(Opinion) Journalists: Call racism what it is

Photo by Suzy Hazelwood via Pexels.

What a hell of a week it’s been.

A member of Queens Community Board 5 was removed last week by Queens Borough President Donovan Richards after he referred to COVID-19 as the “Wu flu” during the most recent public full board meeting.

We worked hard to break the story first for a few reasons. Community Boards are an integral part of the neighborhoods we live and work in, and its members represent us and our ever-growing needs. It’s in our DNA to get hyperlocal.

With that said, we must hold these officials to a higher standard. They must be held accountable for their words and actions. If that comes with consequences – so be it.

Richard Huber, a CB5 board member from Glendale, has been removed by Queens Borough President Donovan Richards after the use of an anti-Asian slur during the most recent public meeting.

We have no regrets for how the story was reported, and would like to take this opportunity to explain why journalists should not be afraid to insert themselves into the stories they report.

Complete objectivity in journalism is an outdated concept, which was first legitimized in the 1920s.

As the news industry evolved, the 1960s and onward saw more and more journalists including analysis and interpretation into their reporting – not “just the facts,” as a 2018 TIME opinion piece highlighted.

In 2023, an era of science denial, calls to end our democracy, increased lies by politicians and an abundance of hate and violence – we cannot dance around these issues.

As journalists, we pay attention to these current events on a to-the-minute basis, and no one quite understands these topics in the same ways we do. We have an enormous responsibility.

Professional judgements differ from personal ones. They are based on factual evidence and experience.

Modern notions of objectivity, which strive to be non-partisan, undermines the idea of us being objective to the truth. It’s a disservice to give two talking points equal 50/50 weight, and isn’t objective in deference to the truth.

We reported that the use of “Wu flu” is racist, and that it is a “known racial slur against Chinese people and Asians as a whole.”

To call it anything else is dodging. “Racially tinged” and other synonyms are simply weak writing.

The World Health Organization (WHO) does not name infectious diseases haphazardly. In 2015, it released new guidelines for the best practices of determining these names, citing the aim to minimize “unnecessary negative impact of disease names on trade, travel, tourism or animal welfare,” and “avoid causing offense to any cultural, social, national, regional, professional or ethnic groups.”

Quickly now, give me one reason other than assigning blame to a certain geographic location for this virus, did Richard Huber have for using that terminology?

Yes, COVID-19 destroyed and ended lives. But to assign blame only opens the door for hate and violence against a certain racial group, in this case, Asians – as they are often viewed as a monolith despite hailing from such a culturally diverse continent.

This term not only assigns blame to Asian people, but it deflects blame from the U.S. government – which many feel did not do nearly enough to address this virus from the get go. 

It ignores the fact that politicians and people gave up, when the easiest thing was to wear a mask and social distance.

If you say “Wu flu,”  you have no serious analysis of what happened with the country’s pandemic response, and we learn nothing about how to protect ourselves.

As for his claims that COVID-19 vaccines alter DNA,we’re going to get a bit medical here, so pay attention; Messenger RNA and Covid-19 vaccines work by delivering instructions to cells in our body to build protections against the virus that causes COVID. After the body produces an immune response it discards all the vaccine, never entering the nucleus of your cells.  But I guess if you don’t trust the CDC, the WHO or just about every accredited medical organization, then go with some study in Sweden.

Community Boards are a forum for members of the neighborhood to give input on bus routes, sanitation, precinct police response, zoning and parks. The borough president appoints the members and expects engagement to help him make decisions on budget items, where attention needs to go to infrastructure (like flooding).

It is not a forum for members to spread opinions about global issues.

It should be noted that the CB5 meeting was held remotely to begin with as a precaution due to COVID-19, flu and RSV concerns.

Yes, Richard – your remarks are completely protected under the first amendment. But you are appointed by the borough president to represent your neighborhood to him. It would have been great if you just apologized for being insensitive, after one member of the board commented that he was offended by what he saw as a racist comment. That’s what we do when our words offend someone, whether we intended it or not.

CB5 member booted for racist language

By Jessica Meditz

[email protected]

A member of Queens Community Board 5 (CB5) has been removed from the board after using racist language at the last monthly public meeting.

Richard Huber, of Glendale, went on a two-minute-long rant during the Jan. 11 meeting — where he doubted the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine, claiming that it alters DNA and that healthy people are dying or becoming ill as a result. Both arguments have been debunked by medical experts.

Amid his declaration, Huber went on to refer to COVID-19 as the “Wu flu,” an improper name for the disease and known racial slur against Chinese people and Asians as a whole.

