Library Board Of Trustees Rescinds Policy On Pride Month Displays

By Stacy Altherr

After mounting pressure from community members and groups, as well as a possible investigation by a state human rights department, the Smithtown Library board of trustees rescinded its decision to remove Pride Month displays from all four of the town library’s children’s rooms.

The library board of trustees held an emergency meeting 6:30 p.m. Thursday evening via Zoom to retract the decision. More than 1,000 people attended the virtual event.

Library board president Brianna Baker-Stines, who voted against the measure Tuesday night, when a 4-2 vote approved the policy removing the displays from Smithtown Library District’s four libraries, said that the board needed to trust the highly skilled and educated librarians to know what books should be included in displays and noted the board should stick to its work of managing budgets and other trustee responsibilities.

After the decision Tuesday to pull the display, New York State Governor Kathy Hochul quickly issued a news release stating that New York will not become the next “Don’t Say Gay” state. “Public places are prohibited by law from engaging in discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” she said via the statement.

In addition to the governor’s office, local and national LGBTQ organizations have reprimanded the library board of trustees for their decision and applaud the quick reversal. 

“The entire community made this happen,” said David Kilmnick, President of the LGBT Network. “It woke up a sleeping giant majority that believes in safety, equity, fairness and love for our children. There is a lot more to do to create and provide safer schools, and LGBT instruction and this victory tonight shows what we can do when we lift our voices and act together.

Tonight’s  vote to rescind Tuesday’s decision was 4-2 with one abstention.

Vice President Thomas Maher said he voted to remove the displays, thinking it would only be until the next meeting when a policy would be made. 

“I will reverse my decision,” he said at the meeting, saying he wants the Smithtown library system to be an “open, safe, and accepting place for everyone.”

Library trustees Marie Gergenti and Theresa Grisalfi voted against the reinstating the display. Both said they were concerned about the content in some of the books. Trustee Marilyn LoPresti, who abstained from the vote, said she spent time reading the books and was also concerned about some of the content.

None of the books were removed from the library shelves when the displays were removed.

Statement from the Board of Trustees of The Smithtown Library:

Earlier this evening the Board of Trustees of The Smithtown Library rescinded our earlier decision to remove Pride displays from our Library’s Children’s Departments. The majority of the Board recognizes that our earlier decision was made without the time, care and due diligence that a decision of this type deserves and that it was the wrong decision. Moving forward we will commit our collective energies toward ensuring that we get the advice and guidance needed from our Library Administrators, staff, outside experts, legal counsel and most importantly from Smithtown residents before we make important decisions regarding our Library.

The Board’s goal for The Smithtown Library is to be a place that welcomes openly all Smithtown residents. We recognize that we have our differences but we believe that what we have in common outweighs those differences. We know that a good library will contain things that may trouble each of us but understand that our primary role involves representing many different viewpoints and opposing ideas. We do this by giving voice - and space - to each.

The Board looks forward to reviewing our decision-making processes and our policies related to our Library’s collections, displays, programs and services to ensure that they are helping us fulfill our mission of “providing access to diverse information, lifelong learning and entertainment resources through outstanding service for all residents of the Library District.”

We will report back to the community regularly on our progress.

The Smithtown Library Board has posted a link to tonight’s emergency board meeting. Click here to listen to the audio recording of the June 23 Emergency Board Meeting. 

"I Didn't Speak Out For Fear Of Offending" A History Lesson

History Lesson

June Capossela Kempf

Sitting on the front porch waiting for the school bus with my granddaughter, G G. (Gorgeous Granddaughter). My attention is split between the time and the street corner; hoping the bus would come before she drives me crazier than I already am for signing up for this detail in the first place – really?  I cherish these precious moments, sharing and bonding with her

Today, she started off by asking; “How old are you?  When I answered, she swung into gear with a slew of questions.

“Do you remember Martin Luther King?” 

 ‘Sure do.”

“When he was alive? You remember his march in Washington. You were living – then? 

“Yeah, I watched it from a distance. I had a dream,” I quoted. Then, reflected how I wished I did more to support the dream - how I admired the people who marched for freedom back then.  As she struggled with the idea that her grandma witnessed her recent history lesson, I heard the words to Aretha’s ‘ R_E_S_P_E_C_T’  tumble around my brain , mixing it up with freedom songs of the sixties. I softly sang, ‘If I Had a Hammer’. 

