So a person who is lacking in the ability to reason, such as youth and those with neurological and functional limitations at the highest cognitive level, would be unable to be free persons in your framework? The social force of public reason would constrain and bind them to a group morality based on its implementation of geniocracy?

Such a freedom has zero coherence. As others have mentioned, the disconnect between 1) what is socially prioritized as human needs, and 2) the disconnection individuals can have to those human needs and values would make such freedom conditional and therefore non-binding.

I would say that the human's ontology is not free as it is biologically constricted and so one would need an ontological system in which a person can become free of this constraint to be able to then have a moral system in which freedom is a predicate. Otherwise, there is no morality at all, only force.

Most importantly, your concept of public reason is a form of ontology by role or relationship, given by association with a certain public body, which completely obliterates the concept of freedom.