The unofficial term refers to Wuhan, China, the city in which the virus first appeared, as per the CDC’s reports. However, most of the medical community condemns its use or other forms of it, as it can cause stigma and discrimination against a certain racial group.

The terms are also associated with former president Donald Trump, who came under fire for using labels such as “kung flu” and “Chinese virus” during the height of the pandemic.

“All you ever heard about the so-called vaccine for the Wu flu…it was only safe and effective, and it would prevent transmission and it would prevent you from catching it — yet that seems not exactly to be true,” Huber said at the meeting.

His remarks came as a response to Gary Giordano’s district manager’s report, where he shed light on the recent nurses’ strike, highlighting the shortage of nurses nationwide.

Neither Giordano nor Walter Sanchez, chairman of the meeting, responded to Huber’s statements during the meeting; however, Derek Evers, a board member, condemned the language shortly thereafter.

“Not gonna comment on the unhinged anti-vax rant we just heard, but I would just like to condemn the racist language that was used,” he said. “I don’t think the Community Board is any place for that, so I just want to put that on the record.”

Two days after the meeting, a spokesperson for Queens Borough President Donovan Richards told the Queens Ledger that “The Borough President has removed this individual from Community Board 5 for cause, effective immediately.”

Members of all Community Boards in Queens are required to abide by the centralized Code of Conduct issued by the Borough President, which requires board members to act respectfully and in a non-discriminatory manner.

Back in May of 2021, the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act was signed into law by President Joe Biden, which was co-sponsored by local Congresswoman Grace Meng (D-Queens), the first and only Asian American member of Congress from New York State.

The bill denounces all discrimination against Asian Americans and formed a new position in the Justice Department to expedite the investigation of potential COVID-19-related hate crimes. It was penned in response to the spike in anti-Asian hate crimes that occurred nationwide, including the killings of six Asian women in the Atlanta area in March of 2021.

Many Democrats, including Meng, feel that the inaccurate language, such as referring to COVID-19 by names with a geographic location attached to it, is part of the reason for the increase in hate crimes against Asian Americans.

“The increased use of anti-Asian rhetoric, particularly from our nation’s leaders such as the President [Donald Trump], and their use of terms like ‘Chinese virus,’ ‘Wuhan virus,’ and ‘Kung-flu,’ is not only irresponsible, reckless, and downright disgusting, it threatens the safety of the Asian American community; such language demeans, disparages, and scapegoats Asian Americans,” Meng said in a 2020 statement.

“Asian Americans, like millions of others across the nation, are worried about the coronavirus; however, so many Asian Americans are also living in fear following the dramatic increase of threats and attacks against those of Asian descent. During this time of heightened anxiety and fear surrounding COVID-19, we cannot lose sight of protecting the health and safety of every single person – no matter their race, ethnicity, or background.”

Walter Sanchez, who is also the publisher of this newspaper, said he could have handled the situation differently.

“As a facilitator of a Community Board meeting I always want to encourage people to speak, but we are not there to hear political views. I felt if I commented on his speech it might have sparked a debate that would have led the meeting down the wrong path. I do respect every member of the board and have respect for their time commitment.  The borough president appoints us for input on local issues affecting our neighborhoods. He has the expectation that we conduct ourselves in a way that reflects the diversity of our borough,” Sanchez said.

“Mr. Huber’s remarks were obviously derogatory towards a certain race and the borough president felt his removal from the board was necessary,” he continued. “His words were quite uncomfortable for me to digest while I was running the meeting. My job was to stop the discussion in its tracks.”

Huber did not respond to a request for comment by press time.

Editor’s note: Walter Sanchez is the publisher of this news organization. His recent remarks were made in his capacity while chairing CB5’s public monthly meeting on Jan. 11.

JPCA updates Citi Bike counterproposal

Group will negotiate with DOT before finalized plan

By Jessica Meditz

[email protected]

Following a pause for additional community feedback on the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Citi Bike expansion plan for District 5, Juniper Park Civic Association (JPCA) has released an updated counterproposal.

Back in April, JPCA released their initial counterproposal in response to the DOT’s original draft plan – which sought to add 52 Citi Bike stations to Ridgewood, Maspeth, Middle Village and Glendale. Thirty-four stations were planned to go in roadbeds and 18 stations were planned to go on sidewalks.

The original proposal for the Citi Bike expansion in District 5, circulated by the DOT.

JPCA’s original proposal called for 45 total stations – all on sidewalks in the interest of preserving parking spaces for locals.

Christina Wilkinson, a member of JPCA who prepared the counterproposal, said that despite submitting the original document to the DOT in April, they did not hear back until June, and all but seven new suggestions for the 34 stations allotted for the roadbeds were rejected.

