Hopland Public Utility District Faces Brown Act Challenge
Ratepayer requests a do-over public hearing
Hopland ratepayers have formally requested that the Hopland Public Utility District (HPUD) rescind steep increases in water and sewer rates that took effect on Nov. 1 or face immediate litigation.
Vernon Budinger, the leader of a group of concerned HPUD customers, issued a formal legal challenge in a “Cure and Correct” letter dated October 26, 2025. The letter describes widespread violations of California’s open meeting laws and financial transparency mandates.
The HPUD board approved the rate hikes on October 9, 2025, following a contentious public hearing at Brutocao Cellars. Under the new structure, the cost of water is set to triple over 10 years, while sewer service will rise by at least 68 percent. The first round of increases includes a 40 percent hike for water and a 25 percent increase for wastewater.
Ratepayers contend that the HPUD’s process violated both the Ralph M. Brown Act, which governs open meetings, and Proposition 218, which mandates rate justification and public transparency.
Budinger said Government Code §54960.1 “authorizes any person to require a legislative body to cure and correct violations of the Ralph M. Brown Act.”
Jared Walker, deputy director of water resources for the Ukiah Valley Water Authority, which provides administrative services to the HPUD, said he could not comment in view of possible litigation. Joan Norry, president of the board of HPUD, did not respond to a request for comment.
Allegations of Procedural Misconduct
The demand letter asserts that the HPUD Board unlawfully curtailed the public’s opportunity to speak and deliberate on the matter. Specific violations cited include:
Unreasonable Limitation on Public Comment: The Board limited the total public comment portion of the meeting to about 10 minutes, with individual speakers limited to three minutes each. During the meeting, Norry stated this limitation was required by the Brown Act—a procedural misrepresentation, the petitioners contend, since the Brown Act sets no such limit.
Premature Interruption: The public comment period was interrupted after roughly 10 minutes when Norry declared the “limit had been reached.” After closing public comment, an informal “back-and-forth” exchange occurred between board members and attendees that was not part of the official public comment segment.
Late Release of Financial Statements: Fiscal year 2024–25 financial statements were not made available to the public in advance of the hearing, which the petitioner argues violates the Brown Act and Proposition 218 requirements that supporting materials be made available sufficiently in advance.
The letter argues that the board’s actions unlawfully limited public participation, which is mandated “before or during the legislative body’s consideration of each item of business”.
Debate Over $5 Million Debt
The HPUD justified the steep increases by citing years of underinvestment and the looming expense of an anticipated Caltrans Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) project on Highway 101, which officials claimed would require the district to assume $5 million in new debt for utility relocation.
However, the petitioner’s letter and ratepayers at the hearing challenged this financial basis:
Absence of Cost-of-Service Analysis (COSA): Ratepayers argue the HPUD failed to conduct a full COSA or proportional cost allocation required by Proposition 218 before or during the hearing. Ratepayer Vernon Budinger called the hike a “smokescreen” for an unjustified increase in administrative costs and questioned the absence of standard engineering estimates.
Reliance on Speculative Costs: The public presentation relied on a summary table of rate increases and the consultant’s unverified opinion, with the justification for the rate hikes hinging almost entirely on the projected pipeline relocation. The letter states that the HPUD has offered no engineering plans, no scope definition, and no third-party validation for the costs.
Disputed Estimate: While the HPUD consultant, Mark Hildebrand, pegged the amount attributable to HPUD ratepayers at $5 million, Assemblymember Chris Rogers, who represents the region, previously estimated the Hopland portion of the Caltrans project to be “about $1 to about $2 million”.
The demand letter emphasizes that HPUD’s reliance on the estimated $5 million future debt—despite lacking a proper COSA—violates Proposition 218, which requires that revenues “not exceed the funds required to provide the property-related service” and must be “proportional to the cost of service”.
Political Backlash and State Funding Workaround
The funding issue drew attention from state legislators who acknowledged that state law often burdens small districts like HPUD with utility relocation costs for Caltrans projects.
Assemblymember Chris Rogers introduced a bill earlier in 2025 that would have allowed Caltrans to cover these relocation costs. Although Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill on October 3, 2025, Rogers maintains that $1.5 million was secured and earmarked for the Hopland project in the state budget.
Rogers said the governor was concerned about setting a precedent for other public utility districts. He added that the project can be funded by reallocating the $1.5 million from Caltrans to the HPUD or to Mendocino County to implement the project.
The Call to Action
The formal demand letter stipulates that HPUD must take immediate steps to cure the violations, including:
Rescinding the Oct. 9, 2025 rate-increase resolution.
Re-noticing and re-holding the Proposition 218 hearing with adequate advance posting of all supporting materials.
Performing and publishing a complete Cost-of-Service and Capital Needs Analysis consistent with industry standards (AWWA M1 and AACE Class 5).
Budinger said if the district does not correct the violations, ratepayers are prepared to seek a court order. “Legal counsel has already been engaged,” he said.
The next meeting of the HPUD board will be on November 13 at 6:30 p.m. Meetings are held monthly and can be attended via Zoom or in person at Brutocao Cellars, located at 3500 S. HWY 101 in Hopland, CA.
Read additional Mendo Local stories on this issue:
Assemblymember Rogers Confident State Funds Will Cover Hopland Utility Costs After Veto
Hopland Public Utility District Board Limits Public Comment, Votes to Triple Water Rates