|
NEWS
National
Local
Mind, Body & Soul
Sports
Archives
OPINION
Editorials
Letters
Columnists
Message Boards
A&E
The Gay Agenda
Calendar
Movies
Food & Wine
LIVING
Gay Bar Guide
Dining Guide
Classifieds
Obituaries
QSaltLake
Subscribe
Advertise
Contact Us
Store
Links
This site is owned and operated by Michael Aaron Green
|
 |
Local News
Rocky to Go Forward with
Partner Benefits Plan
According to legal research done by city council staff, Mayor Rocky Anderson can extend health care benefits to the unmarried partners of city employees, straight and gay, any time he wishes. On Tuesday, August 23 the mayor announced that he would “absolutely” do so, just as soon as research is finished on the plan.
While Anderson is also waiting for a formal answer on whether he can move forward without a City Council vote on the proposal, he said he hopes council members will still pass a resolution in favor of his plan.
“As long as we’re going to do this, we should demonstrate unity on this issue,” he told the Salt Lake Tribune on August 24. “Providing for equality should not create more division in our community.”
On August 23, Anderson also met with Councilwoman Jill Remington Love to discuss extending the benefits. Before learning of the mayor’s plan earlier this month, Love had considered bringing the issue to a council vote. Upon discovering that she and Anderson were working on the same thing, Love said she “encouraged him to move ahead.”
Anderson said that he wants the plan in place by November, when city employees change benefits packages.
Anderson’s plan, however, has met with opposition. In a KSL Radio interview, Rep. Lavar Christiansen, R-Sandy, said Anderson was “moving ahead in total disregard of the existing [Utah] law on the subject.”
“I believe that’s tantamount to the San Francisco mayor performing same-sex marriages on the city hall steps in disregard of California law,” he said.
Christiansen said that Utah law, which prohibits the legal recognition of any sexual relationship save the legal marriage of a man and a woman, should be enough to prohibit Anderson from offering the benefits. If not, he said the government “would address” the matter “if additional legislation was needed.”
“What it comes down to is whether or not you’re sanctioning those relationships or creating a new classification of domestic unions and then trying to give it special legal effect, and that’s the thing that we have not done,” said Christiansen, adding that while Utah courts have recognized same-gender couples’ right to privacy, they have not recognized “the right to demand legal public sanction and public recognition.”
He also said there were other things same-gender couples could do to protect themselves, such as transferring property through joint tenancy deeds and using durable power of attorney to make “medical decisions.”
While it’s true that certain legal rights can be attained with the help of a lawyer, certain benefits of marriage—such as not being forced to testify against a partner in court, taking time off through Family and Medical Leave Act to care for a partner—cannot be gained without marriage or a similar relationship existing.
Anderson’s proposal would use public money to establish something that Utah law does not permit, according to Christiansen.
“If you’re a private employer and you want to expand health coverage for anyone and everyone, then you have the right to do that,” he said. “If you’re a public employer and you’re using tax dollars, you absolutely have to respect the public policy of the state as codified in its statutes and its constitution.”
Cost has also been a concern for those on both sides of the debate. A task force formed to research the implementation of the benefits program has estimated that domestic partners would have to pay around $2,200 a year for the health plan, the same amount currently paid by spouses.
When other cities have offered similar benefits packages, one to two percent of their work force has applied. If Salt Lake City maintains the trend, the Tribune estimates this would cost the city up to $121,000 more each year, a 0.6 percent increase in the city’s $18.7 million benefits budget.
Anderson, however, has said the cost would be less than this.
The City Attorney’s Office has yet to issue an opinion on Anderson’s proposal. If Anderson’s proposal is enacted, Salt Lake City will become the first Utah city to extend benefits to the unmarried partners of employees.
|
|
LOCAL NEWS STORIES:
SPECIAL FEATURE:
GALLERIES:
|