“The reasons they gave didn’t really make any sense. It was this language that maybe they would understand, but nobody outside of the DOT would,” Wilkinson said.

She along with Councilman Robert Holden also felt a great sense of disappointment when the DOT neglected to present their plan to the full Community Board and obtain feedback from local businesses.

Additionally, at Community Board 5’s monthly meeting on Dec. 14, the board voted overwhelmingly in favor of submitting a letter to the DOT requesting that they be able to play an “active role” in the implementation of the program and the placement of these stations.

After some negotiation with the DOT, JPCA’s updated counterproposal calls for 53 stations in total, with 20 in roadbeds and 33 on sidewalks or in no parking areas.

The group argues that the neighborhoods of District 5 are low-rise communities where the majority of residents already own bikes and can adequately store them, resulting in a “reduced demand.”

They also brought up that because this area is a “transit desert,” many residents own cars and thus, need the street parking.

In addition, they argue that roadbed docks “prevent adequate street cleaning,” and that only able-bodied people can enjoy the bikes.

Ridgewood Gardens Associates, Inc., a residential cooperative corporation located at 5224 65th Place in Maspeth, expressed their dissatisfaction with the proposed placement of the Citi Bike stations near their property in a letter to Holden.

“These locations make no sense for several reasons…A large part of our resident population is elderly and they along with other residents struggle to find parking,” George Mandato, board president of Ridgewood Associates, Inc., wrote in the letter. “The inability to find parking is a serious problem for them and the loss of many parking spaces will clearly prejudice the health and safety of these disabled individuals.”

Wilkinson feels that CB5 had the right idea by voting to send that letter requesting more input, and that many people most likely are not even aware of the stations that are coming.

“The more input, the better,” she said. “We didn’t know about this co-op having an objection until [Dec. 16], so I guess most people in the area don’t know that this is coming. And when they find out, they freak out.”

The installation of the stations will be delayed until at least January, but it’s not certain as to when residents will begin seeing more Citi Bikes

New Citi Bike stations ‘on hold’ for District 5

CB5 votes to send letter to DOT requesting input

By Jessica Meditz

[email protected]

The original proposal for the Citi Bike expansion in District 5, circulated by the DOT.

As the implementation of new Citi Bike stations for Queens District 5 comes closer, the debate on where they should go continues among members of the community.

Following an eventful Transportation Committee meeting of Community Board 5 on Nov. 29, the incoming installations are now “on hold” pending community feedback — much to the dismay of some residents.

The committee resolved that it would pen a letter to the Department of Transportation (DOT), requesting that the board be able to play an “active role” in the implementation of the program and the placement of these stations. In the interest of preserving as many parking spaces as possible, the committee stated a preference for stations on sidewalks, daylighting and no parking areas.

At CB5’s monthly meeting on Dec. 14, the board voted overwhelmingly in favor of submitting the letter, in hopes that they can figure out a way to make the Citi Bike system work for everyone.

CB5 voted in favor of sending a letter to the DOT, requesting that they play an active role in the implementation of the program.

“A lot of people in the community have various opinions on it, and everyone just wants to make sure it’s implemented in a way that provides the maximum benefit, while minimizing any consequences or downstream negative effects,” Eric Butkiewicz, a Middle Village resident and chairman of the Transportation Committee, said in an interview.

He said that the DOT has scrapped the original map of the draft plan that was circulated earlier this year, in wake of the pause for community input.

The installation of the stations will be delayed until at least January, but it’s not certain as to when residents will begin seeing more Citi Bikes.

“I think this is the proper way to do it. [The DOT] is open to community feedback and how they go about putting these stations within the grid, and I think that’s where we come in as a Community Board…what works and what doesn’t,” Butkiewicz continued. “It seems that the DOT has scrapped or put aside locations in the previous plan that were right outside businesses, which they thought were a good idea. Once they consulted or heard feedback from those local businesses, they found out that it would conflict severely with the ability for them to operate.”

While Butkiewicz feels the recent conversations around the Citi Bike installation have been productive, other locals feel disappointed in the new plans and left out of the conversation — including Rachel Albetski, an urban planner who resides in Ridgewood.

She and another resident attended the last Transportation Committee meeting to engage with board members and publicly discuss Citi Bike in a positive light to demonstrate that many locals are in favor of the expansion happening as quickly as possible.

“As soon as the door was opened to let us into the meeting, we were immediately questioned by the District Manager [Gary Giordano] where we were coming from and who we’re associated with…I was really taken aback,” Albetski said in an interview. “I’ve never ever been treated like that at a public meeting.”