“How did you feel when he got killed?”

“So scared. I thought his dream for freedom would be lost forever and there would be rioting - everywhere.”

“.. But that didn’t happen, right?”

“His message got through. Laws were passed that not only inspired racial tolerance but protected the poor and disabled throughout the country.”

 G G carefully studied me like I was a talking relic dug up from an archeological dig. 

“Did you go to Woodstock?”

“No.”

“Why not?”

I explained that I was a little older than most of the people who went.  I was married with a child, a house; and I didn’t approve the drugs and the wild crowds, but was there in spirit.”  Blah. Blah, Blah. 

 “Were you a Dove or a Hawk?” she said. 

Luckily, the bus arrived which enabled me to dodge the question. “I’ll tell you later,” I said.  

“Never mind, Grandma… You were no Hawk. “

How could she know? Especially since in the beginning I thought we were fighting the good war in Vietnam. Once I saw the destruction and realized the privileged could avoid the draft and we were losing, at a terrible cost, I leaned towards the bird of peace. But, I stayed on the fence. Did I get out and march - face the fire hoses or write one letter of protest? 

I decided to talk to her tomorrow and tell her how during those days; I didn’t speak out for fear of offending my friends and neighbors - that the bird I was most closely associated with was a chicken?

Perhaps tomorrow, I’ll tell GG that it is never too late to take a stand for your values.  We see now, as history repeats itself; that freedom can’t be taken for granted or expected to endure if we don’t fight like our forefathers to preserve liberty and justice “ – all over this land.”

Thank you Dr. King – Peter,Paul and Mary, Aretha . And thank Heaven for G.G.

June Capossela Kempf: Essayist and  Author of : Yo God! Jay’s Story, a memoir  and Lady of the Dollhouse, a YA mystery

SUFFOLK ClOSEUP : Dr. Berger And Lyme disease

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP

By Karl Grossman

A medical pioneer in Suffolk County in identifying, treating and also speaking out about the gravity of Lyme disease and its spread died this month.

Dr. Bernard Berger, a dermatologist who passed away at 85, wrote early journal articles in the 1980s on the identification of Lyme disease and its treatment with antibiotics. And he was highly critical of the lack of urgency the Suffolk County Department of Health Services took toward the disease. 

“I absolutely believe we’re approaching an epidemic,” Dr. Berger was quoted as telling The New York Times in 1987 in an article it published headlined “Tick-Borne Disease Infects Suffolk.” Said Dr. Berger: “There are certain areas like Montauk, Shelter Island and North Haven where it’s not unusual to have at least one member of the family contract Lyme disease.”

Dr. Berger was a “go-to” medical person when I wrote early on about Lyme disease.

As to the insufficient interest in Lyme disease by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services, in this column in 1987 I noted that the New York State Department of Health had just described Lyme disease as “endemic” in Suffolk and said the county was the worst area for Lyme disease in the state.

I related that Suffolk County health commissioner, Dr. David Harris, asserted that Lyme disease must take “its place besides other diseases in the county” and holding that it was “treatable.”

That’s 35 years ago, and in retrospect it should be acknowledged that Dr. Harris, and under him the county Department of Health Services, was vigorous then in efforts at dealing with AIDS. AIDS was striking the New York area—and Suffolk—hard in the early 1980s. And unlike many areas of the nation where, amid the homophobia of the time, strong action wasn’t taken, the Suffolk health department was moving robustly, even though the miraculous “cocktail” drugs for AIDS were yet to become available.

But, no question, on Lyme disease, strong action by the Suffolk agency was lacking. Indeed, Suffolk County Legislator John Foley of Blue Point, long chairman of the legislature’s Health Committee, felt compelled to put forth a resolution directing the Department of Health Services to develop an action plan because, as Foley said, its actions had not “been strong enough.”

Meanwhile, Dr. Berger, out of his office in Southampton, was treating hundreds upon hundreds of Lyme disease victims, conducting research and speaking out.

He retired in 2018 noting that when “I opened my practice in 1971, with my pregnant wife serving as secretary and nurse, I was the only dermatologist on the South Fork,” and that he planned to remain active in sports. He was a passionate athlete who competed in triathlons and running events, loved tennis and sculling. 

