When the Numbers Don’t Add Up: What the SGMA Fee Structure Reveals About Control

Across the Tulare Lake Subbasin, groundwater users are watching closely as the State Water Board proposes changes to how SGMA enforcement is funded. The new fee structure has far-reaching implications, not just for how much stakeholders will pay, but for what that money supports, and how decisions are made.

This moment isn’t just about rates. It’s about trust, accountability, and the future of local voice in groundwater governance.

What the State Is Proposing

Under the current fee model, basins under SGMA probation pay:

• $300 per well

• $20 per acre-foot (AF) of groundwater pumped

  
  

The proposed SGMA fee structure introduces tiered pricing based on usage volume. It’s meant to create fairness between small and large users, but the early numbers raise serious questions.

• The 20 AF exemption is gone. Small landowners previously excluded from fees would now be included and are expected to collectively contribute over half a million dollars.

• For large pumpers, fees increase sharply. A small number of users would carry a disproportionate share of the cost, even though no public data shows how enforcement expenses are calculated or if they align with actual basin needs.

The intent may be equity. The outcome feels more complex.

A Key Detail from the State’s SGMA Fee Structure Presentation

In a recent State Water Board meeting, officials confirmed that stakeholders in the Tule Subbasin are being charged for State staff time spent in other basins, including Kaweah, Kern, and Chowchilla.

There is:

• No itemized breakdown showing how staff hours or enforcement costs are allocated

• No confirmation that fees collected in one basin stay in that basin

• No publicly accessible tracking system for SGMA-related charges

This isn’t a matter of mistrust, it’s a matter of visibility. And for communities already navigating drought, uncertainty, and compliance fatigue, that lack of clarity is significant.

Why Tulare Lake Is Still Exempt (for now)

Unlike Tule, the Tulare Lake Subbasin is not currently paying SGMA fees. That’s because of an active legal challenge filed by the Kings County Farm Bureau.

That lawsuit is doing more than protecting landowners from immediate costs. It’s also:

• Delaying probation in this basin

• Requiring the State to clarify the goal posts of SGMA

• Creating space for critical questions to be asked and answered

It’s a procedural pause, but one with real community impact.

Enforcement Without a Roadmap

Probation under SGMA was originally framed as a temporary corrective process: a step toward improved sustainability. But once a basin enters enforcement, the path forward is unclear:

• There’s no defined checklist for returning to local control

• No process for adjusting fees once progress is made

• No shared understanding of how long probation is expected to last

That ambiguity puts local agencies and landowners in a holding pattern, paying into a system without a clear end point or destination.

What This Means for Local Stakeholders

These changes are unfolding quickly. For stakeholders in Tulare Lake and across the region, this isn’t just about dollars and data, it’s about governance, transparency, and participation.

This moment highlights a critical need for:

• Clear and accessible explanations of SGMA-related costs

• Equitable distribution of program expenses

• A transparent path from enforcement to resolution

• A seat at the table for the communities most affected

Why Strategic Communication Matters Now

The work of community engagement isn’t just about raising concerns. It’s about asking better questions, translating policy into plain language, and building frameworks people can actually act on.

That’s what the lawsuit is doing.

That’s what stakeholder meetings can do.

And that’s what this moment still makes possible.

SGMA was intended to preserve local control.That only happens when local voices are respected, and when those voices show up with clarity, confidence, and a clear understanding of what’s at stake.

See you at the table,

Julie Martella