Albetski claimed that she was told the entry restrictions were COVID-related, and that she did not see a Zoom link immediately available as a remote option.

She was eventually let into the meeting and shared her thoughts about Citi Bike to all who were present.

“I just wanted to give a positive voice to someone who is pro Citi Bike, and part of that stance is being in favor of seeing them in the roadbed and not on the sidewalk. Once they’re on the sidewalk, you’re further congesting sidewalk space…sidewalk space is at a premium and they’re already congested. It just doesn’t make sense to put Citi Bike on the sidewalk,” Albetski said.

She argued that the discussion at the meeting to go back to the drawing board in terms of placements of the stations was confusing, and said that this would only delay the project from community members who will benefit from more Citi Bikes now.

“That process should be open to more people besides the ones in that room because I don’t really think that it’s completely representative of what everyone in the actual broader community thinks. You’re saying that no one wants this and that the community is against it, but there’s actually a broad swath of people out there that really want to see it,” she said. “It’s just good to have another option for people when they just want to get around within their neighborhood, and it’s a great supplement for trips that would have been made by transit or car.”

Various letters of support from locals were submitted to the public forum of the recent monthly board meeting, as well as another letter questioning whether or not the CB meetings are actually public.

In reference to the Transportation Committee meeting, Giordano said that all members of the public who wanted to be let in, were indeed permitted to enter.

“I had some concern about additional people coming, to the point where it would be unsafe — especially with COVID,” he said. “We didn’t have anyone standing outside not able to get in.”

All members of the community were then encouraged to become involved in future meetings, reiterating that every meeting — both committee and board meetings — are open to the public.

CB5 gives thumbs up to Glendale street conversions

DOT conducted area-wide study

By Jessica Meditz

[email protected]

Since late 2021, residents of Glendale have advocated that a select few streets in the neighborhood be converted from two-way to one-way.

They started a petition in favor of conversions of the streets, citing their 30-foot width with parking on both sides — making it difficult for cars to fit while driving in both directions and thus, causing sideswipes to occur.

In response, Queens Community Board 5 requested the Department of Transportation (DOT) perform an area-wide traffic study, from Myrtle to Cooper Avenues, and from 60th Lane to Cypress Hills Street.

Following their investigation of the area between January and June of 2022, the DOT recommended the following: that 60th Lane be converted to one-way northbound operation from Cooper Avenue to 75th Avenue, 75th Avenue to one-way eastbound operation from 60th Lane to 64th Street, 64th Street to one-way southbound operation from 75th Avenue to Cooper Avenue and 64th Place to one-way northbound operation from Cooper Avenue to Cypress Hills Street.

Eric Butkiewicz, chairman of CB5’s Transportation Committee, said that when the DOT presented their findings to the committee at a recent meeting, it was clear to them that the proposed north-south conversions are the right choice for the area.

“We didn’t find any significant impact on traffic flow, while also giving the residents what they’re looking for and seemingly reducing the risk of sideswipes and other accidents,” he said.

Butkiewicz noted that there was more debate among the committee in regard to the conversion of 75th Avenue to one-way eastbound operation from 60th Lane to 64th Street. The conversion of this street was not included in the initial petition started by locals, rather, was added by the DOT.

The committee was informed by the DOT that around 250 cars per hour, at peak hours in the morning, travel westbound on 75th Avenue. Therefore, if the street were to be converted to one-way eastbound traffic, those 250 cars would be rerouted to Cooper Avenue.

“This raised concerns in the committee that by routing 250 cars per hour to an already congested Cooper Avenue could pose severe problems, because Cooper Avenue is incredibly narrow also,” Butkiewicz said. “The concern is that we’re just going to take this problem, put it somewhere else and still be stuck with the same problem.”

As a result of the discussion, the vote was a six-to-six split for the conversion. Although it did not pass, Butkiewicz said the committee members who voted against the conversion of 75th Avenue committed to keeping a close eye on it going forward, recognizing the issues it faces.

On Nov. 9, CB5 held their monthly public meeting, where the whole board voted on the proposed north-south street conversions that were voted unanimously in favor by the Transportation Committee.

The board voted unanimously in favor of the north-south conversions with the acknowledgement that they will not recommend the eastbound conversion at this time, but will continue to monitor 75th Avenue and make changes if need be.

The Transportation Committee will pen a letter to the DOT with their decision, and it is ultimately up to them to take action and implement the conversion.

The DOT informed them that it could be a year-long process to put up the signs that would make these proposed streets one-way.

Fill the Form for Events, Advertisement or Business Listing