He was diagnosed that year with Amyloidoisis, a disease that causes failure of organs such as the heart and kidneys. He died at home in East Hampton surrounded by his family and friends. Dr. Berger and his wife of 52 years, Phyllis, had three children.

Dr. Berger also had an extensive military career. This included serving in the Army as a captain with service at an Army hospital. Discharged in 1968, he went back to the military in 1975 joining the Air Force and was chief of hospital services at a U.S. base in Japan. He continued in the Army Reserve retiring with the rank of colonel.

Will the kind of miracle drugs developed for AIDS ever come about for Lyme disease? There’s work going on now on a vaccine to provide immunization based on mRNA, also used in the vaccines advanced for COVID-19.  It is being developed by Valneva, a vaccine company in France, along with New York-headquartered Pfizer—a name so familiar to us these days for its COVID vaccine. 

In a press release on April 26—the week before, on May 7, Dr. Berger died—Valneva and Pfizer said it’s “the only Lyme disease vaccine candidate currently in clinical development.” As to Lyme disease, the companies stated: “While the true incidence of Lyme disease is unknown, it is estimated to annually affect approximately 476,000 people in the United States and 130,000 people in Europe. Early symptoms…are often overlooked. Left untreated, the disease can disseminate and cause more serious complications affecting the joints, the heart or the nervous system. The medical need for vaccination against Lyme disease is steadily increasing as the geographic footprint of the disease widens.”

Dr. Berger warned us decades ago about that widening. 

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books. 

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP : Suffolk County's History Includes The Fight For Abortion

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP

By Karl Grossman

A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court involving a longtime Suffolk County person—Bill Baird—was at the base of its subsequent Roe v. Wade decision which legalized abortion in the United States. Now, Roe v. Wade is likely to be overturned by a court majority. A draft opinion leaked to Politico written by Justice Samuel Alioto sets the stage for it.

And Baird, long a resident of Centerport in Huntington Town, who after death threats and the firebombing of one of his birth control/abortion clinics on Long Island has lived in another state, was expressing his outrage to me last week.

The three Trump nominees to the Supreme Court—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett—should, said Baird, be “removed from office” for testifying that Roe v. Wade was established precedent when they underwent confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. “They lied,” said Baird. “All they wanted to do was to get into office and prevent women from getting abortions.”

Baird began battling for legalized abortion after, in 1963, as the clinical director of EMKO, a manufacturer of birth control products, he was at Harlem Hospital “coordinating research, and “I heard the scream of a young African-American woman covered with blood” from the waist down. She was bleeding caused by “a piece of coat hanger” used in a self-inflicted abortion. The unmarried woman, who already had nine children, “died in my arms.”

He was to establish the Parents Aid Society, and later the Pro-Choice League, and be jailed eight times in five states for advocating birth control and legal abortion.

In 1967, students at Boston University sent Baird a petition asking him to challenge the Massachusetts’ “Crimes Against Chastity, Decency, Morality and Good Order” law. He gave a presentation at the university attended by 1,500 students in which he gave a female student a condom and a package of contraceptive foam. Police immediately “swooped in” and he was arrested as a felon, convicted and sentenced to three months in jail.

Thomas Eisenstadt was to become the sheriff of another Suffolk County—Suffolk County, Massachusetts—so Baird’s challenge of the Massachusetts law was titled Baird v. Eisenstadt. In 1972, Supreme Court Justice John J. Brennan, Jr. wrote the decision in that case stating it was legal for an unmarried person to be provided contraception. It declared: “If the right of privacy means anything, it is the right of the individual to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as to whether to bear or beget a child.”

That decision—and its emphasis on the “right of privacy”—would be the basis the following year for the Roe v. Wade decision in which the Supreme Court ruled it was legal for a woman to have an abortion.

Other arrests of Baird included one in Huntington in 1971 at a presentation attended by 300 people, he related. He showed a birth control pill and a diaphragm, and on the basis of a mother being in the audience who was “holding a 14-month baby,” he was “handcuffed” by the Suffolk County Police Department, “spent the night in jail” and charged along with the infant’s mother with “endangering the welfare of a child.”

There would be other legal challenges including two more cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. Further, Baird “every year for 30 years” went to an anti-abortion gathering called the “National Right to Life Convention”—he says the term “right to life” was devised as part of the anti-abortion PR strategy post-Roe v. Wade. At the conventions he conducted a “dangerous noontime picket” bearing a cross written on it “Free Women From The Cross of Oppression.” 

