroded public confidence in the last piece of a rail-only connection to LAX. The case involving Rosendin Electric is one of at least two lawsuits that detail how LINXS’ relationship has frayed with the people the contractor hired to bring the long-awaited train into service.
LAist’s reporting for this story is based on publicly available documents related to the legal battle.
LINXS and Rosendin Electric declined to comment, citing pending litigation.
Jake Adams, deputy executive director overseeing $5.5 billion in LAX upgrades, including the People Mover, said Los Angeles World Airports “provides contract‑level oversight, but does not track how a developer allocates funds internally.“
Know anything about the people mover that we should know, too?
If you have a tip, you can reach me on Signal. My username is kharjai.61.
- You can follow this link to reach me there or type my username in the search bar after starting a new chat.
- For instructions on getting started with Signal, see the app's support page.
- And if you're comfortable just reaching out by email I'm at kharjai@scpr.org
LINXS sues Rosendin, blaming subcontractor for bad work and delays
Rosendin Electric anticipated completing its role on the project in July 2022, three years after it entered into a nearly $262 million contract with LINXS, according to court documents. LINXS hired the subcontractor to provide the labor, construction and assembly of various electrical components of the project, including the technology that powers the train and fire and life safety systems, according to an excerpt of the subcontract included in court filings.
Who is LINXS?
LINXS stands for LAX Integrated Express Solutions. It is the name of the group that formed in 2018 to design, build and operate the Automated People Mover. It’s made up of four large engineering and construction companies: Fluor, Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Flatiron West and Dragados.
Rosendin Electric’s lawyers said in court documents that despite “pervasive disruptions,” the subcontractor has continued to work on the project. The subcontractor’s lawyers continued, saying the company “relied on the expectation” that it would receive its “fair share” of any compensation the city provided to LINXS related to project delays.
The company wasn’t alone in expecting the funds to be filtered down.
According to a July 2024 presentation to the Board of Airport Commissioners, city staff said the settlement would be “advantageous” because it would ensure “subcontractors are paid sooner…providing cashflow to facilitate schedule certainty.”
In August 2024, L.A. City Council approved the agreement, known as the global settlement, to cover a wide swath of issues, including timeline, access to the airport’s IT network and compensation.
The settlement was to be paid out in increments as LINXS completed certain project milestones. All of the project milestones have been met except the final one, which is opening the train to the public. So far, that means the city has paid out more than $430 million.
Five months after the settlement was approved, LINXS filed a lawsuit against Rosendin Electric claiming breach of contract.
LINXS, which is a joint venture between four large international engineering and construction companies, alleges in its complaint that Rosendin Electric provided “defective construction services” that “deviated from technical requirements” and caused delays to the project.
Rosendin Electric denies the claims in LINXS’ lawsuit and later filed a cross-complaint.
-
The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights claims people held at Adelanto lack “basic necessities” and medical care -
Los Angeles County Supervisor Holly Mitchell's competing motion was successful. -
Jonathan Hale said the statute of limitations remains open for another year.
LINXS’ alleged “secretive, deceptive and improper conduct”
Rosendin Electric claims the legal action LINXS initiated soon after the global settlement agreement was forged amounts to “excuses” that the contractor “began manufacturing” to avoid paying out settlement proceeds.
Among other allegations in its cross-complaint over breach of contract, Rosendin Electric claims LINXS:
- Rejected the idea that the subcontractor is entitled to any amount of the settlement.
- “Embarked on a scheme” to retain all of the settlement proceeds for itself by going after subcontractors who assert a “rightful claim to a share of recovery.”
- Stopped paying Rosendin Electric entirely, including “routine progress payments” unrelated to the settlement.
In the latest development in the legal battle, Rosendin Electric’s lawyers said LINXS is trying to avoid testifying about two documents that “conclusively demonstrate that (Rosendin Electric) is entitled to prompt payment of tens of millions of dollars” from the settlement.
How you can look up the cases
Cases filed in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County can be accessed online or in person. Images of the documents filed as part of each case are accessible, too. If you’re looking online, you’ll only be able to see a preview of each document and will have to pay to access the entire document. You don’t have to pay to view the court documents at kiosks at Superior Court locations throughout the county. Printing the documents will cost money, though. The identification number for the case between LINXS and Rosendin Electric is 25TRCV00236. For information on the case between LINXS and HDR, the identification number is 24TRCV02989.
Another subcontractor sued
Within a month after the 2024 settlement was secured and before its legal action against Rosendin Electric, LINXS had also sued the design and engineering firm it hired in 2018 for breach of contract.
In its September 6, 2024 complaint, LINXS alleges that HDR overcharged for its services and produced work that “deviated from technical requirements.” That subcontractor denied the claims and later issued a cross-complaint, alleging LINXS owes more than $57 million for the work it’s done on the project.
-
Eagles Jackie and Shadow may have another full nest on their feathers this season. -
The Governor’s proposal uses cannabis tax revenues to support child care infrastructure affected by the January 2025 fires. -
The strikes will take place at Kaiser facilities in California and Hawaii.
Rosendin Electric’s lawyers called into question the timing of the lawsuit against HDR.
“LINXS could only advance this position after securing the LAWA Settlement because claims of fundamental design defects by its own design team would otherwise have provided LAWA with powerful defenses against LINXS’ claims for delay and compensation,” lawyers for the company have argued.
Both cases are ongoing.
