The Storm Water parcel tax that the City Council has placed on the Nov. 8 general election is set to affect all property owners in Culver City, not just homeowners.

It is not a tax on direct toxic spills, as was mentioned by Dr. Khin Khin Gyi in her essay two days ago (“Clean Water Tax: Who Should Pay?”). The tax will help fund mitigation projects to reduce trash, bacteria and heavy metals from Ballona Creek and the Santa Monica Bay.

This is a parcel tax to assist in cleaning storm water (urban runoff), before entering Ballona Creek and the Santa Monica Bay as part of the United States Clean Water Act signed into law nearly 50 years ago by President Richard Nixon.

The approximate 10 percent collection from local property owners is meant as a way of proving we are in support of clean water and in hopes of obtaining grants to complete the entire funding of the project. This does not include ongoing operations of the project.

The parcel tax is being charged, as I said earlier, to all property owners. There is an exemption for low-income residents of Culver City.

To assist in applying the tax, the City Council accepted the recommendation of city staff to have a flat fee for single-family homes of $99 per year and $69 per year for each unit in a multi-family building, not differentiating between ownership of a unit or a rental apartment.

Commercial/business property is being taxed on a square foot basis of land at about the same rate as has been proposed for a 5,000-square foot residential lot.

As an FYI, the larger property owners in Culver City — whether commercial or multi-family residential — will be paying upwards of $50,000 per year if the voters in Culver City pass the proposed parcel tax.
The biggest error in Dr. Gyi’s comments — which were discussed at the Council meeting — is the fact that industrial users, including Freeport-McMoRan, have their own discharge permits that are enforced even more stringently than the city’s.

We are only being assessed what the Regional Water Quality Control Board attributes to pollution from the city. Pollution from major industrial sites is not included.

The Culver City Chamber of Commerce has not taken a position on the ballot issue. We will be studying the subject to present to the board of directors in late September.

This response is my personal understanding of the parcel tax for Storm Water Mitigation (Urban Runoff) as a former member of the City Council and a 69-year resident of Culver City.

Declaring that the above comments are unrelated to his position as president/CEO of the Chamber of Commerce, Mr. Rose may be contacted at ssssteve.rose@gmail.com