I CAN’T JUST FIRE AIDE
Councilman: Following the process after alleged hate spew
Manhattan Councilman Christopher Marte told angry constituents Tuesday he wishes he could immediately reprimand a top aide accused of harassing a female journalist — but that bureaucratic protocols are preventing him from taking action, the Daily News has learned.
The Marte aide, Steven Wong, allegedly lobbed a torrent of sexist slurs in four Feb. 15 voicemails to Lotus Chau, a reporter at Chinese-language Sing Tao Daily, in regards to a story she’d written that he had taken issue with, as first reported by The News last week.
Since then, pressure has mounted for Marte to fire Wong, culminating in a Community Board 3 meeting Tuesday night, in which constituents grilled the Democratic Councilman on why the staffer remains employed in his office.
Marte, who represents a chunk of lower Manhattan that includes Chinatown, told the constituents that Wong’s alleged comments to Chau were “totally unacceptable.” But he also said his hands are effectively tied at the moment because the legislative chamber’s general counsel office is conducting an investigation into the accusations against Wong.
“I wish there was a lot more that I can say and do,” Marte said during the virtual meeting.
“There’s things that I would have done if I had the final say on them much quicker and more publicly, but I don’t, and so we have to respect the general counsel process because that’s why they’re there,” the Councilman also said before promising to inform the community board as soon as the inquiry is over.
Karlin Chan, a community board member at the meeting, was not convinced by Marte’s explanation.
“This happened 10 days ago,” Chan told Marte. “This language would not have been tolerated in any kind of private employment environment, and it should not be tolerated on taxpayer-paid salaries.”
“If he worked for a private company, he would have been terminated already,” Chan added.
“The words are completely unacceptable, but the general counsel has the final say in this matter,” Marte replied.
A source familiar with the operations of the Council general counsel’s office disputed Marte’s assessment. The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Council members’ staffers are “at will,” meaning they can be terminated at any time as long as the reason for the firing doesn’t violate any laws.
Asked about the matter, a spokeswoman for Marte said Wednesday: “We are still looking into it with the Office of General Counsel and will take appropriate action.”
Wong could not be reached for comment.
The expletive-riddled messages Wong left with Chau were in Cantonese, according to a formal complaint she filed with the Council last week. In them, he repeatedly called Chau a “c—t,” among other offensive terms, the complaint stated.
In the news story that prompted Wong’s alleged outburst, Chau reported the apparent contradiction in Marte telling some constituents that he doesn’t support defunding the police, even though he signed the Council Progressive Caucus’ new mission statement, which includes a pledge to “reduce the size and scope of the NYPD.” The police reduction pledge caused nearly half of the caucus’ members to leave the group in protest last month.