EDITORIAL : HE'S STILL FIGHTING BERNARDI SCORES ANOTHER VICTORY FOR THE TAXPAYERS IN HIS LONG STRUGGLE WITH THE CRA.

FORMER Los Angeles City Councilman Ernani Bernardi, who represented the San Fernando Valley's 7th District for 32 years, was one of the taxpayers' best friends in City Hall. And Bernardi still is fighting for the taxpayers, even though he left office nearly four years ago.

One of Bernardi's greatest victories occurred in 1977 after he filed a lawsuit to block a move by the Community Redevelopment Agency to declare 1,549 acres in downtown Los Angeles blighted so it could become a tax-supported redevelopment project. Bernardi agreed to settle the suit on the condition that no more than $750 million in tax-increment funds (increased property taxes attributed to development in the area) be used for the project.

But that wasn't enough for City Hall.

The CRA sought in 1986 to increase the ceiling to $7.1 billion. The CRA and its allies went to court to set aside the $750 million limit, even though the parties had acknowledged that the 1977 agreement ``is and shall be forever binding.''

Bernardi, however, stood firm. A trial court ruled in his favor in 1995. The CRA appealed. But Bernardi was victorious again late last month when a state court of appeal held in a 3-0 decision that the 1977 agreement is still binding and can't be changed without Bernardi's consent.

That should be the end of it; Bernardi has an open-and-shut case. Nevertheless, Bernardi is fearful that his antagonists will waste more of the taxpayers' money on yet another fruitless appeal. And why not: They are spending the taxpayers' money rather than their own.

However, the taxpayers aren't entirely powerless. They can support Bernardi in his struggle to stop the CRA's raid on the public treasury by telling the mayor and their council representatives to accept the verdict of the court of appeal.

What's involved is, after all, the taxpayers' money. Lifting the lid on the ceiling would allow the CRA to siphon away more property tax dollars that otherwise could be used for public education, police and fire protection, parks, libraries, etc.

We feel that those are better uses for the money than simply spending it to increase the glut of vacant office space in the already congested central business district - or perhaps creating more blight by taking tenants away from other parts of the city.