San Luis Obispo supervisors limit use of county AV equipment during public comment, add civility appendix

The San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors voted 3–2 to adopt revisions to its rules of procedure that prohibit members of the public from using county‑owned audio or video equipment during public comment, while preserving the lectern microphones and an exception for appellants and applicants in hearings.

County Counsel Rita Neill told the Board the discussion grew out of a July 9 meeting in which material shown during public comment drew complaints. Neill said the protections of the First Amendment make on‑the‑spot determinations about obscenity difficult, so the county can instead apply content‑neutral time, place and manner restrictions. "Public agencies can't regulate speech based on content or viewpoints," Neill said, but a rule limiting use of county equipment is a neutral tool to reduce disruption.

Supervisor Bruce Gibson, who moved the modified language, said the change is a "minimal restriction" that reduces the risk of disruptive material being broadcast while preserving other ways for speakers to provide information. "The denial of the county's audio and visual equipment on the day of the hearing is a minimal imposition," Gibson said.

Opponents, including Supervisor Pashong and several public commenters, warned the restriction could chill speech and asked the Board to rely on existing tools. Mike Brown of CoLab said the change appeared to be a broader response to a single incident and urged caution: "What problem are we trying to solve?" he asked, arguing the Board should avoid sweeping limits on public engagement.

The adopted motion included two board‑directed modifications to the original staff proposal: explicit carve‑outs to allow the use of microphones provided at public lecterns, and removal of a requirement that appellants and applicants submit USB drives 24 hours in advance. The Board also voted to add the League of Women Voters' Code of Civility to the rules as an appendix and requested county staff produce a red‑line of the final language for the administrative record.

The roll call vote was recorded as: Gibson — yes; Paulding — yes; Ortiz Lake — yes; Pashong — no; Chairperson Arnold — no. Following the vote, County Counsel said staff would bring final ordinance language and implementation steps back to the Board as needed.

The Board took no additional immediate enforcement steps at the meeting; the changes adjust internal procedure and do not create new criminal penalties. The amendments were agendized and adopted at the same meeting; implementation details — including any guidance for appellants and staff review procedures — will be developed by county counsel and administrative staff.