In a recent government meeting, the topic of free speech zones sparked significant discussion among county board members, following a controversial incident involving protesters at a property tax payment drop box. State's Attorney Mosser initiated the conversation, emphasizing that the decision to establish a free speech zone should be a collective policy decision made by the entire board, rather than an individual choice.

Mosser explained that her office had conducted legal research on free speech zones after receiving complaints about protesters obstructing access to the tax drop box. She clarified that while free speech zones can be legally permissible, they must be implemented in a neutral manner and require community notification. Mosser expressed her personal disagreement with the concept of free speech zones, particularly when individuals were demonstrating peacefully.

The discussion revealed a divide among board members regarding the necessity and implications of free speech zones. Some members voiced concerns about public safety and access, suggesting that the issue was less about restricting speech and more about ensuring unobstructed access to public facilities. Others argued against the establishment of designated zones, citing the importance of maintaining open avenues for expression without unnecessary restrictions.

Several board members highlighted the need for clear guidelines to prevent obstruction of entrances while still respecting individuals' rights to express their views. The conversation underscored the complexities surrounding free speech in public spaces, particularly in light of recent events that had drawn public attention and concern.

As the meeting progressed, it became evident that the board would need to engage in further discussions to determine the best course of action regarding free speech and public access, with many members advocating for a balanced approach that honors both safety and the First Amendment rights of citizens.