A heated public-comment exchange at the Long Branch City Council’s November meeting centered on flags displayed at Pier Village and whether the city could regulate them. Jeff Walstein, who said he was born in Long Branch but now lives in Tinton Falls, argued the council should not require speakers to post their full home address for public comments and said the Pier Village area functions as a quasi‑public forum because the city maintains parts of the property, provides policing and lifeguards, runs events there and collects parking revenue. Citing Marsh v. Alabama, Evans v. Newton and Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority, Walstein urged the council to recognize constitutional limits on viewpoint discrimination and to stop treating the issue as settled "because it is privately owned."

Rich Siegel, who identified himself as Jewish, told the council the Israeli-flag display at Pier Village is a "provocation" and urged removal, saying the display risks inciting hatred. Siegel also referenced historical grievances including the USS Liberty.

The city attorney responded that while nearby boardwalks, beaches and roads are public, the flagpoles in question sit on private property and the council cannot lawfully order a private property owner to remove a flagpole or regulate private speech without running afoul of constitutional protections. He advised that the council can regulate time and manner for speakers at public meetings but has limited authority over private-property flag displays.

Council did not take immediate action to regulate the flag display during the meeting; attorneys and the dais framed the matter as legally constrained to private-property rights versus public‑forum doctrine.