His clinics, in Hauppauge and Hempstead—the Hempstead clinic was struck by a man who barged into the waiting room wielding a firebomb in 1979—are now gone. But Baird, who will be 90 next month, keeps going. He urges people to translate their support for legal abortion in elections this and coming years making sure “they choose candidates who support a women’s rights to make their own decisions,” and to otherwise take action.

“Bill is tireless and amazing and still out there,” says Marilyn Fitterman of East Hampton, former president of the National Organization for Women–New York State, a grandmother of nine who has worked with Baird for decades and authored the recent book “Why I Marched” Moreover, she warned last week: “If the right for reproductive freedom falls, other things are also going to fall.” 

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books. 

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP: Redistricting "They Did It Because They Thought They Could"

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP

By Karl Grossman

They did it because they could. And now New York State’s highest court said they shouldn’t have.

With Democratic majorities in both the State Assembly and State Senate, a redistricting plan—a map giving Democratic candidates an advantage in districts throughout the state and notably Long Island—was passed. And Democratic Governor Kathy Hochul signed off on it.

But last month, the state’s highest court, its Court of Appeals, by a 4-3 vote, rejected the plan. The court’s majority held that it was “substantially unconstitutional.” The mapping of Congressional districts in particularly was “drawn with impermissible partisan purpose.”

A “special court master”—Jonathan Cervas with the Institute for Politics and Strategy at Carnegie Mellon University in Pennsylvania and an expert on redistricting—will redraw the map.

The plan by the Democratic majorities in the State Legislature was an extreme case of gerrymandering—the word coined for the redistricting done in 1812 under Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry with the “mander” for salamander—what one Massachusetts Senate district looked like. 

The New York plan involved multiple salamander-shaped districts.

For example, Suffolk’s lst Congressional District which long consisted of the five East End towns, all of Brookhaven and most of Smithtown, was to have GOP-leaning areas between Westhampton and East Quogue in Southampton eliminated. Left of Brookhaven would be only its northern half which has a substantial Democratic presence. Smithtown would be cherry-picked and include Democratic-inclined Commack. The district would then extend west into Islip and pull in heavily Democratic Brentwood, Central Islip and North Bay Shore. Further west it would take in the northern portion of Babylon Town, which votes reliably Democrat, and a southern part Huntington including Democratic-voting Dix Hills. Going yet further west, the lst C.D. would extent into the Democratic bastions of Plainview and Bethpage—in Nassau County. 

“Preservation of communities of interest” is considered important when it comes to redistricting which is done to reflect population changes after the national census every decade. 

But in the New York plan, in the lst C.D. and other districts, communities were combined not to represent common interests but for Democratic political advantage.

Gerrymandering based on the 2020 census wasn’t just a New York Democratic move but happened elsewhere in the U.S. and involved both Democratic and Republican Parties.  

The media watch group Fairness and Accuracy in Media features an article exploring this in the current issue of its monthly newsletter Extra! The piece, by Dorothee Benz, quoted USA Today as connecting gerrymandering to “increasing polarization,” “gridlock,” and “an even more divisive Congress.” It cited the concern of The New York Times about gerrymandering causing a “lack of competition in general elections” which “can widen the ideological gulf between parties.”

This is because of “uncompetitive districts—that is, one-party districts,” wrote Benz. 

She reported that “the percentage of competitive districts in Congress is set to shrink from an already appalling 17% after the 2010 redistricting to a truly deplorable 9% after the 2020 redistricting.” She quoted USA Today stating uncompetitive districts are “driving the lack of action on issues that a lot of Americans really care about.”

Other recent gerrymandered redistricting moves, she noted, included in Ohio where Republicans “redrew congressional maps in a way that turned 64% of them into safe Republican districts.” That plan was struck down by the Supreme Court of Ohio.

In New York, the gerrymandering and its judicial rejection will necessitate having two primaries—one in June, one in August—at a multi-million-dollar additional cost.  

There are a number of organizations that have long sought reform in redistricting. A leader in New York has been its League of Women Voters which entered a “friend of the court” brief in the challenge to the state plan. It declared: “This appeal raises a question of monumental importance: whether the courts will enforce the procedural requirements adopted by the people in the New York Constitution to prevent partisan gerrymandering…”

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books.