LAKEPORT, Calif. – The Board of Supervisors did not take action on Tuesday on a proposal to place a pass-through fee on cable users’ bills to support the county’s cable access television show, instead directing county counsel to research possible conflicts with state law.

PEG TV8, which is based in Clearlake, is asking for a 1-percent pass-through fee to be placed on Mediacom users’ bills to help fund the station.

It’s estimated that the pass-through fee will generate up to $55,000 a year for the station.

So far, the city councils of Lakeport and Clearlake have both passed resolutions to approve the pass-through fee, although neither council has asked for – or been provided – financial reports to show the station’s current income or expenditures. The current board budget also does not include up-to-date financials for the station.

During the brief discussion on the item Tuesday morning, Board Chair Rob Brown said some issues had come up with regard to Proposition 26, and whether or not the pass-through amounted to an actual tax rather than just a fee.

Passed in November 2010 as a constitutional amendment, Proposition 26 is meant to stop “hidden taxes” and prevent government from placing more levies and fees on voters.

As such, it requires a two-thirds – or “super majority” – vote of the Legislature for certain state fees. Local fee increases also would require a two-thirds vote.

County Counsel Anita Grant told the board that Proposition 26 has created a lot of confusion.

If the pass-through fee were ruled a tax, it would need to be put on the ballot by cable users – not the Board of Supervisors or another local government – in order to follow the law, Grant explained.

“There are some red flags,” Grant said of the pass-through proposal.

If it’s determined to be a special tax, the pass-through fee would be impacted by Proposition 26, she said.

Grant added that if the supervisors proceeded without certainty of whether the pass-through was a tax or fee, the board could run the risk of being in defiance of Proposition 26.

Supervisor Denise Rushing asked Grant if she believed the pass-through amounted to a tax.

Grant said in her initial review she’d only looked at the proposal’s red flags. She recommended the board have her review it further, saying she needed a few weeks to complete the analysis.

Rushing said she believed further analysis was important. She said she has received calls from constituents – both for and against the fee – with some suggesting that it is a tax.

The board agreed to delay the matter. Brown suggested rescheduling the discussion for 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, Sept. 11.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .